This legalistic distortion of these Biblical elements of the Mosaic covenant involves a misunderstanding of sin and death. Since, according to legalism, sin is basically a transgression of the law, the breaking of the rules and a falling short of the universal divine standard, sin is considered to be a crime against God, and the penalty for these crimes is spiritual, physical and eternal death. Until the penalty is executed at the last judgment, man is under the burden of an objective guilt or condemnation which must be satisfied by the execution of the penalty. But in addition to this objective guilt there is a subjective guilt of a bad conscience, which may or may not correspond to the objective guilt. This objective guilt has been conceived in terms of a debt which man owes and/or as demerit on man's record.
This is not the Biblical concept of sin. Legalism assumes that in the Bible sin is just a transgression of the law. True, a transgression of God's law is sin, but sin is more than just a transgression of the law. Sin may and did exist where the law of God did not exist. "For until the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed where there is no law" (Rom. 5:13). In the period before the law "sin was in the world." Men were sinning. Sin existed where the law did not exist. Therefore sin cannot be just a transgression of the law. Again, if sin is just a transgression of the law, then all would not have sinned, since all do not have the law. For not only those before Moses did not have the law, but also the Gentiles did not have the law.
"When the Gentiles who have not the lawBut all have sinned (Rom. 3:23). Therefore, sin is not just a transgression of the law. Sin is what the law shows it to be; it is basically idolatry. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3; Deut. 5:7). From the Biblical point of view sin must be understood and defined in terms of true God and not just in terms of the law. Accordingly, sin should be defined as any choice that is contrary to faith and trust in the true God. "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Rom. 14:23).
do by nature what the law requires,
they are a law to themselves,
even though they do not have the law" (Rom. 2:14).
The Greek word translated "have sinned" in Rom. 3:23 means "missing the mark." The mark is not the law as the divine standard, but God Himself. Man misses the mark when he puts his trust and faith in a false god, a substitute for the true God. The falling short of the glory of God in the last part of Rom. 3:23 does not mean falling short of the standard of God's perfection given in the law. The Greek word here translated "falling short" means "to be in want of" or "to be in need of". [1] In the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, this same word is used in Psa. 23:1.
"The Lord is my shepherd: I shall not want."The glory of God in the Old Testament is the manifest presence of God. Therefore, according to Rom. 3:23 man does not have this presence of God; he is in want or need of it. In other words, he is spiritually dead, separated from God's presence. And all have sinned because they are spiritually dead (Rom. 5:12d). "All have sinned and are in want or need of the glory or presence of God."
(See also Matt. 19:20; Mark 10:21; Luke 15:14; 22:35;
John 2:3; I Cor. 1:7; 8:8; 12:24; II Cor. 11:5,9; 12:11;
Phil. 4:12; Heb. 4:1; 11:37; 12:15).
The legalistic concept of death is a misunderstanding of death. In the Scriptures, death is not always the result of each man's own personal sins. All men have received spiritual and physical death (but not eternal death) from Adam (Rom.5:12). Man is not responsible for being spiritually dead because he did not choose that state. He received spiritual death from Adam just as he received physical death from Adam (Rom. 5:13-14). But man is responsible for the god he chooses. The true God has not left man without a knowledge (about) Himself (Rom. 1:19-20). This knowledge about God leaves man without excuse for his idolatry. He knows that his false gods are phonies. But this knowledge does not save him because it is knowledge about the true God, and not a personal knowledge of the true God which is life eternal (John 17:3). But even though man is not responsible for being spiritually dead, he is responsible for remaining in the state of spiritual death when deliverance from it is offered to him in the person of Jesus Christ. If he refuses the gift of eternal life in Christ Jesus, he will receive the wages of his decision, eternal death (Rom. 6:23). If a man refuses the gift of spiritual and eternal life in Christ Jesus and continues to put his trust in a false god, remaining in spiritual death, then after he dies physically, at the last judgment he will receive the results of his decision or sin, eternal death, separation from God for eternity.
