Against Such Things There Is No Law
Why Paul Lists the Fruit of the Spirit in a Covenant Dispute
The fruit of the Spirit is one of the most familiar lists in the New Testament. Love, joy, peace, patience. It is quoted often, memorized early, and rarely questioned. But familiarity has a cost. When Galatians 5:22–23 is lifted out of the argument in which it is positioned, it can become a mirror for self-evaluation rather than a weapon in Paul’s theological defense. Paul may not have written this list to help believers measure their spiritual progress. It may instead function as his answer to a charge: that life without the Law could not be trusted.
A Note on How to Read This Piece
This article presents one possible way of reading Galatians 5:22–23. It pays close attention to Paul’s argument in the letter, the historical situation in Galatia, and the covenant question Paul is addressing. It does not claim to say everything the passage could mean, to settle every debate about Law and Spirit in Paul, or to rule out other thoughtful interpretations.
The focus here is on how Galatians 5 functions within the flow of Paul’s argument. For that reason, the emphasis is placed on context and purpose rather than trying to harmonize every Pauline passage into a single, complete system. When other texts (such as Romans or Jeremiah 31) are mentioned, they are used only to help clarify what Paul is doing in Galatians, not to build a full theology of Law, Spirit, or sanctification.
The conclusions offered here are therefore careful and limited. They are not meant to be taken as final or absolute, but as a reasoned attempt to follow Paul’s line of thought as it unfolds in this letter. Other approaches may highlight different questions or connections, and those deserve serious consideration as well.
Readers are encouraged to weigh this reading against the text itself, compare it with other interpretations, and think through the evidence on their own. This reading is offered as a lens, not a verdict; one way of seeing the argument more clearly.
The Problem Paul Is Solving, Not the Virtues He Is Listing
Paul’s list of the fruit of the Spirit is often approached as a timeless catalogue of Christian virtues or as a diagnostic tool for personal spiritual maturity. While the traits themselves are undeniably moral goods, such readings detach the passage from the controversy that gives it meaning. In Galatians, Paul is not reducing his argument to virtue formation, nor presenting virtues as covenant criteria, but he does intentionally shape moral life as a consequence of Spirit-rule.
The Galatian churches were under pressure to adopt circumcision and other markers of Torah fidelity as conditions for covenant membership (Gal 2:3–5; 5:2–4; 6:12–13). Paul’s opponents framed their argument morally and pastorally: without the Law, Gentile believers would lack discipline, moral restraint, and communal order. Torah, they claimed, was necessary for covenant faithfulness.1
Paul does not deny the Law’s divine origin or moral seriousness (Gal 3:19; Rom 7:12). Instead, he contests its continuing authority. His argument is covenantal rather than ethical: the Law’s role as covenant governor has reached its appointed end with the arrival of Christ and the gift of the Spirit (Gal 3:23–25; 4:4–7).
Law, Spirit, and the Question of Jurisdiction
In Galatians, “under the Law” does not refer merely to being subject to its penalty, but to living under its authority as covenant governor. Paul defines the Law not primarily as a source of condemnation, but as a temporary custodian whose supervisory role ended with the coming of Christ (Gal 3:23–25; 5:18). Paul’s claim that “those who are led by the Spirit are not under the Law” (Gal 5:18) is one of the most misunderstood statements in the letter. It is often softened to mean that believers are still functionally governed by the Law but empowered to obey it better. That reading does not survive the argument of Galatians as a whole.
Throughout chapters 3–5, Paul presents the Law as:
temporary (Gal 3:19),
custodial (Gal 3:24–25),
and replaced by sonship through the Spirit (Gal 4:4–7).
The metaphor is not supplementation but succession.2
This is why interpretations that treat the fruit of the Spirit as internalized Torah, often appealing to Jeremiah 31:33, overreach in this context. While Paul affirms covenant continuity elsewhere, he avoids is using fulfillment language to re-install Torah as covenant authority. That distinction needs to be explicit. Instead of saying that the Law is now obeyed internally, Paul says in Galatians that those who are led by the Spirit are not under the Law (Gal 5:18) and that the Law functioned as a temporary custodian until Christ (Gal 3:23–25). He explains the nature of that release elsewhere by describing believers as having died to the Law’s jurisdiction through union with Christ (Rom 7:4–6).
