Romans 3

3:1-8 The advantage of being a Jew: God's faithfulness

What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God. What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God’s faithfulness? Not at all! Let God be true, and every man a liar. As it is written: “So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.” But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is deserved. (Romans 3:1-8 NIV)

Paul continues his argument from chapter 2, that the essence of being a Jew is a circumcised heart (v. 29), leading to keeping God's moral and ethical commands (v. 25), not just the outward signs of circumcision and observation of the dietary laws (kasher). But if gentiles can do this as well as Jews and without need for the outward signs of Jewish life (v. 26), what if anything was the advantage of being a physical Jew in Old Testament times and in Paul's day?

Here Paul speaks as a gentile might, who drew a false conclusion based upon his argument in ch. 2 that put the Jew and gentile on the same footing before God as lawbreakers. If Jews and gentiles are equally sinners in God's sight, then there appears to be no advantage at all to being a Jew!

The questioner wonders why God ever bothered to free Israel from Egyptian bondage or give the law through Moses on Mt. Sinai. If all this could produce was a slightly different route to guilt before God, why do it?

The imaginary speaker may also have a second question in mind: whether it is worth all the effort to be a practicing Jew—in Paul's case a Jewish believer in the messiah— instead of a free-thinking, free-living gentile pagan. For as a Jew he realizes that Jewish life is not all privilege: there is effort required to be a faithful Jew. The pagan Romans must often have asked themselves “Why would anyone go to all that trouble and become such odd-balls in society?” Anti-Semitism was rife in Roman society, and is especially prominent in the writings of the elite. Jews were looked down on and not only viewed as a curiosity, but suspected of all sorts of foul play, since their social life was largely concealed from the non-Jews of the city. Jews had to work hard—just as Christians did later on—to gain the right to live according to the laws of God, even if they could never become fully acceptable in Roman society.

Paul’s answering words “much in every way” (v. 1) will be elaborated later in ch. 9. Here he needs to refer to only one principal privilege: the Jews were made custodians of (“entrusted with”) God’s written word (τὰ λόγια τοῦ θεοῦ “the oracles of God”).

Let's first try to understand what Paul's answer is for the first way of understanding the question. Of what value to God's plan and to the gentile world was the election of Israel and the giving of the law to them? It was not God's will to have angels from the sky proclaim his will and his nature to all nations. Instead, he wanted his righteous nature and his will to be embodied in full view of their neighbors. For this he needed earthly custodians of this revelation, even at the risk of having them prove disobedient and have to receive chastisement from time to time.

These words of God were entrusted to Israel. They were not to be hoarded, but used for the benefit of all peoples of Earth. Even before the rise of the Jesus-believers, Jewish authors indicated their consciousness of this fact: they were God’s means of saving the gentiles. In a similar way, Paul and the other apostles were entrusted with the gospel (1Cor 9:17; Gal 2:7; 1Th 2:4). The Jews were stewards of the OT scriptures, as Paul (ὑπηρέτης, οἰκονόμος) was of the gospel of Christ (1 Cor. 4:1-2). They even made up edifying stories of biblical characters bringing pagans to faith, such as the colorful tale of Joseph and his Egyptian wife Asenath, found in the Jewish intertestamental writings.

But what about the second question? Of what value to the Israelites themselves was this scenario? Having the scriptures as a guide to life allowed Jews in Old Testament times to know what pleased and displeased God much more accurately than the “law of the conscience” which was all that the gentiles had to guide themselves. And obeying God, even if one could not do it perfectly, brought satisfaction to Jewish souls as well as the possibility of fellowship with God in prayer and worship. Just read the Psalms and see for yourself what joy they had in worshiping and learning from God! There is a Jewish festival today known as Simḥat Tôrah "the joy of Bible Study".

Even though in the centuries before Jesus, Jews understood that they couldn't obey God's laws perfectly, that they could not be "sinless," they aimed for a high standard short of sinlessness, which they called "blamelessness."  Psalm 119:1 reads:

Blissfully happy are those who are blameless (Hebrew tamîm) in conduct, who live according to the law of the Lord.

In Paul's day the advantage of having full access to the word of God in the scriptures also belonged to Jews who were believers in Jesus. We have to realize that for the Church in Paul's day the scriptures consisted entirely of what we call the "Old Testament," and even if it was read aloud in Christian meetings in Greek, not Hebrew, the conceptual "language" behind the Greek was still Hebraic, that is to say, "Jewish." Concepts like sin, transgression, repentance, atonement, forgiveness, and holiness, were very un-Greek and un-Roman. New believers in those days needed a thorough training in Old Testament and Jewish customs and thought patterns in order to follow the readings from (Old Testament) scripture given in worship services. Jewish believers in Jesus had a decided advantage when it came to understanding God's written word, which they could use to help their gentile brothers and sisters in Christ.