Romans 6:23 does not mean that sin must be punished and that death is the penalty of sin. The meaning of this verse must be determined by considering its context, the previous verses from 15 to 23. The context of this verse is not the law-court but slavery. Sin is personified as a slavemaster. Verse 14 says sin will no longer have dominion or lordship [kurieusei] over the Christian, because he is now under grace. Verse 16 speaks of yielding oneself as a slave - either to sin or to obedience [to God]. Verse 17 speaks of having been slaves to sin but now (verse 18) being slaves of righteousness. Verses 20-21 asks what return did they get from the things that they did as slaves of sin. Paul says that the end of the slavery to sin is death. Verse 22 says that the end result of being a slave of God is eternal life. Then in verse 23, Paul summarizes his argument by saying that the wages of sin, that is, the wages paid by the slavemaster of sin, is death. But God does not pay wages, but gives a free gift, eternal life in Christ Jesus.
It is very plain from verses 17 and 18 that the slavery of sin was a past experience for the Christian. He has now changed masters. If he had remained under his old master, sin, that master would have eventually paid off in only one kind of coin, death. But since they have changed masters, they are not now in a position to collect wages from the old master, sin. And it does not say the they get wages from their new master, God. But they get a free gift, something that could not be earned, eternal life. What kind of death did they receive from their old master? Eternal death, eternal separation from God. That eternal death is meant here is clear from the second half this verse: "...but the gift of God is eternal life..." Paul is not talking about spiritual or physical death here but only eternal death, the end result of the slavery of sin. Romans 6:23 says nothing about the penalty of sin, that is, that sin is a crime that must be punished. True, the result of sin is eternal death. But that does not mean that sin must be punished as a crime before the sin can be forgiven. If the sinner repents and turns from his idolatry and to the true God in faith, he will be freely forgiven. If he does repent and believe, he will not still be liable to be punished for his sins.
"21 But if a wicked man turns away from all his sinsHere is the error of legalistic understanding of death. It says that sin must always be punished even if the sinner repents and believes (trusts) God. This contradicts the plain and clear teaching of God's Word (Ezek. 18:21-23; 33:10-20; Lam. 3:31-33; Isa. 55:6-7; II Chron. 7:14; II Pet. 3:9). Do not misunderstand what I am saying here. I am not saying that God does not punish sin. He does. This is not the error. The error is to say that God cannot freely forgive sin before or until he has punished sin. The error is that God must always punish sin before sin can be forgiven. That is, that before God can in love forgive the sinner, He must of necessity punish the sin. This is false. Man needs to be forgiven but paying the penalty of sin is not forgiveness. When sin is punished it is not freely forgiven. The punishment of sin is the execution of the consequences of sin; forgiveness is free dismissal of the consequences of sin. If sin is forgiven, it is not punished. Forgiveness through punishment is a contradiction. According to this legalistic teaching, this necessity is grounded in the justice of God. This justice requires, it is said, that the penalty must be paid before guilt can be removed. The guilt of sin cannot be freely forgiven, but only can be taken away by paying the penalty, which alone can satisfy justice. Justice demands that sin must be always punished. According to this legalistic theology, God is not free to forgive the repentant sinner until the sin is punished. God's freedom is thus limited and his love is conditioned by his justice. As we will see this legalistic concept of justice is a misunderstanding of the righteousness of God.
which he has committed and keeps all my statues
and does what is lawful and right, he shall live;
he shall not die.
22 None of the transgressions
which he has committed shall be remembered against him;
for the righteousness which he has done he shall live.
23 Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked,
says the Lord God,
and not rather he should turn from his way and live? ...
32 For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone,
says the Lord God; so turn, and live."