Jeremiah 31:31–34 is often appealed to in order to frame Paul’s understanding of the new covenant as the Law being internalized: Torah written on the heart rather than enforced externally. Whatever Paul may do with that theme elsewhere, it is not the controlling frame in Galatians 5. Here Paul’s contrast is not “external Law vs internal Law,” but “under the Law” versus “led by the Spirit” (Gal 5:18), with the Law functioning as a temporary custodian “until Christ” (Gal 3:23–25). So the opinion I’m presenting is contextual: Galatians 5 is not presenting Spirit-life as ‘Torah internalized,’ but as life no longer located under Torah’s covenant governance. Paul never cites Jeremiah 31 in Galatians, despite its relevance if internalized Torah were his point. Instead, he consistently presents the Law as temporary and custodial, functioning until the coming of Christ and the gift of the Spirit (Gal 3:23–25; 4:1–7). His contrast is not between external and internal Law, but between the “written code” and the “new way of the Spirit” (Rom 7:6). This is further confirmed by Paul’s conclusion that “against such things there is no law” (Gal 5:23), a statement that would be rhetorically incoherent if the Law remained the operative covenant standard, even in internalized form.
A related counter-text is Romans 8:4, which speaks of “the righteous requirement of the Law being fulfilled in us who walk according to the Spirit.” This verse is frequently read as evidence that believers now keep the Law internally through the Spirit. However, Paul’s argument assigns the fulfilling action to God’s redemptive work in Christ (Rom 8:3), not to the believer’s renewed Torah obedience. The Law’s requirement is fulfilled “in” believers as an outcome of participation in Christ, not “by” believers as covenant subjects under the Law. This reading is reinforced by Romans 7:4–6, where Paul explicitly states that believers have died to the Law and now serve “in the new way of the Spirit, not in the old way of the written code.” Romans 8:4 therefore describes the moral result of Spirit-led life, not the reinstallation of the Law’s governing authority. The Law’s intent is realized, but its jurisdiction is not restored.
James D. G. Dunn argues that Paul’s concern in Galatians is not the internalization of Torah but the termination of its covenantal authority, emphasizing the Law’s role as a temporary guardian rather than an enduring standard (The Epistle to the Galatians, BNTC).
Douglas J. Moo notes that Romans 8:4 refers to the fulfillment of the Law’s righteous requirement through God’s action in Christ, not through believers becoming Law-observers under a new internal regime (The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT).
N. T. Wright frames Paul’s Law–Spirit contrast in terms of covenantal transition, arguing that the Spirit marks the new era in which the Law’s role as covenant boundary and regulator has ended (Paul and the Faithfulness of God, vol. 2).
Thomas R. Schreiner distinguishes between the realization of the Law’s moral intent and the continuation of the Law as covenant authority, concluding that Paul affirms the former while rejecting the latter (Paul, Apostle of God’s Glory).
The Anticipated Objection: If Not the Law, Then What?
Paul is fully aware of the charge that freedom from Torah leads to chaos. He voices it implicitly throughout the letter (Gal 5:13, 15). Galatians 5:22–23 functions as his rebuttal.
The fruit of the Spirit is not presented as aspiration but as evidence. Paul is not presenting the fruit as a ladder believers climb in order to become legitimate. He assumes the Spirit’s presence and argues from its observable results. Yet he still calls for active participation: ‘walk by the Spirit’ (Gal 5:16) and ‘keep in step with the Spirit’ (Gal 5:25). So the point is not that effort disappears, but that legitimacy is not grounded in Torah observance or virtue achievement. The fruit is evidence of Spirit-rule, not a merit system.
Paul is arguing that the Spirit has already produced a way of life that answers the Law’s moral concerns more effectively than the Law itself.3
This is why readings that focus only on personal spiritual growth miss the force of the passage. Growth is assumed. Paul’s concern is not private self-evaluation, but whether Spirit-led life can stand on its own without the Law propping it up.
How We Know the Objection Paul Is Answering
This objection is not imported from later theological debates but arises directly from the way Paul structures his argument in Galatians. Having argued that life in Christ is no longer located “under the Law” but “led by the Spirit” (Gal 5:18), Paul immediately turns to the concern that such freedom will lead to moral disorder and communal breakdown. The question is not hypothetical. It is the obvious challenge his argument provokes: if the Law no longer governs God’s people, what restrains the flesh and holds the community together?
Paul addresses that concern as he names it. He warns that freedom must not be used “as an opportunity for the flesh” (Gal 5:13), cautions that the churches are in danger of “biting and devouring one another” (Gal 5:15), and contrasts life “under the Law” with life “led by the Spirit” (Gal 5:18). These are not abstract theological distinctions or general moral reminders. They are responses to a concrete charge: that removing Torah as covenant governor leaves nothing in place to preserve order or restrain behavior.
