Details
Nothing to say, yet
![cover of CPC Sunday School |Law and Gospel (1 of 3) [Mark Evans : 11-12-2023]](https://audio.com/s3w/audio.com.static/user/avatar/15/09/1759670652560915.jpeg@3840?qlt=75)
CPC Sunday School |Law and Gospel (1 of 3) [Mark Evans : 11-12-2023]
00:00-56:14
Comment
Nothing to say, yet
Listen to CPC Sunday School |Law and Gospel (1 of 3) [Mark Evans : 11-12-2023] by Cornerstone Presbyterian Church MP3 song. CPC Sunday School |Law and Gospel (1 of 3) [Mark Evans : 11-12-2023] song from Cornerstone Presbyterian Church is available on Audio.com. The duration of song is 56:14. This high-quality MP3 track has 72.87 kbps bitrate and was uploaded on 12 Nov 2023. Stream and download CPC Sunday School |Law and Gospel (1 of 3) [Mark Evans : 11-12-2023] by Cornerstone Presbyterian Church for free on Audio.com – your ultimate destination for MP3 music.
Today we are discussing the importance of understanding and distinguishing between law and gospel. We will be covering the three-fold use of the law, the difference between legalism and antinomianism, and how these concepts can affect the Christian life. The law reflects God's perfect righteousness and serves as a mirror to show us our sinfulness. It cannot justify us or empower obedience. The gospel, on the other hand, offers grace and salvation. The law and gospel are not in contradiction, but rather work together to reveal God's will for us. Understanding this distinction is vital for living a Christian life. Hey, good morning, y'all. We'll go and get going. It's not even 9-10, so we'll start early for us. All right, let's begin with a word of prayer. Heavenly Father, we praise You, we thank You for this day, the Lord's day, the day Your Son resurrected from the dead, vindicated that He's been exalted as triumphant over all. We praise You that He is our one and only mediator we're thankful for this time. We pray that it would be set aside as we consider the truths of Your Word, of law and of gospel. Help us to make wise distinctions, help us to think biblically, help us to think Your thoughts after You. Help us to live as becomes believers. We pray that this time would be instructive, that it would be faithful to Scripture, but also that it would be equipping us to go and live the Christian life with a greater fullness, being better able to glorify You and understanding of Your Scriptures and doing so by the fullness of Your Spirit. In Jesus' name we pray, amen. Okay, so we start law and gospel today, three weeks on law and gospel. Agenda for today, really short and simple, so really just covering these three things is really the only goal today. One is known as the three-fold use of the law, not to be confused with the three-fold dimensions or aspects of the law, so those are two different things. And then we'll talk about legalism and antinomianism, if you're unfamiliar with those terms, don't worry, we'll hopefully explain them and define them, but then more importantly just talk about how they show up and can really wreck the Christian life. But that's it, those three things, three-fold use of the law, three-fold dimensions of the law, and those two aspects is really all we're doing today, so short and to the point. But just to ask a properly stupid question, which is my job as the teacher, why are we spending three weeks on it, you could phrase it this way, how important, how vital is it to rightly understand and distinguish between law and gospel? How important is that? Hopefully you're saying very important. Here's John Newton's take on it. John Newton says, ignorance of the nature and design of the law is at the heart of most religious mistakes. That's how far John Newton calls it. John Newton, remember, author of Amazing Grace, former slave trader, discoverer of gravity, just kidding on that last point, not to be confused with the other Newton. Okay, so why this class? I think, as we've been thinking about it, nobody wakes up and says, okay, today I'm going to be a legalist, today I'm going to be an antinomian, and yet we all do it. We all, in subtle ways, start to slide into and drift into legalism and, let's just say, lawlessness. I wish it was as easy as spotting Mr. Legality, that's Mr. Legality from the cartoon version of Pilgrim's Progress. Kids, if you've watched Pilgrim's Progress or read the book, you know Mr. Legality. We wish it was this easy, right? You could just see it, oh, there's my legalism front and center, and yet, of course, we know it's not. So we've got to grow wise in our ability to distinguish these things. Just a primer, let's review what the law, and there's more than this, but let's just review a few things about the law, about God's law. When I use the word law, I'm using, I'm referring to God's law, not our civil penal code, just to avoid confusion there. We know the law commands, it demands things of us, it's God's imperatives, it reveals God's will for us, that's pretty basic. What the law can't do, and there's more things than this, but we know the law can't ever justify a sinner, it can't alleviate the bondage of sin that we're in as sinners, and maybe most of all, it can't empower obedience. The very thing that the law asks of us, the law cannot give us the power to do. That's just a primer of what the law is asking of us, and I think we're right to see, you know, when is the first law given? First laws are given as old as Eden, right? Even notice, this is before the fall, this is pre-fall, God gives Adam and Eve law, right? Here's what you can do, you can eat of every tree, here's what you cannot do, you cannot eat of the one tree. So it's just simply to say, law, that God has given us law, speaks right to the identity of us as creatures. God is creator, we are his creatures, it is fitting, proper, good and right that God has given us law as his creatures. He is our lawgiver, our judge, our authority, our Lord. It's very fitting in this sense that God gives us law, and He did so before, prior to sin entering the world. We should take full notice of that. At the same time, you know, just ask, when does the first gospel appear? When does the gospel first show