Questions and Answers

(Regarding 'The church' I'd recommend downloading and listening to the audio MP3 message by John Metcalfe called 'The church' based on Ephesians 5:25-27 from this website - see the"Audio" page.)

Questions on LAW and GRACE

Ian, I've been looking at some of the links from your web site and have some questions on the subject of law and grace. Many 'Reformed' writers teach a lot about the law being our 'rule of life' and they very much have an emphasis on "doing" - one example is the following, which paraphrases what one writer has to say about the subject. (See also, for example,  http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/jay_adams.htm):

"I'm going to discipline myself to godliness. I'm going to work at it. I'm going to engage in sustained daily effort in doing God's will and obeying God's requirements. I'm going to deny self and crucify self every day. I'm going to put to death the old life patterns of the old man. I'm going to say 'no' to self and say 'yes' to Christ every day. As I do these things I will be developing godly habits. I will not give up but I will persist in doing right. I will do what the Scriptures say regardless of how I feel. I will live a commandment-motivated life of holiness oriented towards godliness."

This is the sort of teaching that I have heard for many years, but recently I have come to see things more Biblically and now see that the believer's rule of conduct is the Gospel and not the law. But I do have some further questions and wonder if you might be able to help...

The Reformed position says that salvation is all of grace (without works or law) but when it comes to sanctification they tend to bring in the law (as with the above quote - which is perhaps a bit extreme but nevertheless gives a good illustration of their thinking).

1. So my first question is, what is the actual place for Exodus 20 for the true New Testament believer?

2. In Ephesians 5 and 6 Paul exhorts believers to good Christian conduct. But in Eph 6: 1/3 he says: "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth." Why does Paul make a direct appeal to the Law (Ex 20:12) as he now writes in the New Testament times? What's more, a number of these children could well be believers.

3. The works of the law are essentially "doing" things, it's understood that these works are not meritorious as far as salvation is concerned. But allied to 2) above when we come to the last part of nearly all of Paul's epistles we find a whole catalogue of commandments (or precepts if you prefer). If the believer is bound by these precepts, then is there not a sense in which his rule of conduct is the precept? A particular reference might be 1 Thess 5: "Rejoice evermore, Pray without ceasing. In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you. Quench not the Spirit. Despise not prophesyings" … and so on.

I would be intested in your views..

Thanks for the questions. This is quite a big subject, so although I'll try to answer below I may not have the time or space to fully do the subject justice.

Some brief comments to begin with though... Yes, the teaching that 'the law is the believer's rule of life' is predominant amongst those who call themselves 'Reformed'. It is the 'third use' of the law, as they say. However the Reformers themselves had different understandings of the law, for example Luther's teaching is quite different to Calvin's on this (and I prefer Luther in many ways actually), so I have to ask what gives these modern men the right to take the title 'Reformed' to themselves? As a title it doesn't even give a clear idea of their teaching as the Reformers had a wide range of different ideas about various things - so 'which' Reformer are they following? If their teaching be examined it is more akin to the Puritans than the Reformers, and even then only a certain section of the Puritans who were themselves diverse in their teaching. 

Your paraphrase of one writer's sentiments, I have to say, rather left me cold. Whilst some of the sentiments are in the right place it nevertheless reminded me of the self-confident promise of obedience which the children of Israel made in Exodus 24:3 "All the words which the LORD hath said will we do". Well, how long did that promise last? Whilst Moses was still in the mount they rose up to play and fell into all manner of sin.

...and that's the whole point of the law. It finds out man's sin - it brings it to the surface. For "By the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20. Not the knowledge of righteousness, note, but the knowledge of sin. The law was given to show man his sin, to expose it, to bring him in guilty before God. And it didn't take long with the children of Israel.

