Edenic Law and the Book of Romans

The key doctrinal issue in New Testament times was the shift from the Law of Moses to salvation by faith, highlighted by Paul's use of the Eden story in Romans.

It is a straightforward task to figure out the main doctrinal issue during New Testament times. For fifteen hundred years, the Jewish people had been living under the Old Covenant, and the Law of Moses directed their lives. The gospel taught that the New was replacing the Old Covenant and that one could not be saved by keeping the Law. The gospel accounts, the epistles to the Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews, firmly attest to this controversy. Many other parts of the New Testament touch on this topic, including First and Second Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, and First Timothy.

As twenty-first-century Christians, it might be difficult for us to appreciate the impact of the New Covenant replacing the Old and the Law of Moses’s failure to save. We were never under the Old Covenant or Law of Moses, so many of the powerful messages of the New Testament can lose their impact.

However, what happens when we boil down all the arguments of the gospel records and books like Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews? We produce a Bible passage that not only succinctly summarizes the New Testament controversy but universalizes it, making it applicable to all Christians of all ages, whether they were originally under the Old Covenant or not. That Bible passage is the story of Eden.

In this series of articles, I will look at the first principle teaching that law cannot save through the lens of how Paul, in the Book of Romans, uses the story of what happened in Eden to develop his argument. We will see that while we were never under the Law of Moses, we all struggle to embrace the doctrine that justification comes by faith instead of law.

Eden

First, let’s summarize the events of Eden. God set up an idyllic scenario that can be described as a perfect laboratory condition in which to test the first human pair. Everything was “very good” (Genesis 1:31) in a world devoid of sin and its consequences. God provided Adam and Eve with everything they needed and gave them the task of tending the garden. He also gave them one simple, unambiguous commandment to not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Failure to obey that commandment would result in death. The serpent entered the scenario and conversed with the woman. The record states “the woman said to the serpent, ‘We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, “You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.”’” (Genesis 3:2-3).1

By reiterating the commandment, the woman informs the reader that she and the man understood the commandment. In fact, adding “neither shall you touch it” infers they took the commandment seriously. Those words are not recorded with the initial commandment, and perhaps God said that too. Alternatively, it could be that the man and woman discussed the commandment and decided to put a safeguard in place not to even touch the tree. Either way, the record tells us they knew the commandment and were not blasé about it.

However, despite that, when confronted with the serpent’s words that contradicted God, Eve chose to partake of the forbidden fruit. The serpent represents carnal thinking, the animal-logic way of assessing a situation. His words appealed to the woman’s fleshly instincts, and despite the abundant clarity of the commandment she disobeyed, her husband followed suit.

One of the doctrines this teaches is the law’s incapability to save. There weren’t ten commandments, or the 613 commandments the Jews attest are in the Law of Moses—just one clear, precise, and basic commandment. They had all the other garden trees they could freely eat from (Genesis 2:16) but chose the forbidden one. Thus began the story of human nature and rebellion. Adam and Eve represent humanity; you and I are Adam and Eve.

The consequences of their sin begin with the words, “Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths.” (Genesis 3:7). Their eyes were opened, which is our experience when we sin. This sensation was not a physical opening of the eyes, as if they were walking blindly through the garden beforehand. It was a spiritual awakening akin to a baby’s first taste of something sweet after growing up on its mother’s milk and plain cereal. The first time you put some chocolate into a baby’s mouth, you see their eyes widen with the new experience, and there is no going back. Similarly, when we sin for the first time, we experience the sensual and pleasurable capabilities of the flesh, and there is no turning back; our eyes are opened.

It is evident that they were ashamed because of their sin and later hid from God (v. 10), contrasting with their lack of shame beforehand (Genesis 2:25). To solve their dilemma, they tried to cover their nakedness with fig leaves. We all do that when we sin—attempt to atone for our sins with a self-made covering. We justify, turn a blind eye, make excuses, or develop a fig-leaf religion whereby we mask our sinful lives by turning up at religious events, wearing the proper clothing, and doing the right things. In effect, we fail to learn the lesson that salvation does not come by law.