up on the scene? Yeah, right after. So we've got law as old as Eden, we have gospel as old as Eden. Alright, there's the fall, and God gives this gospel promise to Adam and Eve that someone will come and he will crush the head of the serpent. And so we see from Genesis 3 onwards, the gospel being worked out, the gospel being more and more unfolded, and of course coming to a fullness of time with the advent of Christ. And so when we're thinking through this class, maybe I'd ask the question this way, are law and gospel in contradiction? Do they contradict one another, is there tension there? I would say at this point, I think it would be far too simplistic to try and answer that question with a simple yes or a simple no. Like if you just said no, they're not in contradiction, or yes, they are in contradiction, you probably are not giving a sufficient answer. You want to think through it a little more carefully and add some nuance to that question. And so maybe hopefully by the end of this class, we're at least edging towards a good answer to that question. And one reason we get into trouble is we can make bad distinctions. We might begin to say or think, well, the law is really God's commands with no grace. That would be a bad distinction. Conversely, we might say, well, the gospel is all grace and no commands. That'd be another bad distinction. And once you start going down these forks in the road, you can start to get yourself into quite a bit of trouble and confusion. But let's think about perhaps the most prevalent popular law, rightly, would be the Ten Commandments. God gives the law, we have a many thou shall nots. And maybe if we think in terms of God's grace in relation to the giving of the Ten Commandments, if we were to ask the question, well, the Ten Commandments just raw law, right? All law and no grace. What's the preamble? What comes before, right before the giving of the Ten Commandments? It's of great significance. How does God introduce the Ten Commandments? What's that? Yeah, exactly, right? So right before the giving of the Ten Commandments of the law comes this, I'm the Lord your God, I brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. In other words, God introduces His law by saying, remember who you are. You are my covenant people. I redeemed you. I freed you from slavery by grace, by way of my awesome redemption, and in that context, in the context of redemption, and you being my people, now here you go. Here is law. Walk in my law. That's really important to keep in mind as far as understanding the relation between grace and law. Maybe another way to put it, even within the law itself, right, Second Commandment. You see those words, right? It's not just a, hey, you shall not, you know, don't do this, don't do that, but even in the Ten Commandments, you've got that there, I'm going to show steadfast love to thousands who love me and keep my commandments, that I would argue is of grace. So even within the law, you see grace threaded throughout it. Okay, that's just a primer. Let's talk about now the three-fold use of the law. Who's familiar with that term? How familiar is that? Okay, we've got a handful. Okay. So, just to keep it simple, these are my own terms. You'll hear other terms. I've tried to just keep, think of the simplest terms I could. These are the three ways the law can be lawfully used. The law is a guardian to us. It restrains, and we'll talk about what it restrains, and it's also a guide to us. All right, so let's talk about the first one. The law is a guardian, a tutor, whatever other word you want to use. But think of it this way, firstly, the law, of course, reflects God's perfect righteousness, right? God's perfect script of God's holiness, God's holy will, reflecting His character. As we say, we look into that mirror. Kids, have you ever looked into a mirror and seen a blemish on your face? Kids, I'm sure you've looked in the mirror, right? You see, I got some mud on my face, right? I got a blemish on my face. I got some mud on my face, right? And you've got to wipe it off. God's law is like that, right? You look at God's commands. God says, don't covet. You're like, ah, I've coveted today. I wanted my brothers, whatever. I wanted my sisters, whatever. And then you realize, ah, this is reminding me I am a sinner. I have fallen short when I look into this mirror of God's will for my life. Does that make sense? You need to indicate by, this means yes, this means, if it doesn't, just ask, ask. But that's the concept of the mirror, right? We look into God's mirror. This is why we read, one of the reasons why we read the Ten Commandments at the start of every month, right? We read God's moral law, and it should provoke in us, ah, I have fallen short of the glory of God. Just to show how old, how far back this distinction goes, Augustine, so we're talking, you know, third, fourth century, ancient church father, this is the way he put it. The law orders that after we try to do what God has commanded of us, we start to feel our weakness so that we can learn, and that's kind of a key way of understanding the first use of the law, that it teaches us to implore the help of grace, to come to God, ah, I need grace. I have, once again, fallen short. Here's right where you see it in Scripture, Galatians 3, the law was our guardian, so hence that's why the first use of the law is sometimes called a guardian or a tutor, until Christ came in order that we might be justified by faith. So that Greek word there that's in red is pedagogos, which you could hear our English word for like pedagogy, so the law has a pedagogical use, it's got a teaching use, right? It's got a tutoring use. It's our schoolmaster, you could say. You could think of it, kids, like a schoolmaster in ancient Greece would be one, they would kind of take you by the hand and they would lead you to school. And that's one of, that's the first use of the law. The law takes you, shows you, you are a sinner, you have fallen short, you are only going to continue to fall short, let me take you by the hand and walk you to Jesus Christ, who is the only Savior for such sinners. So