Frankly, would not any true child of God shudder to utter words with such self confidence as  "I will do what the Scriptures say... I will live a commandment-motivated life... I'm going to discipline myself to godliness" etc? Why? Because they know from bitter experience that they can't last but one hour in such a pathway. As soon as they proudly say "All the words which the LORD hath said I will do" they fall into sin in an instant, and their very words condemn them. For sin isn't just what is done outwardly, but it is all the inward thoughts, motives, desires and feelings which we can hide from others but which are painfully apparent to ourselves when God the Holy Spirit makes us aware of what is within, taking the veil away from our eyes. In our ignorance and the darkness and deadness of the flesh we might not have known these things, but a quickened child of God knows what proceeds from his heart and he finds the law to be a killing letter and nothing more. Oh, yes, it might prescribe conduct which is excellent, and for that he loves it, but he finds no ability in himself to keep it - Romans 7 - hence he cries out for One to deliver him from this body of sin and death... and in the Gospel he finds such a Deliverer!

But you do raise some good points regarding the precepts and exhortations which are to be found in the New Testament... does their existence not argue for a continuation of the law in some fashion? I'd answer, No. Why? Because the law is more than simply precepts. The fact that both law and gospel may have precepts does not mean that they are essentially similar, but in 'different packaging'. They are, in fact, diametrically opposed both in nature and character. Their whole principles are totally diverse, so that Gospel precepts are on a completely different footing and basis to those found in the law.

The law is founded entirely upon the basis of works, with a motivation of self righteousness and fear of the law's penalty, demanding of man what he must do. Whereas the Gospel reveals God's grace to man and is characterised by faith and love - which is the believer's motivation towards obedience to Christ, as led by the Spirit, outworking what God has wrought in the heart - because the Gospel declares what God does.

The law says 'do and live'. The Gospel says 'live and do'. Man can't do under the law, so he dies. But man is made alive by the Gospel so he 'does'. The Gospel does not do away with all 'doing' but it makes men alive and gives them not only the ability to do but also the will (for it is God who worketh in us "both to will and to do of His good pleasure" Philippians 2:13), so that anything it exhorts, it also provides grace and ability to do, hence Christ's yoke is no burden and His commandments are not grievous.

But, the 'Reformed' scholars tell us, that that's the whole point. Christ gives us life in the Gospel and then sends us back to Moses to 'sanctify' us, as we now have the ability to do what Moses commanded in the law. But in this they greatly err (What! Is Christ subservient to Moses?). Because the law is not simply a set of precepts, or exhortations, similar to those found in the Gospel which we can now set ourselves to doing. The law is law! A law is set of commandments with penalties attached on failure of doing. If you go back to the commandment "Thou shalt not covet", then when you do covet, you will find yourself back under its penalty. "But", some say, "its penalty has been met in Christ, we are freed from its curse". Yes, we are, but that is because we are also freed from its precept - we are "dead to the law", "not under the law", "delivered from the law". As far as the law is concerned we are dead men, whom it can no longer penalise, but whom it can also no longer command.

Law is law - it stands as a whole. You can't separate the penalty from the commandments. They are forever joined together. If we have been freed from the one then we must have also been freed from the other. Likewise if we put ourselves back under the one (the commandment) then we also put ourselves back under the other when we fail to keep the commandment, hence the curse is back upon us. When Galatians tells us that Christ has freed us from the curse of the law it does not mean that the curse has been 'detached' from the law - it means we are freed from the law entirely, both curse and commandment.