The structure of Galatians 5 makes this clear. Paul first denies that the Law retains governing authority (5:1–12), then immediately acknowledges the fear that such freedom will produce chaos (5:13–15), and finally offers the fruit of the Spirit as evidence that Spirit-led life is morally coherent and socially stable apart from the Law (5:16–23). The ethical material does not follow the theological argument as an afterthought. It completes it. Paul is not merely teaching ideals; he is demonstrating that life governed by the Spirit can be trusted to hold together without Torah enforcement.
“Fruit” and “Works”: Grammar as Theology
Paul contrasts the fruit (karpos, singular) of the Spirit with the works (erga, plural) of the flesh (Gal 5:19–23). Lexically, karpos denotes produce or yield: the natural outcome of a living source.4 Paul’s use of the singular karpos, especially in contrast with plural erga, supports a unified-source reading, even if the grammar alone does not demand it.
The “works of the flesh” are plural because they are fragmented, competitive, and manufactured. They arise from human effort animated by disordered desire. By contrast, the Spirit produces a unified outcome: a coherent life.
This grammatical contrast undercuts readings that frame the fruit merely as new covenant identity markers (as in some New Perspective formulations). While covenant identity is indeed at stake, Paul’s emphasis lies deeper. The issue is not which markers define God’s people, but which power generates covenant life.5
Love as the Organizing Principle of New Covenant Life
The list begins with love (agapē). In Paul, agapē denotes a volitional, covenant-shaped commitment to act for another’s good rather than an emotional state.6 Paul has already framed love’s role in Galatians:
“Faith working through love” (Gal 5:6)
“The whole Law is summed up in one word” (Gal 5:14)
Love is at the head of the list because, for Paul, it is the Spirit-produced posture that organizes covenant life in this new era (Gal 5:6, 13–14). That does not mean love becomes a new law-code or a substitute nomos. Rather, love functions as the Spirit-generated mode of covenant faithfulness in a community no longer defined or governed by Torah as covenant boundary and custodian. In that sense, love is not ‘Law-keeping under a new name,’ but the Spirit’s concrete expression of the life the Law pointed toward but could not produce.
Joy and Peace as Evidence of Stability
Joy (chara) denotes gladness rooted in God’s action rather than in circumstances that can be controlled or secured.7 While the term is closely related to charis (grace), the point is not wordplay but meaning: joy arises as the response to having been received by God apart from performance. It is not emotional exuberance dependent on stability, success, or certainty, but a settled confidence grounded in grace. In Galatians, this matters because the central issue is not mood but assurance.
Within the letter, joy is inseparable from freedom (Gal 5:1, 13). Paul reminds the Galatians that they were called into freedom not as a precarious experiment but as a decisive act of deliverance. Joy, in this context, functions as evidence that freedom does not produce anxiety or moral instability. It reflects the security of those who no longer live under the pressure of proving covenant legitimacy through the Law.
This directly counters the charge Paul is answering. His opponents assume that removing the Law will unsettle believers, leaving them unanchored and vulnerable to disorder. Paul points instead to joy as a Spirit-produced outcome of freedom itself. Rather than destabilizing life, freedom grounded in grace produces a steadiness the Law was never designed to secure.
Peace (eirēnē) reflects the Hebrew concept of shalom, which denotes relational wholeness, restored order, and communal harmony rather than mere inner calm. It describes life rightly ordered between people, not simply the absence of personal anxiety. This nuance is essential for reading Galatians, because Paul is not primarily addressing private moral struggles but visible breakdown within the community.
The crisis in Galatia is communal fracture. Paul warns that the churches are “biting and devouring one another” (Gal 5:15) and lists factions, divisions, and rivalries among the works of the flesh (Gal 5:20). These are not secondary concerns. They are signs that the community is being torn apart by competing claims to legitimacy and authority.
Peace, then, functions as evidence that Spirit-led life can sustain communal order apart from Torah enforcement.8 The Spirit produces unity across Jew–Gentile lines without requiring uniformity in Law observance (Gal 3:26–29). Shared identity in Christ replaces Law-based hierarchy, and relational wholeness emerges not from imposed conformity but from a new covenant reality.
In this way, peace directly answers the objection Paul is facing. His opponents fear that abandoning the Law will dissolve communal stability. Paul points instead to peace as a Spirit-produced outcome. The unity the Law sought to preserve through boundary markers is realized more fully through the Spirit, who forms a community held together by shared belonging rather than regulated by division.
Relational Virtues Under Conflict Pressure
Longsuffering (makrothymia) literally means “long-tempered” and refers to restraint exercised toward people under provocation rather than patience with circumstances.9 It names the capacity to absorb offense without immediate retaliation. This distinction is crucial in Galatians, where the pressure is not abstract suffering but interpersonal and theological conflict.