that's the pedagogical function. I just pulled out there to notice that phrase that you saw in Galatians, until Christ came. So just hold that in your mind, right, the law was doing something and doing its thing until Christ came. So just, I highlight that, hold it in your mind, okay, there must be some kind of temporary or non-permanent function of the law or something of the law that starts to drop out when Christ comes. All right, just hold that in your mind's eye and we'll come back to that. Galatians continues on, here's just to reiterate the point, this person's under guardians until the date set by his father, and then notice the time component there. When the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his son. And a very key phrase, born of woman, certainly key and we could talk about that at a different class, but you see there, born under the law, right, Christ in every way is under the law as the God-man, that he can, must, and does walk in perfect obedience, qualifying himself as the only righteous one to be a sacrifice for sinners. He is under the law, submits to it, obeys it, keeps it perfectly. Okay, so that's the first use, right, just to keep it simple. It indicts us, it convicts us, you look into that mirror, I see all my blemishes, I see all my spots, and it takes us by the hand and tutors us towards Jesus Christ. Questions on the first use of the law? Or comments? Clear? Clear? Clear? If it's confusing, feel free to ask questions. Questions are encouraged. Yeah, I mean, so like one simple way would just be self-righteousness, right, like, hey, I'm not tutored to Christ, I can keep this on my own, I've not fallen short, that would be just like a really basic, I mean, you can even see it like, I think that's why like in parenting, good to be like, to particularly show children this, like, hey, you are a sinner, here's where you have fallen short, but don't worry, like, let's go by the hand to Jesus Christ, you know, versus conversely, if you never do that, it would provoke a kind of pharisaism in children, and of course, in adults, we're just as guilty. Yeah? Why is it so hard for us to get that the law itself is not bad, we always tend to naturally think, you know, the law is bad, grace is good. Yeah, yeah, that's a great question. So maybe, when we come to antinomianism, maybe ask that one again, that's a good, that's a great question. All right, so let's go to the second. Yes, sir? Yes, sir? Yeah, I know, and that's, so John was talking about perfectionism, which is something that is waxed and waned in church history, he saw like in the holiest movement, Dan, I think you covered that at one point. Go ahead. Yeah. I was going to say, I was wondering where you're taking this view, that Wesleyan training has this ideal of perfectionism, and we're not going to put that in the worship, but it tends to be more of an experiential kind of feel, as though I have complete control, you know, or complete, including the Holy Spirit. And so you're going to see that throughout history, there's going to be times when people will focus more on the little aspects, more on the great aspects, but there tends to be, I think, because of that moment in time, that people were captured up in this hyper-charismatic movement, and particularly because this decoration was characterized by people taking the means that are the fruit of the movement of the Spirit, and one of the people said, take that annualistic motif, and say, you know, we do these things, and we have, as it was said, we can have a revival anytime we want. And so they're taking the fruit of baptism, the fruit of the Holy Spirit, and saying, re-replicate this, and we're going to work backwards, and we're going to have that. So it's more of an experiential kind of feeling, probably, so it's commonplace in ancient times of history. I think, and safe to say, too, right, the New Testament is confronting it like 1 John, you know, if we say we have no sin, which I would think is a fair assumption to say someone was saying, I have no sin, you know, and John's saying, you're deceiving, you're deceiving yourself. Okay, second use. So first use, the indictment, the tutor towards Christ. Second use, a restraint, a restraint. So the law in and of itself, you could maybe say by itself, can't change the human heart. It can, and we like it. If you ask me what use are we like the worst at, it would be this use. It can serve to restrain sin and promote righteousness. It can do that. Here's Calvin's take on it. By means of its fearful denunciations, its dread of punishment, to curb, that's a good way to put it, to curb those who unless forced have no regard for justice. Right? So it's talking about, you know, in the broad spectrum, the unregenerate man, the law can come in, not save him, not promote right, not create inner righteousness, but it can curb, curtail his bent towards evil. We saw this in, what book did we see this in recently? Okay, Ecclesiastes. All right, good, good. I don't know who's preaching to that book, but they need to do a better job. But we just saw this in Ecclesiastes 8, okay? Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed speedily, what happens? Man ramps up the evil, right? That's a great verse for second use of the law. Given our anthropology, man is depraved. He's wholly inclined towards evil. He's going to do evil. But one thing that can, not eliminate it, but curb it is, hey, here's the punishment. Here comes the punishment of the law against you. Yeah, for sure. Yeah, it could work. Yeah, that's a great point. Yeah, they could, all three, you know, can and should be playing off each other, you know? Okay, so that's a great verse to think of, and it's very clear, you know, that's probably one of the clear verses on the second use. You see in the New Testament, John comes to Herod. It's not lawful, that Greek word, their existing, usually translated authority. Like, you don't have the authority to have your brother's wife. That's a great use of the second use of the law. What you're doing is no bueno. And, of course, that costs him his life. So that's the second use, very