So, to get to your questions…

1. What place does Exodus 20 have for the believer?

It stands as that which once condemned him, from which he has been forever delivered. It gave him a knowledge of sin, whilst also demonstrating in measure the holiness and goodness of God. It demonstrates to him the justice of God and points in measure to the Gospel and what Christ did in delivering him from the law's penalty. But as to his actual relationship to the law now, the believer is dead to it. It has exacted its penalty upon him, in Christ, and with Christ he has died. The law has no more to say to a dead man (which he is in the sight of the law, though now risen and alive in Christ, the other side of death). It is neither his rule, nor his guide. It cannot be used as 'guidance' for it is still law - to take its commands, but ignore its penalty is to use it unlawfully, not knowing what one says or affirms, for the law is not made for a righteous man, which is what the believer is in Christ. See 1 Timothy 15-11. We simply can't get past passages such as Galatians 2:19, 2 Corinthians 3, Romans 6:14, Romans 7:1-6 etc. in relation to this. The 'Reformed' arguments about these passages either referring only to justification (and not sanctification), or referring to the 'judicial' or 'ceremonial' parts of the law, and not the Ten Commandments, are, in my judgment, just sheer sophistry. They don't hold water. They make a mockery of these texts which are plain, simple English stating plain truth - we are dead to the law, that we might serve God (now, ie. 'sanctification'). We cannot serve God whilst still alive to the law, whatever the legalist might argue. The fact is that all who go to the law in their self-will break it continually, and they can only have any sense of having kept it if their eyes are blinded to their real state, and the totally depravity of their hearts. Hence they demean God's holy law by bringing it down to their own meagre, sinful, fleshly level. Not only that but they treat it unlawfully by using it as 'advice' severing it from its curse, and dividing it into three by rejecting the ceremonial and judicial 'parts' and retaining what they call the 'moral' part - the Ten Commandments. This is not to use the law lawfully, and is 'anti-law' hence it is Antinomianism, properly so called.

However, the law is part of the overall teaching of scripture, and in the sense that all scripture is profitable to us in various ways it therefore still has its use. But scripture must be divided rightly, and not all scripture applies to all men at all times. Few 'Reformed' writers would claim that the dietary laws of the Old Testament apply to New Testament believers - they have no problem whatsoever in seeing that (yet the fact is that the Bible never divides the Ten Commandments from the rest of the law, including the 'judicial' and 'ceremonial' aspects - the whole stands as one - the Law of Moses - and we are either under all of it, or under none of it). They also clearly see that the OT priesthood and sacrificial system has gone. Is all that teaching regarding those things in the OT of no use to us now then? No, it is of much use as it sets forth the Gospel in type and figure. So, too, does Exdous 20, in that it shows forth much of God's holiness and justice, it gives a knowledge of sin (most especially when applied by the Spirit as Paul found in Romans 7, when 'the commandment came'), it shows what Christ delivered us from. But we, being delivered, are now no more under those Ten Commandments than we are under the dietary or judicial parts of the law. They have no power to condemn us. "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." Romans 8:33-34.

2. You make a mention of Ephesians 6. Yes, Paul refers to Exodus 20:12, and in fact elsewhere in the New Testament a number of the other commandments are quoted. I think we can make some conclusions from this. First of all, we might ask that given that the NT does in fact quote most of the commandments why do most 'Reformed' writers have such a problem with something like article 16 of the 'Gospel Standard Articles of Faith' which declares that the Gospel is the believer's rule of life? Why do they not just agree with that statement, given that 9 of the commandments can be found recorded in the New Testament also? Why not? Because deep down they have a legal spirit which gravitates towards law and not Gospel (and they must also cling to the Sabbath commandment which is not repeated as such in the NT). The fact is they don't really rejoice in the deliverance we have from the law, because the law has not really been applied to their conscience before being brought to Christ, hence they don't know the liberty of the child of God in Christ. Those who know what it is to be slain by the law are glad to be free from it.

But why does the New Testament repeat these commands in places then (for example Romans 13:8-10)? Well, there is a difference between 'right and wrong' and law. The law as I stated before is law - it has commandments with penalties attached, which cannot be divorced. However right and wrong exist apart from law, because 'right' concerns the very character of God with whom we have to do, who is just, holy and righteous. It is wrong to worship other gods, whether the law says it or not. Before the law was ever given at Sinai, it was still wrong to worship idols. Thus our deliverance from the law does not make us free to serve idols - no, it delivers us from a law which dictates one thing, but actually causes us to do the opposite. Our nature in the flesh, when commanded not to do something ends up doing the opposite, and the law then condemns us. That is the nature of the law and the effect it has upon our flesh, so we need to be delivered from it.