In such contexts, escalation is the natural response. Disputes over truth, identity, and authority tend to harden positions, provoke counterattacks, and fracture communities. Paul identifies longsuffering as the Spirit-produced alternative to this cycle. It resists the urge to repay provocation with provocation and prevents disagreement from devolving into hostility.
By naming longsuffering as fruit of the Spirit, Paul signals that Spirit-led life does not avoid conflict, but it governs how conflict is endured. Rather than allowing pressure to tear the community apart, the Spirit produces the restraint necessary to preserve unity without surrendering conviction.
Kindness (chrēstotēs) refers to active benevolence rather than mere pleasantness or agreeable temperament. The term carries the sense of usefulness expressed in concrete action. It is goodness that moves toward others for their benefit, not simply a soft disposition or polite demeanor. In Paul’s argument, this distinction matters because kindness can easily be counterfeited by outward warmth while still serving hidden agendas.
Paul explicitly contrasts this kind of Spirit-produced kindness with the manipulative zeal of those troubling the Galatians. They appear earnest and invested, but their concern is self-serving. “They make much of you,” Paul says, “but for no good purpose” (Gal 4:17). Their intensity is not directed toward the good of the community but toward control, dependence, and exclusion. Kindness, by contrast, seeks the genuine good of others without demanding allegiance or conformity in return.
This is why Paul anchors kindness to freedom. “You were called to freedom,” he writes, “only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another” (Gal 5:13). Spirit-led freedom does not collapse into self-indulgence or coercion. It expresses itself in service that builds others up rather than binds them. In this way, chrēstotēs becomes a visible marker of Spirit-governed relationships, sharply distinguishing genuine care from religious manipulation.
Goodness (agathōsynē) adds moral firmness to the posture of kindness. While kindness moves toward others for their benefit, goodness ensures that such movement remains anchored in what is right. It guards against the misunderstanding that Spirit-led care requires moral softness or the avoidance of confrontation. Without goodness, kindness can easily slide into permissiveness or silence in the face of error.
Paul’s own conduct in Galatians makes this clear. His sharply worded warning: “If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:8–9), is not a lapse in spirituality but an expression of Spirit-led goodness. When truth is threatened, goodness acts decisively. It does not dominate or coerce, but neither does it retreat. In this way, agathōsynē names the moral clarity that allows Spirit-governed communities to protect the gospel without reverting to Law-based control.
Faithfulness and Gentleness: Spirit-Governed Authority
Faithfulness (pistis) in this context most naturally refers to reliability or trustworthiness rather than belief-content alone.10 While pistis can denote faith or belief elsewhere, the immediate setting favors the sense of steadiness expressed over time. Paul is not listing doctrinal commitments but visible outcomes of Spirit-governed life.
This emphasis fits Paul’s concern throughout Galatians. The churches are under pressure to shift allegiance, adopt new markers of legitimacy, and abandon the freedom they initially embraced. Paul’s worry is not that they lack correct beliefs, but that they may prove unstable, drawn away from the Spirit-led path by fear, persuasion, or pressure. Faithfulness, then, names the Spirit-produced capacity to remain dependable and consistent without external enforcement. It reassures that communities led by the Spirit are not erratic or short-lived, but capable of enduring together over time.
Gentleness (prautēs) denotes strength held under control rather than weakness or passivity. It describes power that is deliberately restrained and directed for restoration rather than domination. Paul gives this quality concrete expression in Galatians 6:1, where those who are spiritually mature are instructed to restore a fellow believer “in a spirit of gentleness.” Correction, in this frame, is not an exercise of superiority but an act of care governed by the Spirit.
This directly challenges authoritarian models of religious leadership that rely on pressure, fear, or coercion to enforce conformity. Spirit-led authority does not compel submission through force or control. It operates through restraint, patience, and a concern for the restoration of the community. In this way, gentleness reframes leadership itself, not as Law-enforced compliance, but as Spirit-governed guidance aimed at healing rather than domination.
Self-Control and the Reordering of Desire
Self-control (enkrateia) literally means “power within” and refers to internal mastery rather than externally imposed restraint.11 Unlike the Law, which regulates behavior through commands and prohibitions, enkrateia names a form of governance that operates from the inside out. It is not the suppression of desire by force, but the reordering of desire itself.
Its placement at the end of the list is deliberate. Self-control functions as Paul’s final response to the central objection driving the Galatian controversy. If the Law no longer governs God’s people, what restrains desire? Paul’s answer is that the Spirit does not merely curb behavior but transforms the source from which behavior flows.