simple, right? It's a restraint. It is casting, hey, here's your evil, and we're going to curb it with the threats. The punishments. The justice of God's law. Questions on that? Okay, so third use. Here's the third use of the law. And this is just very simple, right? It's our guide for life. And you see this throughout. I mean, you can't go anywhere in the Bible without seeing this. But the psalmist is always very clear on it. Kids, this is a good verse to memorize. How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word. And you just read through the Psalms. And that use is over and over. I mean, it's just fully saturated in the Psalms. That God's law is a guide of life. Now you might say, well, yeah, that's an Old Testament thing. You don't see that in the New Testament, because it's all grace. You want to say, no. Christ himself says, if you love me, you will keep my commandments. I think in some ways you could say this is the highest function of the law. Highest in the sense of, again, go back to the garden. God's law given to show here is my will. You are made in my likeness. Creator, you're the creature. Walk in this. Walk in my law. Reflect my glory by walking in my law. And so in that sense, I think you could rightly say this is the highest, greatest function of the law. This is its telos, its purpose. When we study it, when we meditate it, of course we would grow in righteousness. We learn what pleases and offends God. That's a fairly basic point. And here's just maybe the thing to consider. I think in broader Christendom, we don't do a good job of saying. You just say it with a straight face. The moral law was, is, and always is binding. We are obligated to obey God's moral law. Maybe I could state it negatively. There's nothing about grace or salvation or being in Jesus Christ that would lessen walking in God's moral law. If anything, as we'll see, it is of course just the reverse. So God's moral law is always binding. Now you might say, wait a minute. What do you mean by the term moral law? That's a great question. I'm glad you asked that question. So that will lead us into the threefold division or dimensions or aspects of the Old Testament law. So don't get confused. We just left the three uses of the law, which were a guardian, a restraint, a guide. We're talking about something different now. So just to avoid confusion, now we're talking about the Old Testament law and three divisions within it of how theologians have typically chopped it up. So stay with me. We're on a new topic here. And again, I've just tried to keep this very simple. These are just made-up definitions. You could find better ones or more exhaustive ones, I'm sure. But moral law, this means laws for life, laws for everyday living. How then shall I live? Civil law, as the word implies, how are we going to arrange things for the polis, which is just a Greek word for city, like our communal life. How are we going to arrange things for us living together as a community of people? And then ceremonial laws that affect worship. So I'm going to provide some examples. Moral, civil, ceremonial. Moral law. Here's a really simple, straight-up example. You shall not murder. Don't murder. Moral law. Very simple. I think we'd say that's binding. That's true in the Old Testament, true in the New Testament, true in 2023. We are not free to go and murder people. We all agree? Any dissenters? No? Okay. Okay, so that's moral law, all right? Let's go to now the civil law, all right? Here's a great example of the civil law. When you build a home, you've got to make a parapet on your roof. Why? That way you don't bring the guilt of blood upon your house if anyone should fall from it. So you can see a difference here in that building a new home, you know, is not like in itself a moral act per se. Whereas murder, murder strikes right to mores, to our morality. Building a new home is not necessarily like a moral thing, but you see the reason why. Well, because you're going to go up on your roof, you're going to hang out there, someone could fall off your roof, and now you've not loved your neighbor, and now you've got blood guilt upon your home. And so this is saying how are we going to do life as the community of Israel? How are we going to do life? And you can see it's just as much a law. This is not an option. This is not a suggestion. This is a command. Build a parapet upon your roof. You're not free to say no on this for the Israelite. Okay? So those civil laws are in the Pentateuch. You're thinking Genesis, Exodus, so on and so forth. That's where these civil laws are summarily comprehended. Now the question that you're asking, I'm sure you're asking, are these civil laws still in force, right? Are these still at play today for the Christian? Remember, moral law, always binding, always binding. Westminster Confession says these civil laws expired, no longer in force with the state of that people, that people meaning Israel, that people meaning Israel, not obliging any other people. So Westminster Confession is saying that's expired, right? These civil laws are no longer in force, no longer in play, not obligatory to us today. But the confession continues and it throws in a very important phrase, further than the general equity that may be required of it. The general equity. So let's flesh out, I know your next question, what does general equity mean? What is this saying? So to summarize, if you're asked, are these civil laws still in force? I think one way you could say is, well, yeah and no. They have expired, but not the general equity. That is still in force. And I'll try and give an example so we can clear up that phrase, but I wanted to point to, here's a good use of it. Here's Samuel Willard, definitely a Puritan stock, great preacher. He put it this way. This is in a sermon, actually, he preached. So he said, when it comes time to make laws, consult the Word of God. That's a good idea. And here's the way he put it, common utility of the subject. So instead of general equity, he uses the phrase common utility. For though there is not a body of civil laws drawn up in the Scriptures, to which