But that doesn't alter the fact that it is still right to worship the one true God, and it is right, whilst in this world, for example, to honour our parents. (Nevertheless such a command, and in fact several of the ten commandments, tend to regard our conduct whilst in this world - whereas when we enter heaven they won't have the same role, as there we aren't given to marriage, we won't have children etc. So such commands are types and shadows in that they point us to what is spiritual, that we are God's children, that we are Christ's bride and so on). Hence Paul, in context, refers back to the commandments because what they say is still "holy", "just" and "good" (Romans 7:12) and as believers we certainly don't seek to break them. No, through the Gospel we actually fulfill them, because the Gospel gives us faith, which works by love, and love is the fulfilling of the law. It is in this context that Paul quotes most of the commandments in Romans 13 - not to enforce the commandments, but to illustrate that the love wrought by God through the Gospel actually fulfills the law.

Nevertheless, despite there being exhortations and precepts in the New Testament there is a world of difference between the exhortatory nature of the epistles, and the cold, commanding, nature of the law. So... to answer 3…

3. In the epistles there are many exhortations and precepts. However there is a great difference between the nature of these and the context in which they are given, and the law. Whereas the law uttered a commandment and exacted a penalty of death if broken, the gospel presents a message of life and then encourages and exhorts the believer with that life to walk in a way which is in accord with his natural desire and inclination in the new man. The new man of grace knows to do right, it loves to do right, it loves to follow the Lord and show love to the brethren. The exhortations in the epistles simply address this new man of grace and encourage him in such a pathway, and exhort to mortify the flesh, for the flesh always wars against the Spirit. As with Christ's commandments - His yoke - such exhortations are not grievous, they are not a burden, but are gladly taken up by the child of God. As the Gospel is not 'Antinomian' (against the law), some of these exhortations will be in accord with that set forth in the law, and that love encouraged and exhorted in the Gospel will in fact fulfill the law, because as the faith of the believer is drawn out, that faith worketh by love (Galatians 5:6) and love fulfills the law (not by looking to the law, but by just living out that life of faith and love, doing what is natural to it, as exhorted in the epistles).

We must keep in mind the difference between earthly man in the flesh, and the new, heavenly man of grace in the Spirit. As believers we were once entirely in the flesh, the offspring of Adam, dead in trespasses and sin, but now we have been crucified with Christ, and have risen again from the dead, having a new life in Him, being His offspring, of the Last Adam, the Second Man - the heavenly man. The law respected earthly man in the flesh and his conduct in this world. The Gospel brings men into newness of life in Christ and it respects their heavenly nature in Him, their walk in the Spirit and their being led out of this world unto the new heaven and new earth. Hence the Gospel regards heavenly things, not earthly things. Indeed we are spoken of as being seated in heavenly places now. Then what does a command not to covet our neighbour's house or wife have to do with that? What does a command to keep the sabbath day holy have to do with a realm where we dwell in righteousness in an endless day, an eternal sabbath? How could such a command be broken in such a state and in such a realm? (In reality the command is broken spiritually now by ceasing to rest in Christ alone and returning to work at keeping the law...)

So, the Gospel, rightly seen, respects our new man of grace who is heavenly. It tells us to reckon ourselves dead to this world, to mortify the deeds of the flesh. We are to think of ourselves in Christ in heaven, as citizens of heaven (* see note), to have our gaze set there, not on earthly things. Whereas to use the law as a rule of life is to be taken up with earthly things. It is to be earthly minded - but Christ has brought us into newness of life, in His Gospel. Yes, the Gospel has exortations, for we are still in this world, and we do still have the flesh. But the exhortations are always given in a context. What is that context? In the Doctrine of Christ, the Gospel. They follow on from the doctrinal parts of the epistles which set forth Christ and His work. Only after having set the believer's gaze upon Christ does the Apostle then exhort the new man of grace to follow Christ by walking in various ways. This is very different to the law, which has nothing to do with faith, for the "law is not of faith" and which simply says "Thou shalt" or "Thou shalt not". The Gospel first declares Christ, conveys life, and then directs that life. For we walk not by sight (looking upon earthly things) but by faith (looking unto heavenly things).