(Ezek. 18:21-23, 32; see also Ezek. 33:11)
The legalistic preoccupation in Christian theology with death as the necessary penalty of sin has distorted the Biblical concept of spiritual death as separation from God and of eternal death as eternal separation from God. Separation from God is far more serious than the penal consequences of sin as God is more important than the law. But not only is death misunderstood but life is also misunderstood as the reward for meritorious works. Life as fellowship and communion with God, a personal relationship to God, is lost sight of in the legalistic preoccupation with the law and its meritorious observance.
Legalism understands righteousness to be a keeping of the rules, a conformity to the law in thought, word and deed, a living up to the divine standard. Legalism sees righteousness as moral perfection, sinlessness. According to legalism, man was created under the law and for the law, man's highest good and final goal is this moral perfection, this legal righteousness. To stand spotless and without blame before the law is thought to be man's ultimate hope. This righteousness is often conceived in terms of merit; each good deed has a certain quantity of righteousness or merit associated with it. During the course of his life, a man acquires merit by his good works or demerit by his sins, transgressions of the law. At the final judgment these will be weighed in the double-pan balance of justice (dike). And justice will render to each impartially that which is due to him (he has earned it). If the merits outweigh the demerits, the man is legally declared righteous and legally entitled (he has earned it) to eternal life and blessedness. On the other hand, if the demerits predominate, he justly deserves and receives eternal death, punishment, pain and suffering.
This legalistic concept of righteousness is a misunderstanding of the Biblical concept of righteousness. The Biblical concept of righteousness is revealed in the story of Abraham. After God revealed His promises to Abraham, the Scripture says, "then he believed in the Lord; and He reckoned it [his faith] to him as righteousness" (Gen. 15:6; see also Rom. 4:3; Gal. 3:6). Abraham believed the promises of God and his faith was reckoned to him as righteousness (Rom. 4:5, 9). And Abraham's faith was reckoned to him as righteousness because faith in God is righteousness, the righteousness of faith (Rom. 4:16-22). Righteousness is not a quality that we possess, neither merit that we have earned or have imputed to our account, but a right relationship to God. Faith in God relates us rightly to God. A man is righteous when he is in right relationship to God. And faith in God, believing the promises of God, trusting in God is being in right relationship to God. The righteousness of faith is the opposite of sin; sin is trusting in a false god and righteousness is trusting in the true God. Just as man's basic sin is idolatry, so man's basic righteousness is allegiance to and trust in the true God from the heart. It has nothing to do with merit just as sin has nothing to do with demerit.
This legalistic misunderstanding of righteousness and life underlies both Roman Catholic and orthodox Protestant theology. It is true that they both in their own way teach that salvation is by the grace of God. But they do so in such a way that this basic legalistic conception remains intact. This legalistic misunderstanding came into Christian theology through Tertullian (3rd century) and Cyprian (4th century) and was fixed upon Christian theology by Aurelius Augustine, Bishop of Hippo in North Africa, in the early fifth century A.D. This came about in connection with his controversy with a British monk, Pelagius. Pelagius had come to Rome teaching and zealously exhorting his fellow Christians to good works. He was especially disturbed about those who endeavored to excuse themselves, when charged with their sins, by the inability of their sinful natures. He was outraged by these excuses and cried,
"Oh, blind madness! We accuse God of a two-fold ignorance, --Upon hearing Augustine's prayer -- "Give what Thou commandest, and command what Thou wilt" -- repeated in his hearing, Pelagius became particularly incensed. The powers of man, he held, were gifts of God; and it was, therefore, a reproach against God as if God had made man weak or evil, to believe that they were insufficient for keeping of His law. Pelagius began to teach and write against this Augustinian view, and when Augustine heard and read these Pelagian teachings, he engaged Pelagius in a lengthy controversy by writing many treatises opposing his teachings.
that He does not know what He has made,
nor what He has commanded, --
as if forgetting the human weakness of which He is Himself the Author,
He has imposed laws on man which he cannot endure."Pelagius
"himself tells us that it was his custom, therefore,
whenever he had to speak on moral improvement
and the conduct of a holy life,
to begin by pointing out the power and quality of human nature,
and by showing what it was capable of doing.