every polity is to be confined. That's just a long-winded way of saying, hey, you don't have civil laws in the Bible prescribed for Australia, Africa, Asia, America, so on and so forth. Yet, we've got sufficient general direction to be gathered from there. We've got sufficient general direction. We've got what we need, so to speak. And that's why he says civil rulers, this is something to think about, should be just men. If you're going to be making these laws, you would want to be ruling in the fear of the Lord. You would need to understand justice. So let me give an example. This would be an example of the general equity. Build a parapet around your roof, in our time and place, might mean something like, hey, put a fence around your swimming pool. So you can see you're taking the same concept. You go up on your roof. You might trip and fall. You die. Let's take that concept. Let's pick it up, and now let's drop it into 2023 and take the heart embodied in that law and make this law. Put a fence around your swimming pool. That way a two-year-old doesn't wander out, trip and fall into the pool, and you're not loving your neighbor in that sense. Okay, so that's an easy example. That's just kind of an easy layup. That's like maybe one of the simplest examples. Now, of course, it can get more. It might get more and more complex the more you go along. Here's another example. This would be a civic law from the Mosaic Law. If an ox has cussed him to gore in the past, the owner was warned, the owner didn't do anything about it. The owner's like, hey, not my problem. Sorry. Sorry, my ox. Sorry you have a horn sticking through your belly. Not my problem. That owner is stoned, and the owner also is put to death. Well, you could pick up that concept, drop it into 2023 today, and have criminal penalties for owners of dogs who have a violent history, who the owner did nothing about it. Sorry my dog attacked you. Not my problem. That kind of thing. Does that make sense? So the concept here is we're taking the general equity, the heart embodied in the law, and we're dropping it into the present day. Here would be an even more, maybe a more radical one. This is on restitution. Someone steals the law, civic law prescribed. You restore it in full, so you've got to give back what was stolen, plus you add a fifth to it. Now, that's one you could almost just take the same thing and drop it into America. Just imagine how much of a mess our legal code is today when someone steals in courts and so on and so forth. I steal from you. I have to go and face you. I have to be reconciled to you. Hey, I'm sorry I stole your property. I'm going to give it back to you, plus I'm going to give you 20% back for what I've done. Just think of what that might do in terms of our problems of theft. All right, so that's civil law. Questions on civil law, the second use, civil law. Second division, not use. Second division. Questions? Makes sense? You're just taking the general equity, the general principle, the spirit embodied in the law, and you drop it into the present day. Yes, sir? Yes, sir? Right, right. Yeah, that's a great question. So I think for the Christian, I'd say yes. Now, the way the civil law is defined, that opening slide was saying, when you're thinking of it in terms of civil law, and even the second use of the law, that it can't change the heart, but it can kind of curb and restrain unrighteousness. And that's sort of like the blanket statement of it going on. But for the Christian, I mean, right, we should never be coming to God's law heartless. So I think that's why, yeah, if you're building the fence around your pool, there should be some kind of like, hey, I'm doing this because I have love for God and I love my neighbor. So when my friends come over, they don't have to worry about their child falling into the swimming pool. Whereas the unregenerate might be like, ha, I can't believe I got into this stupid law. I hate this, and all that kind of stuff. Yeah. Okay, so ceremonial law, which not the best term, but it's the best term we have, is just, and you read through Leviticus and other parts of the Pentateuch, you see it, tons of instruction on, hey, when you're making an offering, when you send, here's the things that must be done, right? Here's how to kill the bull. Here's how to filet it. Here's how to arrange it. Here's the parts that need to be burned. And again, this is, these are laws. This is not optional. This is not, ah, I send, I guess I'll, what do we have in the fridge to offer up? Like, no, it must be done like this. And this is law. And this is how God would be pleased and how you make a pleasing aroma to the Lord. And if you make an unpleasing aroma to the Lord, this is for a reference as to what happens. So, these are in every way clear, clear laws that God gave to Israel that they would not be like the other nations and glorify and be a light to God. Okay. So I think one thing to just keep in mind if you ask the question, yeah, is that threefold division of civil, of moral civil ceremony, you know, is that perfect? Is that neat? Is that nice and tidy? You could certainly say, no, there's overlap. Civil law, not murder, is a moral law and it's a civil law, right? You don't want to live in a, you wouldn't just say that's a moral law, right? You'd want it to be a, hey, we're, the state is not going to allow us to murder one another. The state is going to intervene and there'll be civil penalties. There'll be moral penalties, so to speak, and civil penalties for murder. They'll probably even say, certainly say there'll be ceremonial implications as well. So it's not this perfect, neat, and tidy division, so to speak. Frame puts it this way. You think of the Feast of Tabernacles. Obviously that was given to Israel alone. But the death penalty, this is what we just talked about, for murder is for everyone. But the two aren't always that easy to distinguish. What about the provision of cities for refuge of those accused of murder? He's just making the point. This is not, you know, this is not a perfect, neat, and tidy division but still a useful one. All right, so let's move now to any questions on moral, civil, ceremonial. Eric. That glance was not for you. Eric's asking a question. Buckle up. Buckle up. