Why is it true that if I break one part of the law I am guilty of breaking all of it? Why can't I just repent over that one infraction through sacrifice or repentance? In other words, Paul asks the Galatians if they've really considered the implication of putting themselves under the bondage of the law. What I'm wondering is why that would be such a bad thing.--Micki (Atlanta)

I think James and Paul are saying that if you are trying to be justified by the law, when you break any part of it (since law justification requires perfection) you are in fact breaking all of it. James 2:10 reads "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point he has become guilty of all" (NAS).

Let me offer an analogy. If you throw a rock through a window, even though parts of the window are not broken it is still ("all") broken. The window is broken, even though technically speaking some parts are not shattered, crushed or broken.

So it is with the law. It's all or nothing. Though there has never been a time when salvation did not come through grace, it is also true that there has never been a time when the Lord did not expect obedience.