God taught them the fundamental lesson by giving them garments made of skins (Genesis 3:21). True atonement can only be provided by God; we are saved by grace.

Romans

Having summarized what happened in the Garden of Eden, let’s turn our attention to how Paul develops the principles in his epistle to the Romans. For this study’s sake, we will concentrate on the first eight chapters. Romans is divided into three sections. The first eight chapters are highly doctrinal. Chapters 9-11 focus on the example of the Jews and Gentiles as an object lesson illustrating that doctrine, and the final five chapters bring out the practical lessons based on it.

In Chapter 1, Paul reminds his readers of the sinfulness of the world, a world that started with Adam and Eve and followed their rebellion. A Jewish reader of chapter 1 would nod his head in agreement at the awful pagan world around him, but then in Chapter 2, Paul turns his attention to the Jews and says they are just as sinful as the world in general despite having the Law of Moses. Paul sums it all up in Chapter 3 by saying that all have sinned, both Jew and Gentile alike.

How, then, can one be saved? That question is asked halfway through Chapter 3 and answered as we enter Chapter 4—justification comes by faith, not by law. Paul uses the examples of David and Abraham to prove his point, but then, in Chapter 5, he moves back to the universal nature of the problem by reminding us that it all started with Adam, whom he contrasts with Christ and the fact that we are saved by grace, not law. Chapters 6-8 begin to bring out the practical nature of the doctrine. In Chapter 6, Paul talks about the new way of life in Christ and contrasts it with the old way of life in Chapter 7, in which he illustrates the problem of the old life of the flesh by tying it to the Law. Finally, in Chapter 8, Paul tells us it comes down to a different kind of thinking or mindset. God is not looking for people who can follow a law but people who think differently, have a different attitude, and develop a character that fully depends on Him.

Paul’s Thesis Statement

After a lengthy introduction to the epistle, Paul lays out his thesis statement in the first chapter, in verses 16-17:

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.”

The rest of the epistle springs from these statements. The gospel is powerful enough to achieve salvation, which the Law of Moses could never do. It is not about law but faith—which is the key idea in both verses and is true whether you are Jew or Gentile.

Why does Paul say he is “not ashamed” of the gospel? Perhaps he alludes to the persecutions and ridicule that the preaching of the cross brought to its adherents. Despite this, Paul found extreme value in it that overrode the ridicule. Or perhaps Paul is alluding to the other time when people were “not ashamed”—the man and the woman in the garden who “were both naked and were not ashamed.” (Genesis 2:25). Is Paul saying that the gospel can deal with the outcomes of sin when the man and woman realized they were naked and hid themselves?

Another echo from the Old Testament can help settle the argument. The Prophet Isaiah records, “But the LORD God helps me; therefore I have not been disgraced; therefore I have set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be put to shame.” (Isaiah 50:7). In the previous verse, the prophet speaks of one who suffers “disgrace and spitting” all of which points forward to the Lord Jesus Christ who did experience persecution and ridicule because he preached the gospel. But he was not “put to shame” despite the maltreatment. He knows “the LORD God helps me,” a sentiment repeated in the next couple of verses where the prophet writes, “He who vindicates me is near.” (v. 8.) The word “vindicates” is related to the Old Testament word for “righteousness.” In Romans, Paul talks about how the “righteousness of God is revealed” (Romans 1:17) in the vindication or justification of those who have faith.

Continuing in Isaiah 50:8, the prophet asks, “Who will contend with me?” and “Who is my adversary?” It is as if the one the prophet speaks about is in a court of law, a motif Paul uses in Romans 3 in the lead-up to his explanation of justification by faith. Then, in verse 9, the prophet again declares, “Behold, the LORD God helps me,” followed by another question, “Who will declare me guilty?”