Certainly the Gospel precepts respect our conduct and could therefore be described as a rule of conduct - in fact the Gospel as a whole will govern our conduct. We could even say that the whole word of God is a rule of conduct (because ultimately Christ is our 'rule of life', as set forth in the Gospel, and as set forth in all the scriptures, for He is our life [see also Galatians 6:13-16 for mention of 'this rule']). But to say that the law, in particular, is our rule of life is to go to that very part of the word of God which would condemn us - how foolish (See 2 Corinthians 3). But, yes, the Gospel precepts do direct us, because the Spirit does not work in a vacuum. Galatians 5 tells us that if we are led by the Spirit we are not under the law. But the Spirit does not direct us apart from the word of God - He uses that word and applies it to us on a daily basis. Rather than having us mechanically going to a fixed set of rules (such as the ten commandments) seeking to obey them by our own will-power, the believer is directed by the Spirit in a living way and given grace to walk in that way. The believer submissively follows the Spirit's leading, and each day the Spirit leads him in the scriptures, applying one passage one day, another passage another day and directing his pathway in a living way, appropriate for the time and cirumcumstance he finds himself in.

Ultimately this is a pathway of faith - Faith which works by love. This is the nature of the Gospel and the pathway in which the believer walks. It is very different to a pathway of works, or of a legalistic mind.

However, it is not good enough to simply say "the gospel is my rule of life, not the law", because many bring a legal spirit into the gospel. They simply turn Gospel precepts into legal commands, strive to perform them in their own strength (and hence ignore the leadings of the Spirit and ultimately grieve Him), and effectively condemn others if they don't walk as the Gospel directs. But we are not to use the Gospel in such a judgmental fashion, nor are we to set to follow its precepts in our own strength. We must never lose sight of the fact that the Gospel is on an entirely different principle to the law - it is about faith! And this faith is not of ourselves "it is the gift of God" (Ephesians 2:8). For "the just shall live by faith" (Romans 1:17). Neither must we lose sight of the central truth of the Gospel to which such God-given faith is directed - "Christ and Him crucified". Only when the eye of faith is continually set upon Christ, does a sheep then follow its Shepherd. And when exhorted to look to Him alone, the exhortations to mortify the deeds of the flesh, or control the tongue, or flee fornication, or rejoice evermore are gladly received and performed.

You make mention of 1 Thessalonians 5: "rejoice evermore", "pray without ceasing", "in every thing give thanks". Well, such exhortations demonstrate what I have been writing about above. The believer whose eye is set upon Christ will gladly 'rejoice everymore' for he sees Christ, his reason for rejoicing, he will gladly pray without ceasing for he is looking to Christ from whence his help comes, he will happily give thanks, for he sees the One to whom he is thankful, he will despise not prophesyings for he loves to hear of Christ, and he will grieve not the Spirit for the Spirit leads him to Christ whom he loves and to whom he gladly goes.

So, in summary: the law is about works and respects this world. But the Gospel is about faith, concerning Christ, and respects the world to come. The just shall live by faith, and the precepts of the Gospel are not grievous to faith, because faith works by love, and as James rightly tells us (James 1:17), faith without works is dead, being in reality a mere profession of faith, but true, living faith always produces fruit, it always produces the works of faith, as led by the Spirit. For "If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law." Galatians 5:18.

(Finally, an interesting observation... In our home we have a daily text calendar. After having written the replies to your questions above I looked at today's text, which was "I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God" Galatians 2:19.... Our God's timing is perfect, is it not?)