For (he says) he esteemed it of small use to exhort men to do
what they deemed impossible: hope must rather be our companion,
and all longing and effort die when we despair of attaining." [2]
The legalistic misunderstanding of righteousness and life underlies this controversy. Both Augustine and Pelagius assumed that eternal life was something that had to be earned by meritorious works; it was a reward for righteousness or meritorious good works. But Augustine and Pelagius differed on whether man was able or free to do such good works. Augustine denied that man since the fall was able apart from God's grace not to sin and do good works. Adam's descendants, he held, were not able to earn salvation by their good works because they had lost their freedom not to sin. Consequently, apart from God's grace, they are not able to do good works and hence to merit eternal life as a reward for their good works. Only by God's grace is man enabled to do good works and thus receive the reward of eternal life for their meritorious good works. Thus eternal life is both a gift and a reward: a gift because only by the grace of God is man enabled to do good works and a reward because these good works merit eternal life as a reward for these good works. Augustine wrote:
"If eternal life is rendered to good works,
as the Scripture openly declares:
'Then He shall reward every man according to his works,'
(Matt. 16:27), how can eternal life be a matter of grace,
seeing that grace is not rendered to works,
but is given gratuitously as the apostle himself tells us:
'To him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace,
but of debt' (Rom. 4:4)...?
How, then, is eternal life by grace,
when it is received from works?...
This question then, seems to me to be by no means capable of solution,
unless we understand that even those good works of ours,
which are recompensed with eternal life,
belong to the grace of God...
It follows, then, beloved, beyond all doubt,
that as your good life is nothing else than God's grace,
so also the eternal life
which is the recompense of a good life is the grace of God;
moreover, it is given gratuitously,
even as that is given gratuitously to which it is given.
But that to which it is given is solely and simply grace;
this therefore is also that which is given to it,
because it is its reward; grace is for grace,
as if remuneration for righteousness;
in order that it may be true, because it is true,
that God "shall reward every man according to his works." [3]"Nevertheless, since even that eternal life itself,
which, it is certain, is given as due to good works,
is called by so great an apostle the grace of God,
although grace is not rendered to works, but is given freely,
it must be confessed without any doubt,
that eternal life is called grace for the reason
that it is rendered to those merits
which grace has conferred upon man." [4]
Pelagius, on the other hand, affirmed man's freedom not to sin and to do good works because the denial of human freedom undermined man's responsibility for his acts. According to Pelagius, by the grace of creation God had given man the freedom not to sin and to do good works. By these man could gain eternal life as a reward for his good works. Thus also for Pelagius eternal life is both a gift and a reward. But the gift was by the grace of creation. Nature and grace are the same. For Augustine, nature and grace are separate and distinct from each other because what was given to man in creation, the freedom not to sin, was lost by the fall and could be restored only by the special grace of Jesus Christ. Apart from this difference concerning nature and grace (and the doctrine of original sin), Augustine and Pelagius both assumed that eternal life was basically a meritorious reward, and freedom to do good works was given by God's grace in order that man might receive eternal life as a reward for his meritorious good works that grace made possible. The conception of salvation of both of them is basically legalistic: eternal life is something that has to be earned by meritorious good works. But because the grace of God makes good works possible, salvation is also by grace.
[1] C. K. Barrett, The Epistle to the Romans
(New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1957), p.74.
[2] Benjamin B. Warfield,
"Introductory Essay on Augustin (sic)
and the Pelagian Controversy,"
in Philip Schaff,
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, vol.5
(Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971), p. xiv.
[3] Augustine, "A Treatise on Grace and Free Will,"
ch. 19-20, in Schaff, pp. 451-452.
See also chapters 6, 13-15, of the same treatise.
[4] Augustine, "A Treatise on Rebuke and Grace," chap. 41,
in Schaff, pp. 488-489.