The Law "Unpacked"

I've become aware that how we view the Mosaic Law really matters in how we understand grace. I admit to buying into the Reformation view that Grace was totally contrary to the Law, and that maybe that wasn't what Paul was getting at. So, what was Paul's view of the Mosaic Law? Here are a few things I posted in a discussion about that topic.

"The Mosaic Law is a system of earning God's favor."

After doing some study on that, I think there are some problems with that point of view. I am not saying that Paul would not be opposed to a system of earning God's favor, but correlating the Law with that system is reading to much into the text.

First, when Paul uses the word "nomos" he is referring directly to the Mosaic Law, not a universal principle of earning favor or merit (for two good examples see Gal. 3:15-25 and Rom. 5:13-14).

Second, while Paul believes that the Torah is temporary, he does not casually dismiss it, and even quotes from it to reinforce his argument (1Cor. 9:9 to stay in the letter you are working with here).

Third, in the same letter you are working with we find this:

1Co 9:20 And to the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain the Jews. To those who are under the Law, I became as under the Law, so that I might gain those who are under the Law.

Now, if the Law is a system of earning God's favor, is Paul saying that he was pretending to earn God's favor by works, or that he was acting like a Law-observant Jew (ie. observing dietary requirements etc.)?

Fourth, I think you are "demonizing" the Mosaic Law by claiming it as a system of earning God's favor, something Paul didn't do. To him the Law was good, it is sin within us that made the Law ineffective (Rom. 7). Again, this is an example of Paul talking about Mosaic Law and not universalizing it.

Last, I think that Paul's issue with the Law was not that it was a system of legalism, but that it had served it's purpose in redemption-history. Christ is the goal of the Law (Rom. 10:4)! So, if the Judaizers were trying to get the Gentiles to enter it by circumcision (which is the main reason for Galatians, and underlies Romans), it is not legalistic, it is missing the point. By relying on the Law they are now missing the whole point, which was Christ! Faith has replaced Law (Gal. 3:25-26).

I suspect that our intepretation of the Law as a system of earning God's favor comes from Luther and the other Reformers who WERE battling a religious system of legalism. I think it is entirely possible that they read their contemporary issues into the text rather than asking the tough historical questions.

Feel free to poke some holes in this. I'm sure there are things that I'm missing, or have wrong...