Of course, one needs also to balance this advantage with the greater responsibility that accompanied greater knowledge. As Jesus' brother James put it in his general epistle: “Not many of you should presume to be teachers [of scripture], my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly” (James 2:26-3:1 NIV). God holds people accountable for how much they know of his will. Does this discourage us from knowing more of scripture? No. But it warns us that God expects us to live up to the knowledge we have, which others do not yet have.

But Paul does not linger to elaborate on this advantage. Quickly, he moves on in verses 3-8 to another question: What effect does Israel's failure to recognize Jesus as their messiah have on God's faithfulness?

Beginning with v. 3, Paul rejects a false belief that God's faithfulness to his promises can be nullified by Israel's unfaithfulness. He will address this matter again in much greater detail in chs. 9-11.

By "entrusting" (Greek πιστεύω pisteuō, the same verb used for putting faith in Jesus) his words to Israel, God as it were put his faith in Israel as custodians. Some Israelites proved unworthy of this trust by disobeying the very scriptures given to them. We know this from the historical and prophetic books of the Old Testament, as well as from archeological artifacts that show idolatry practiced in Israel itself during the monarchy. But God's initial "faithfulness"—his commitment to them, his "faith" in them—continued uncompromised by the failure of some of them. God's commitment is like that which he commanded Hosea the prophet to show: Hosea married a woman destined to become an unfaithful wife and a prostitute (Hosea 1); yet God commanded him to go and fetch her from her prostitution and make her his wife again (Hosea 3).

In all periods of Israel’s history, beginning in Egypt under Moses, there was always a part of Israel that was “unfaithful,” just as in its darkest hours under King Ahab there was always a part that remained “faithful.” In Old Testament times, the unfaithfulness of Israel took the form of idolatry and a failure to obey God's law. Idolatry technically was grounds for the rejection of the nation, since the ten commandments were the basis of God's covenant with Israel at Sinai. Yet through all this time, God remained "faithful." He would not reject the nation he had chosen. And although he eventually sent them into exile in Babylonia, they were still his people, and he brought them back under Zerubbabel, Nehemiah and Ezra. As Paul explains in ch. 11, the gifts and election of God are irrevocable (Rom. 11:29).

Paul is careful to say (v. 3): “What if some (Greek τινες) (Jews) have been unfaithful (that is, have not believed in Jesus),” for he is well aware that the initial Christian movement in its entirety, those who began it all and continued to be its foundation and bedrock—the apostles and prophets, were all Jews. All but one of the New Testament writers were Jews.

The believers in Rome, both Jew and gentile, were well aware that the majority of Jews in the city seemed permanently resistant to the gospel. God had made a covenant with Israel. But in contracts and international treaties, if one party violated the terms of the agreement, the other party was absolved from all its responsibility. Was this also true with God’s covenant with Israel? Was he now free to become “unfaithful”?

Throughout Israel's previous history her disobedience and unbelief brought temporary punishment, but repentance and restoration were always available. Israel is God’s “prodigal son,” and like the father in that story God is always at the roadside looking for him to return. So far, the faith in Jesus as the messiah has been limited to a small stream of Jews. But in Romans 11 Paul says that in the end the spiritual blindness that has characterized Israel during the present age will be lifted. The repentance will be nationwide. As Paul says in ch. 11:

“Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. But if their failure to believe now means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!” (Romans 11:11-12)

But Paul hastens to add (v. 4) that, even if not just part of Israel, but every human being, rejected God’s truth in favor of Satan’s lie, God himself would always remain the Truth, the standard by which all falsehood is judged.

In verses 5, 7-8 Paul brings up several specious arguments that conceivably could be brought by mischief-makers who wish only to confuse clear-thinking believers. “If good results from evil, how can a good God punish that evil?” This, Paul’s readers know as well as he, is mere sophistry, not serious thinking about God and about good and evil. That is why Paul adds in v. 5 "I speak in a human way." He gives his answer in v. 6: If your premise were to be accepted, God could not judge anyone, since the ultimate good, namely the ultimate Kingdom of God, will come in spite of all the evil in the world.