The Law restrains conduct from the outside.
The Spirit reshapes desire from the inside.
Paul makes this explicit when he writes, “Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (Gal 5:24). Desire is not merely managed; it is put to death in union with Christ. This coheres with Paul’s broader argument that sin’s dominion is broken not through Law observance, but from union with Christ’s death and resurrection (Rom 6:6–14). Self-control, then, is not the Spirit helping believers keep rules more effectively, but the Spirit producing a new kind of inner mastery that the Law could never generate.
“Against Such Things There Is No Law”: A Jurisdictional Verdict
Paul concludes the list with the statement, “Against such things there is no law” (Galatians 5:23). This line is often read as a general affirmation, as though Paul were merely saying that these qualities are admirable or universally approved. But in context, it functions very differently. The statement functions at least juridically within Paul’s argument, even if it also carries rhetorical force.
Paul speaks in juridical terms. Law exists to regulate conduct by prohibition, restraint, and judgment. Paul can speak of the Law in multiple ways, but in texts like 1 Timothy 1:9–10 its emphasis is juridical: the Law addresses wrongdoing by exposing and restraining it. That’s the aspect most relevant to Galatians 5:23, where Paul’s point is that Spirit-produced life gives the Law, as an accusing/prosecuting authority, no case to bring. This doesn’t deny other functions the Law can have (pedagogical, revelatory, boundary-marking); it highlights the function in view when Paul frames the Law in legal terms.
A life shaped by the Spirit’s fruit gives the Law nothing to do. There is no violation to address, no disorder to restrain, no accusation to bring. The point is not that the Law approves of such a life, but that it has no jurisdiction over it. Paul’s claim, therefore, is not moral but covenantal. The Spirit produces a kind of life that no longer falls within the Law’s governing reach.
This is why Paul does not say that these traits fulfill the Law. Fulfillment language would still position the Law as the standard against which life is measured, even if that standard were now met. Paul’s argument goes further. The issue is not that the Law’s demands are satisfied, but that the Law itself no longer functions as the authority that defines covenant faithfulness.
Paul has already prepared the reader for this conclusion. He describes the Law as a temporary guardian whose role ended when faith came (Gal 3:23–25), and he insists that believers have died to the Law through union with Christ so that they now belong to another (Romans 7:4–6). In that light, “against such things there is no law” is the logical verdict. The Spirit-led life does not stand before the Law for evaluation because the covenantal relationship that once placed people under the Law has come to an end.
Paul’s claim, then, is not that Spirit-produced virtues render the Law unnecessary because they meet its standards. His claim is stronger and more decisive: the Law no longer applies as covenant authority at all.12 The Spirit does not assist believers in keeping the Law better. This does not mean the Spirit produces behavior contrary to God’s moral will, but that the Spirit does not restore the Law as covenant governor or measure of legitimacy.
The Spirit produces a life that the Law was never designed to govern.
Governed by the Spirit
The fruit of the Spirit is not a virtue checklist for personal self-measurement, not internalized Torah under a new name, not a sanctification scorecard, and not merely a replacement set of covenant identity markers. In Galatians, it functions as evidence introduced into a covenantal dispute. It demonstrates that life governed by the Spirit is morally coherent, socially stable, and covenant-legitimate apart from the Law.
For that reason, Paul’s claim goes beyond improvement.
The Spirit does not help believers keep the Law more effectively.
The Spirit produces the kind of life the Law pointed toward but was never given authority to govern.
Thanks for reading Berean Underground! Share this if it made you think, and subscribe for more reflections that refuse to settle for easy answers
Disclaimer: This post was sharpened with the help of AI tools for clarity and flow.
Change Your Mind?
If you ever decide this content isn’t for you, you can unsubscribe with the link below at any time.
Footnotes
J. D. G. Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, BNTC, on Gal 5:2–12.
N. T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God, vol. 2, on Law as temporary custodian.
Douglas J. Moo, Galatians, BECNT, on Gal 5:22–23 as apologetic evidence.
BDAG, karpos, sense 1–2.
Dunn, Galatians, on identity and Spirit-ethics.
BDAG, agapē; cf. Rom 13:8–10.
BDAG, chara; cf. Gal 4:15.
Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God, on Spirit and unity.
BDAG, makrothymia.
BDAG, pistis, sense of faithfulness/reliability.
BDAG, enkrateia.
Moo, Galatians; Schreiner, Paul, Apostle of God’s Glory, on Law’s jurisdiction.