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, right. Yeah, those are the kind of things it's going to take a lot of thought through, right? Right. Right. Yet. No, I'm just kidding. Yeah, yeah, that's a great, yeah. That's kind of like, that's a great question of it, and that's why this is not a perfect, neat, and tidy division as we would like it. So there was a movement, a movement called Theonomy that wanted to draw kind of a one-to-one correspondence. Hey, there was death penalty for X, Y, and Z and you just carry that over and we need death penalty for X, Y, and Z. Right? That's simple. And that's why the Confession uses that language of, no, it's expired. It's for Israel. Let's take the general equity. And so you've got to think through, okay, what's for the state? What's the church's responsibility? What's the believer's responsibility? And it takes a ton of, like, I can't just get up here and give simplistic answers. To me, this is the hard work of Reformation that's going to take time and thought and why we need, to Samuel's point, we're going to need just rulers, men who have thought through carefully on justice and who understand the fear of God to try and work through these things. To me, it's like a to your project. But you're right on that. Yes, sir? Yes, sir? I would say one thing that you can look at in that regard is that the Jews, in Jesus' day, brought the woman that was caught in adultery to Jesus, thinking Jesus has to uphold the penalties that are in the law about those attacks, that they catch him if he's caught in adultery so he has to be stoned so he's the one who's stoned. And, you know, Jesus asked him if he was going to do it without him and, you know, they all kind of walked away and said, neither do I. He said he wasn't he didn't strictly walk exactly what the prescribed punishments were, which probably did not, but there is a room in there that Jesus said that he had to be able to respond to it. Yeah, and the other thing questionable in that moment, too, is were there really two or three witnesses that might have been exposed as well. Okay. Alright, so let's go now to let's just introduce a problem. So we've said God's law it's binding, it's our guide of life and yet we have a problem the law cannot empower my obedience. So the very thing the law is asking of me I can't do. So what is our solution? Let's talk about enter the new covenant the law being fulfilled. So as we think of the law we always want to think in terms of the law be a Christ. Christ comes and he says, I've not come to abolish the law, I have come to fill them up. I have come to fulfill the law. Which means a whole number of wonderful and beautiful things, but not least which as far as this class, of course, fulfilled would not mean abolished. That's very much what Christ is saying. I have not come to abolish the law, I've come to do it keep it, live it. And probably the other great way to think of it is remember the promise of the new covenant. The very heart of that promise is God's going to take his law, which is holy and righteous and good and God's going to take that law and write it upon the heart of man. This is the great promise of the new covenant. That's why we always want to think of the spirit and the law as friends. The spirit is taking that law, as God promised, I will put my law within my people, I will write it on their hearts. That great promise from Jeremiah 31. I have a question about that though. When Paul says the law is written on their hearts of unbelievers is he saying that the law is written on our hearts as we pray to the image of God, we know right from wrong? Is it about from Romans 2, that passage? Yeah, no. Is he saying that after you become a Christian, then the law becomes written on your hearts? Yeah, no, Romans 2 I take him to be saying like in the Romans 1 sense all men know God, the law of God is written upon their hearts to their demise. You know, like you can't help being in the image of God and knowing when I murder someone, I did something wrong, kind of thing, yeah. You know, natural law, yeah. Okay, so the awesomeness of the new covenant I mean, just think of it this way so the law is the same, I mean the law has permanent abiding validity. That's the one thing I'm trying to get, one of the things I'm trying to get across in this class, yet here's the awesomeness of new covenant, being in Christ you see these how elevated it is you know, you think of the law given at Sinai considerably less powerful right, Christ comes, the power of the new covenant for the believer to live, go and do the law is substantial in Christ it's fulfilled right, the law was given originally through Moses, we are under the law of Christ you see this contrast written on stone, law written upon the heart at Sinai, spirit not yet given as it is given in the new testament for us as new covenant believers spirit has been given spirit has been poured out spirit empowered obedience to the law huge deal, right, as far as so the law remaining the same but you see in terms of scriptures development between old covenant and new covenant between Moses and Christ but that said how do we abuse, how do we misuse God's law this is how, there's more than this but we get on this seesaw right, we kind of bounce back and forth between these two things, alright so let's talk about antinomianism being the first one, if you're not familiar with that term, don't worry, don't let it scare you, don't let it intimidate you, you know what the word anti means, if you're anti something, you are against it, and then nomos is just the Greek word for law, so this is a highfalutin way of saying I'm against God's law I'm against it I'm anti God's law which no one comes out and says, of course right, no one, well most no one comes out and says that but here's kind of the way you can get that thought going alright, here's kind of the subtle thought you might say something like well since Christ fulfilled the law which is true then or therefore