A prime example of good coming from evil is found in OT history. Joseph's being sold as a slave into Egypt by his brothers was a terrible evil. Yet through that act, God gave Joseph favor with the pharaoh and raised him to power in Egypt enabling him both to save pagan Egyptians and his own family (the nucleus of the future nation of Israel) from dying of famine. Yet although good resulted from an evil act, this did not prevent God from judging the brothers' sin. God would have been just in judging the evil of Joseph's brothers, but they came to Joseph in sincere repentance and were forgiven by his grace. Only two things deterred Joseph's (and God's) righteous judgment: the brothers' repentance and Joseph's and God's grace. These two concepts—repentance and grace—are also key to Paul's gospel as it applies to the Jewish question.

In the next section (v. 9-20) Paul speaks as a Jewish non-believer for half of one verse (9a). But beginning with the words "No, not at all" he returns to being Paul and answers his interlocutor.

⁹ What then? Are we Jews any better off? — [Paul:] No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, ¹⁰ as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; ¹¹no one understands; no one seeks for God. ¹² All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” ¹³ “Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.” “The venom of asps is under their lips.” ¹⁴ “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.” ¹⁵ “Their feet are swift to shed blood; ¹⁶ in their paths are ruin and misery, ¹⁷ and the way of peace they have not known.” ¹⁸ “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” ¹⁹ Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. ²⁰ For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. (Romans 3:9-20 ESV)

The hypothetical questioner built his new question on Paul's affirmation of Jewish advantage in being custodians of God's word. But in reply to the question: "Does this make us (Jews) better off (in terms of building a perfect record of good deeds)?" Paul's answer is that, despite the advantage possessed by Israel of having God's word, the scriptures, Jews are no better off in regard to earning salvation. He repeats the verdict of chs. 1-2, namely, that all people (Jews and non-Jews) apart from Christ stand under the judgment of God because of their failure to live lives of perfect obedience to God's laws. They are "under the power of sin."

To prove that Jews too, with all the advantages of possessing God's word, were as universally guilty of sin as the pagan gentiles, Paul appeals to statements made in the Old Testament scriptures (Rom. 3:10-18). In presenting the way of salvation to our non-Jewish friends, we often quote these OT verses which Paul cited here, but in their original contexts these verses (Psa 5:9; 10:7; 14:1-3; 53:1-3; 140:3; Prov 1:16; Isa 59:7-8) refer not to pagan gentiles, but to wicked Jews.

As if to make sure that his hearers realized that the cited verses were not just describing non-Jews, Paul adds in v. 19: Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. Since it was the Jews who were "under the law," the passages from the "law" (Old Testament) quoted have to be addressed to them. And thus, added to the gentiles, "the whole world" has become accountable to God.

In v. 20 Paul anticipates an imaginary rebuttal: that although the “law” (i.e., the Old Testament scriptures just quoted) declares all sinners are guilty before God, that same law provides God’s remedy for sin in the sacrificial system and in the requirement of repentance. This seems to have been the view held by many if not most Jews in Paul's day, and it would have been known even to gentile Christians who had any contact at all with the synagogues.

This ancient Jewish basis for confidence in God's forgiving their sins has been given classic formulation by E. P. Sanders under the name "covenantal nomism." Such Jews did not believe they could enter the kingdom of God on the basis of their good deeds, but by being members of the covenant community and utilizing the means of obtaining forgiveness: (namely) repentance, confession of sin, and making the sacrifices prescribed in the law of Moses. They relied upon the grace of God and his provision for their forgiveness. They strived to keep the commandments, not in order to earn salvation, but in order to live out their status as saved members of the covenant community and thus "stay in" the community of the saved. Sanders concluded that the old view of the Protestant Reformers, that Jews in Paul's day relied on their good deeds to secure a blessed afterlife, was a serious misreading of the views of  Jews in the days of Jesus and Paul.

This, of course, raised the question: What then does Paul mean when in his letters he criticizes the Jews who do not believe in Jesus for seeking salvation by "the works of the law"? Was Paul himself misled? Or did he deliberately misread the beliefs of his opponents? Most scholars—and certainly all evangelical ones—would reject either of these two answers. But building on Sanders' insights, the British New Testament scholar James Dunn has innovated what is called "the new perspective on Paul", according to which the "works of the law" that Paul rejected as having any role in salvation were not the ethical commandments (such as the Ten Commandments: do not lie, kill, steal, commit adultery), but circumcision and the dietary laws, what Dunn calls the "Jewish boundary markers," the visible signs that one belonged to the chosen people of God.

But in my opinion it is more likely that the expression "works of the law," as Paul uses it, was not restricted to these "boundary markers," but certainly included also the ethical commandments of the law. And insofar as it may have focused upon the Jewish boundary markers, this also entailed the entire sacrificial system.

