I’m trying to follow you, Theodore. But, I just can’t accept the connection I think you are making.

You note Heb. 7:12, stating, “The law of God was changed after Jesus was crucified. A word has been added to the law.”

Heb. 7:12 does note, “For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law.” However, this singular sentence is not the full summary of the point. It is rather an important, but short sentence of a much bigger thought. This sentence notes a change of the law – true – but it never asserts your position that “a word” has been added to the law. It says nothing of the sort. Rather, Hebrews 7 details the “normal” course of the priesthood. In particular, it speaks of the succession from Aaron through the tribe of Levi. He then states that Jesus is a new priest in the order of Melchizedek, who was a non-Levite priest. The point is that Jesus is bringing a new tribal line to the priesthood. The very next verse says (13), “he of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. (14) For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.”
I agree that the law changed, per Heb. 7:12.

Yet, that text says absolutely nothing about your postulate that the law changed by “a word” being added to it. The law changed because the priesthood changed. The law of Moses was replaced by the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2). Such is the subject matter of my “The Law and the Believer” series posted here: http://www.returningking.com/?series=72.

Your next quote, from Rom. 5:20, is “The law was added so that the trespass might increase.” I’m not totally sure why you’re quoting this in your argument, but if you’re attempting to say that this text refers to “an addition” to the law, clearly this is not the case contextually. Romans 5 is a discourse on how Adam brought death and Christ brought life. It says nothing of the nature of “a word” being added to the law. Rather, it speaks of “the law” as that which condemned man’s sin. It was the law which was added that man might be utterly exposed for the sinner that he is. Paul explained the scenario again in Rom. 7:13, “…in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it (the law) produced death in me through what was good, so that throught he commandment sin might become utterly sinful.”

Lastly, it seems by your quoting of Rom. 2:13, that you are asserting that this new law – (your version, with the mysterious “added word”) – is responsible for one’s salvation. You quote Rom 2:13 as if this law is the source of salvation. Yet, clearly Romans 2:13 is arguing utterly against the premise of one being saved by the law of Moses (which is the law in question). You must read the entire chapter! Focus on Rom. 2:12-16. Paul’s declaration is not that one will be saved by observance of the law, but that one will be judged as guilty by the law. Only by Christ will anyone be judged as righteous by the law- for only Christ fulfilled it. Paul continues his discourse to its climactic resolution in Rom 3-

Romans 3:21-25 (NIV)
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–

The righteousness from God is “apart from the law” of Moses. It is a new law of Christ by grace through faith; for Christ had fulfilled the law (Mat. 5:17-18) – and rendered it inoperative for the believer (Rom. 10:4, Gal. 2:15-16, Gal. 3:24-25).

I’m sorry, but there is not “additional word” added to the law in any of the passages you’re referencing. I encourage you to read from testament to book; from book to chapter, from chapter to paragraph, etc. Context is utterly essential to prevent us from eisegesis (reading into the text), which I believe you have mistakenly done.
Best wishes-
Jeff

For “It is NOT those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who OBEY the law who will be declared righteous.” Rom. 2:13.
What law?