I don't need to obey it, right, I mean that seems like a logical thought here's some other ways we kind of get into antinomian mindsets who might say things like I'm justified by grace as scripture itself says, I'm not under the law, I'm under grace for freedom Christ has set me free, I'm saved by faith alone let's throw in grace alone, I'm not saved by my obedience these are all things that are formally true, I mean that is we'd all say yes and amen the implication that starts to come from that is, I'm justified by grace, therefore I don't have to obey God's law that's kind of the implication of a lawless antinomian mindset but we're right to remember, Christ absolutely did redeem us from the curse, from the penalty of the law, but of course Christ did not free us from law keeping, right, we want to say no, just the reverse just the exact reverse of that that's antinomianism legalism on the other end there's more than this, I just threw up some quick ones but certainly adding or subtracting to God's law, you see this in the New Testament the demands of circumcision are kind of a repeated thing throughout the book of Acts here would be another form of it you've got a good conviction so nothing wrong with this conviction, so you're like I'm not going to partake of alcohol but you start throwing that upon everyone else, like not only am I not going to partake of it, no one else can do it and then of course, utilizing by my law keeping that's how my right standing before God is secured I'm trusting in my self-righteousness just to clarify what is not legalism, because we've fallen into this trap too, would just be holding to that good conviction, just abstaining from alcohol, that in and of itself is not legalism I'm not going to partake of alcohol it could be, and that would be something a matter of the heart, but in itself there's nothing about that that is legalism I think this too we sometimes think anyone who's more obedient than I am is probably a legalist, we kind of tell ourselves that so just to be reminded painstaking obedience I am striving to be obedient that in and of itself is not legalism it could be, but there's nothing about that inherently that is legalistic all right, but let me let me try and this thought to me was very helpful when I first stumbled upon it, I got this from Dr. Ferguson and I hope I can make it clear um but legalism at its core is just you're trying to separate who God is from God's law, right you're pulling those things apart is sort of the heart of what a legalist does, you start to separate you know, there's law over here and then there's God over here and that's why Ferguson used to tell us legalism and lawlessness which is just another word for antinomism are really just two sides of the same coin they're more related than you might think they are and let me try and just tease out why that would be and we could use Adam and Eve as an example and this has got good guys behind this thought Voss put it this way when they rejected God's law which of course would be an antinomian a lawless approach they were expressing also a kind of legalism, like they're thinking with a kind of legalistic heart so maybe think through why that is, right, again God comes here's God's law and then Satan comes and tempts them with these temptations you'll be like God, you're going to know good and evil and then Eve sees, ah the tree is good, it's a delight to the eyes, it's desirous to make one wise, right she starts to believe this lie and starts to be deceived and what you see then is both legalism and antinomianism have this in character, they both impugn God's character, they both express a kind of distrust towards God legalism being this way, right God's law is not so good God's out there withholding something from me remember she sees the tree is good it's desirable, I can be like God, right, and then God she believes this lie, God's law is prohibiting me from good things so now I've got to go get the good things for myself because God has disallowed them from me and that legalism provokes, it stimulates her antinomianism therefore I'm going to cast aside God's law and I'm going to eat the fruit and disobey God and so in that sense legalism and antinomianism are not identical of course, but they've got that great similarity to them that the heart is very malfunctioned and then it starts to distort who God is and how God is relating to me as a Christian and think of it this way, her gaze was diverted off of the super abundant plenty that God had commanded her to enjoy remember this, this was in God's law, so this is God's law you may surely eat of every tree of the garden and we overlook this notice the positive statement you could say, the super abundant grace, right, it's all yours, you can have it all save this one tree that's just as much part of the law as is the negative command and yet Eve she skips over that and her gaze is now solely on the forbidden fruit and so that's where you can see legalism and antinomianism have both have this malfunctioned perspective of who God is and how God's law comes to us that God's law really is holy, righteous and good, it really is the best thing for me and so legalist starts to say, yeah, I mean kinda, but it'd probably be better if I could indulge in X, Y, and Z which can provoke, well I'm just going to go ahead and cast aside God's law and not obey it did you have a question? Oh, no, okay I was just going to say what about when Eve said we should not even touch it adding an extra layer around what God did yeah, right, right would that qualify as legalism? perhaps, so there's some, you know, perhaps perhaps, there's some debate on that so yeah, me, probably all have heard that, Eve being the first legalist because she added to God's command, there's some debate on that because you do see in the Pentateuch commands of, or wisdom of hey, if there's something forbidden, don't even touch it like the wisest thing to do would be to not touch it so, I'm still fleshing through that, but yeah, perhaps, perhaps yeah, okay, so in that regard legalism and antinomianism, two sides of the same coin, right, both