Some scholars who buy both Sanders' and Dunn's ideas seem to believe that Paul's chief objection to covenantal nomism was that it was inappropriate for his gentile converts. But Paul's (and God's) argument is that it is inappropriate for Jews as well!

If indeed covenantal nomism was the view of Paul's non-believing fellow Jews, his reply to them here in Romans is that the law of Moses belongs to the pre-messianic age. And it can never make sinning people right with God, but only demonstrate to them that they are "accountable" (that is, "guilty" ὑπόδικος) and liable to God's judgment. Paul argues that the very “works of the law” that they depend upon, including the sacrificial system itself, condemn them, since ironically recourse to that system required that a person first confess his particular sin and guilt (Lev 5:5-6; Num 5:7), and only afterwards make his sacrifice. These sacrifices, like the law as a whole, belong to the pre-messianic era. As Paul had written earlier to the Galatian churches,

“Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.” (Galatians 3:23-25 NIV)

The NIV's paraphrase "was put in charge" renders what is literally "was our tutor (or guardian)". This supervision or guardianship role of the law extended beyond merely its ethical commands. It included the sacrificial system, which also was preparatory, finding its perfect fulfillment in Jesus' death and resurrection. The sacrifices in the tabernacle and in the Jerusalem temple had never been able take away sin, but were merely an anticipation of the messiah's future sacrificial death which would be the true work of atonement. Now that the messiah had come and fulfilled what the Old Testament sacrifices only foreshadowed, anyone who claimed them as a means of escaping God’s judgment on his sins was merely admitting both his guilt and his lack of a remedy outside of the messiah. As the writer to the Hebrews put it so clearly:

“The law is only a shadow of the good things that were to come—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.” (Hebrews 10:1-4 NIV adapted)

While the attitude that Sanders and Dunn call "covenantal nomism" might have secured forgiveness for pious Jews prior to the advent of the messiah, it was completely inadequate and powerless afterwards.

3:21-31 God's righteousness

Rom. 3:21 “But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. 27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. 29 Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30 since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

The various modern English Bible translations differ in vv. 21 and 22 as to whether they add the word "the" or not before "righteousness" and "law". Is the righteousness God's own rectitude or a right standing that he gives? Is this apart from "the law" of Moses, or apart from "a law," i.e., any code of morality? These differences are significant, and yet the Greek text cannot tell us which is meant.

I prefer the NIV's combination, which you have heard read: "But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify." The reading “a righteousness of God” means not God’s own righteousness which is one of his attributes, but a right standing with God which he can give to believers. “Apart from law” means that this righteousness is achieved apart from keeping any moral code, not just the law of Moses. While none of these three renderings results in heresy, I would say that the NIV’s combination is closest to what we know elsewhere to be Paul’s view of justification.

In v. 21 Paul writes that it is only "now"—with the death and resurrection of Jesus the messiah—that this righteousness has been disclosed, but according to Paul's understanding of two OT passages which he will be quoting soon, the idea of persons being counted right with God (that is, “righteous”) on the basis of their faith is implied in Israel's scriptures, even if it was not understood until now.

In v. 22, all the modern translations say—in various paraphrases—that righteousness from God comes “through faith in Jesus Christ to/for all who believe”. And here we must be careful. For here the Greek actually has the definite article and a genitive meaning "of": “through the faith of Jesus Christ”, not “in Jesus Christ.”

What could Paul have meant by “through the faith of Jesus Christ”? You remember from our discussion of ch. 1 that the word for “faith” in biblical Greek (πίστις) can also mean “faithfulness.” And many interpreters argue here that it was the faithful obedience of Jesus that Paul means here. It was through Jesus’ faithful obedience unto death that God’s righteousness can now come to all who believe.

Paul’s use of the word “all” in v. 22 ("all who believe") refers to both Jews and gentiles who believe in Jesus. That is why he immediately adds (v. 22) “for there is no distinction”: God gave the Jews an advantage by making them custodians of his written revelation, but they are equally sinners in the eyes of God; and with regard to the requirements for receiving his gift of righteousness they must come the same way that we gentiles do—by faith alone, without making any claim based upon Israel's law.

“All (i.e., both classes) have sinned” (v. 23), and “all (i.e., both classes) are given right standing with God freely by God’s grace through the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus (v. 24).

Both Jews and gentiles need the same “justification” (right standing) and the same “redemption”. Both require God to be gracious, that is, to show his mercy to the undeserving. This and other passages in Paul refute the idea that, if God's election of Israel still exists, it must mean that there are two routes: one for Israel through the law and without belief in Jesus as the messiah, and one for gentiles through belief in Jesus.