It makes sense if Paul alluded to this passage when stating that he was not ashamed of the gospel. At the end of the first section of Romans, in Chapter 8, Paul alludes to the passage again with a series of similar questions. First, he asks, “If God is for us, who can be against us?” (Romans 8:31) because, as the prophet says, “the LORD God helps me.” Then, in verse 33, he asks, “Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect?” echoing the prophet’s, “Who will declare me guilty?” Paul’s answer is best read as a question—“God who justifies?” Similarly, in the next verse, Paul asks, “Who is to condemn?” followed by another question—“Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us?” Will God condemn us? No! Will Christ? No! Neither God nor Christ is going to hold Paul and his readers guilty. In Christ, we find vindication and justification.

The Solution for Shame and Guilt

In other words, the gospel can deal with the problems of shame and guilt. If we’re like Adam and Eve, we feel shame when we sin, and we try to cover our nakedness with fig leaves. But that does not work. No amount of trying to cover our sins through our own devices will take away from the fact that we are guilty, and we continue to feel shame and hide behind a mask. It means we are not genuine in how we present ourselves, and there is no atonement despite the veneer of righteousness.

The practical implications of the doctrine of justification by faith are immense. Our dilemma as human beings is that we tend towards a fig-leaf religion as the solution to our problems. We think the law saves even if we don’t say it aloud. So, even though we are not under the Law of Moses, we sew fig leaves together when we devise a religion based on standards of behavior, particularly those about how things are to be done in religious gatherings or behaviors that are easily identifiable as wrong. We can also be like Adam and Eve when we don’t just say, “Don’t eat from the tree,” but “Don’t even touch it.” Paul wrote about that kind of religion in Colossians. He said the “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (Colossians 2:21) philosophy while having “an appearance of wisdom” (v. 23) is “of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.” (v. 23). Adam and Eve are a testimony to the “do not touch” religious fallacy. Despite that safeguard, which seemed to support the commandment, they still indulged in the flesh.

In an ecclesial setting, this kind of law-based religion might appear on the outside to be righteous. Everything is done decently and in order. People dress and act in a way that conforms with nominal standards. Rules are in place to enforce commandments, like not marrying outside of the community, not getting divorced or remarried, and other rules governing things like the kinds of entertainment tolerated by members of the ecclesia.

However, inside that community, it can be like walking on eggshells. Because it is based on perceived righteous standards of behavior, people are afraid to be vulnerable with one another and show their true selves. Instead, because “neither shall you touch it” does nothing to stop the indulgence of the flesh, everyone wears fig leaves around each other to avoid the shame of their nakedness and hide their true selves behind a mask. If someone does touch the forbidden fruit, the law is in place to deal strictly with the behavior, with judgment being a first resort and forbearance and forgiveness an afterthought.

Contrast that with an ecclesial environment where it is understood that neither God nor Christ is holding us guilty. We are justified by faith and vindicated by the God who helps us. That is God’s way of dealing with the human problem. When we buy into God’s way, we can remove the mask, do away with the fig leaves, embrace the garments of skins provided by God, and be open and genuine with one another. We understand that as children of Adam, we are all in the same boat; all “have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” United in our shared sinfulness, we are together also in our shared vindication in Christ, and shame and guilt are done away with.

Our predicament is that we question the wisdom of a religion based on faith rather than law. It seems as if the law solves the problem of sin because it identifies good and bad behavior and prescribes righteous living. Faith, on the other hand, sounds like it ignores sin and lets us get off scot-free. And so, we continually wrestle to find a law that can give life (Galatians 3:21) while paying lip service to faith. In Romans, Paul understands the power law holds over us, and that’s why he spends so long going over the problem.

In next month’s article, Lord willing, we’ll continue to examine Paul’s thesis statement as he endeavors to outline God’s righteousness.

Richard Morgan,
Simi Hills Ecclesia, CA