Is Faith Enough, or Do We Still Need the Rules?

In this article, you will learn how Romans 10:4 contradicts Matthew 5:17, Galatians 3:10, James 2:24 and Matthew 19:17. Find the translations at the bottom of the page..

When it comes to understanding how Christians should relate to the laws given in the Old Testament, one might encounter seemingly conflicting messages in the New Testament. Romans 10:4 puts forth the idea that faith in Jesus Christ marks the end of the law for re-establishing one's righteousness before God. In simpler terms, Paul's message is that believing in Jesus is enough to be right with God.

Yet, the issue gets intriguing when we look at Matthew 5:17. Here, Jesus himself says he did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. If Jesus is fulfilling the law, does that mean it continues to hold importance for those who follow him?

This contradiction deepens with Galatians 3:10. While Romans emphasizes faith over law, Galatians warns that those who rely solely on following the law are bound to adhere to all of it, or else be under a curse. This raises the question: Is the law necessary for righteousness, or does it risk becoming a burden?

Then consider James 2:24, which suggests that faith alone isn't enough for justification; instead, actions or "works" are essential. This appears to challenge the notion in Romans where faith alone seems sufficient.

Lastly, in Matthew 19:17, Jesus implies that keeping God's commandments is still crucial for eternal life. So, are the old commands any less significant if faith is enough?

These differing perspectives echo the conflict between a doctor's advice to focus solely on diet versus exercise for health. Both are important, but what's the ultimate priority? Similarly, the Bible offers diverse views on law and faith, each contributing to a larger, complicated picture. How do believers reconcile these differences? Are old rules still relevant, or has faith made them obsolete? Readers might pause to consider, how do these principles coexist today?