The two different prepositions used in v. 30 "by faith" for Israel and "through faith" for the gentiles merely reflect different modes of acquiring faith. Israel already had the spiritual preparation provided by the centuries of God's revelation in the Old Testament, enabling them to only add the recognition of Jesus as their promised messiah and come "by" the faith already promised to them. On the other hand, the pagan gentiles had no such preparation— they come to God "through" the faith prepared for Israel. This distinction, which Paul tries to express by varying his prepositions, is not intended to give Israel a special route to God that is a detour around the messiah Jesus. There are not two routes to God, but historically there were two on-ramps (v. 30) to the single route: one for those with the advantage of better prior information about God and those without. It may help you to think of the analogous situation today of two persons, one of whom grew up in a loving and Bible-knowledgeable family, and the other in an atheistic one. Persons in the former position can certainly choose not to follow in their family's path, but they have a better chance of knowing the relevant truths and seeing their outworking in their parents and siblings.

In v. 25 Paul proceeds to explain what he means by “the redemption (ἀπολύτρωσις apolutrōsis) that came by Christ Jesus” (v. 24). The redemption was accomplished by Jesus’ sacrificial death, which is expressed here by the word for “atoning sacrifice” (ἱλαστήριον hilastērion) and by the phrase “in his blood.” God has “presented” (NIV) or “put forward” (NRSV, ESV) Jesus as this atoning sacrifice (hilastērion), but it must be received “by faith”, or, as the NRSV puts it so nicely “effective through faith”.

What does Paul mean by “put forward” or “presented”? The last part of the verse explains that: Jesus’ death for us not only accomplished our salvation, it also vindicated God for crediting righteousness long before Jesus’ death to those Old Testament saints who believed. Their sins were not expiated by animal sacrifices, but God “passed over” them in view of what he knew his Son would accomplish. Old Testament saints like Moses, David, and Elijah had their sins forgiven, as it were, on credit. When the proper time arrived, God "presented" Jesus as the atoning sacrifice that made good all that "credit" extended in Old Testament times. God didn't need a congressional bail-out! He paid  the debt with the blood of the Lord Jesus.

In v. 26 Paul unites the two notions inherent in the phrase “the righteousness of God”: by doing all this, God was able to prove the rightness or justice of his behavior and at the same time give right standing (“justify”) the one who is "(the beneficiary) of the faithfulness of Jesus” (τὸν ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ). Once again Paul uses πίστις pistis as to denote the faithfulness of Jesus as our obedient Dying and Rising Savior.

Paul closes this section of his presentation in vv. 27-31 with a triumphant conclusion. God is able to solve all the problems by this plan. In the process he also eliminates any grounds for human boasting, bypassing law-keeping and substituting the principle of faith. By operating on this principle God is able to use two different historical operations—two "on-ramps" (the election of Israel and the election of gentile believers) to accomplish the salvation of those who believe. He is not only the God of the Jews, nor is he only the God of the gentiles. He is the God of both. When Paul writes in v. 30 "he (i.e., God) is one," he alludes to the Jewish creedal statement, the Shema Yisrael, that was recited daily by observant Jews. "Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God. The Lord is One." Therefore God is at liberty to unite the two groups on the basis of faith in his Son. In a real sense, gentile knowledge of God is always mediated through Jewish knowledge of God. As the Christian bumper sticker puts it, "My boss is a Jewish carpenter."

And finally, in v. 31, the big question: does this role of faith in the saving of both Jew and gentile now "invalidate/abrogate" (katargoumen) the law? No. By showing that the law's proper role was always to guide in behavior and alert to sin, we give to the law its proper role. This verse properly leads into the next chapter, since Paul now must find an example in the "law", i.e., the Pentateuch, to rebut the charge that salvation by faith left no purpose for the law.

Normally, we evangelicals read these verses as a defense of the teaching of justification by faith. But when we understand that Paul also anticipates much hostility to Jewish things among the gentile believers in Rome, we see this in a different light. Paul doesn't want Jewish believers in Rome to try to force gentile ones to keep the law of Moses in order to be saved. But he also doesn't want the majority gentile believers to belittle Israel's scriptures or to fail to see how vital Israel's law was and is in its proper role of showing human sinfulness and making necessary both the messiah's atoning sacrifice and God's free gift of right standing to believers. When we come to chapter 12, we will see how Paul addresses the question of whether or not the law of Moses has a role in guiding a believer's moral life.

Our study of chapter 12 is still another few months away. But you don't have to wait for the class to read the chapter! And I hope I have made you a little curious. After all, we all want to be not just hearers of the Word, but doers!