distort the nature and character of God, and both start to see this this kind of darkness in God, that God is withholding something good from me, and that's why it's so important that's what Ferguson means he says, you can have God's law and then you start to separate that from God himself, and they become two different things, that's a huge problem that we don't ever want to do, right God's law is holy, righteous and good, reflective of the God who is holy, righteous and good, and therefore when it comes to me it is for my good to walk in it, as a guide of life okay so maybe here's a way we might express it again, I'm just putting, no one comes out and verbalizes this, but here might be an example in our hearts surely God is not so gracious as to really justify me, fully justify me, so I should probably, at least in part, trust in my own righteousness on my own law keeping um, antinomianism we already covered that, right, I'm saved which could lead to, I'm saved by grace so I can cast off the burden right, the burden, not the blessing of God's law, that he has given to me as a guide of life um alright, let me just end on this one because then we'll have time for questions so in that regard, they're both anti-grace, both legalism and lawlessness are both against grace, and the trap you never want to fall into is, do not prescribe one for the other, in other words right, you wouldn't want to walk up to a legalist and say, man, what you need is just to relax, like you just need a little antinomianism in your life, to chill out and you wouldn't want to walk up to an antinomian and say, hey, what you need is some, you need a dose of legalism, right, you need the legalistic hammer to come down on you now of course, in life, it's never that simple, but that's why really, Christ is the remedy to both, he is the answer to both, in the sense that when we are in Jesus Christ, he has freed us to walk in God's law, when we are in Jesus Christ, we have the forgiveness of our sins, when we are in Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, we are empowered to walk as God's law asks us to walk and forgiveness for our shortcomings, like we could just go on and on about how Christ really is the answer to both of those two polarities that we all inevitably fall into by the Spirit, I didn't have time, I had a whole section on the Holy Spirit because that very much is God's solution to the lack of power that we have to walk in God's law that he has given us his Spirit that we can walk in it, which we formerly could not would not do alright, we're out of time, questions, any questions on this so just to review real quick, we covered three uses of the law, we've got God's law is a guardian it's a restraint and it's our guide to life which is perhaps the highest function Christ set us free so that we could walk in God's law, so it tutors us to Christ it can restrain evil and it's a guide to life then we transitioned and we didn't get confused that there's also three dimensions of the law, what are they? what's that? moral civil, ceremonial, moral, civil ceremonial, moral thou shalt not murder we saw civil, build a parapet around your roof, that that could be applied today with general equity, and then thirdly ceremonial all those being fulfilled in Jesus Christ and then legalism and antinomism that I think in many ways are two sides of the same coin, two sides of the same hard problem alright, questions, comments where does circumcision fit in all this you know, involved yeah yeah, that's why I had that I think that's a fine example of legalism the way it was appropriated, which was yeah, hey, to be saved you must do this you know, to be truly really saved you've got to be circumcised as an example of legalism yeah Eric a comment and a question if I may the comment is that, as Ian surely knows the current building code and all kinds of regulations are very similar to the parapet you know, two drums and two I find it to be a striking example of how the current civil code very much draws inspiration from the past that's what I wanted to discuss the question is it's very simple to summarize the errors on the two sides of the coin as antinomism and legalism but the right way seems to be harder to name and explain and how do we train ourselves to give a response to someone who didn't want the other error of this is the way you should go yeah well it may take an hour that's the thing like I said at the beginning of this class all of us know no one wakes up, hey I'm going to be a legalist I'm going to be a lawless today and yet we do and when our devotion to Christ wanes these are the pitfalls that we fall into these are, in my mind, these are Christ's problems because of our sin problem where we say I'm not going to glorify God and I'm not going to enjoy Him forever that is the heart of it and so in one sense the solution is it is remarkably simple to love Christ is to walk in God's ways it always manifests itself in that by the Spirit that through the Spirit we fulfill the righteous requirements of the law it's for this that Christ has given us His Spirit applying that to a particular person in a particular setting with a particular problem it's always going to be more complicated that's kind of the joy of it, that's the fun of it but I think it is remarkably simple in one sense that it is for this that Christ has saved us yeah, absolutely right right right you know you need to turn from these lies and turn towards the truth of who God is right right absolutely with the key thing being only in Christ is that true outside of Christ you've got condemnation upon condemnation failure upon failure futility upon futility yeah yeah, right Martin Luther, you saw how much it wrecked his consciousness yeah, right and it was never enough never good enough yeah yeah yeah, right, right yeah, right right, that's right that's right, yeah, amen amen, yeah alright alright let's pray Father, we do praise you we are thankful indeed of what we just said that here we are as sinners as we look into your mirror and we are all keenly aware convicted how much we have fallen short and so we praise you that you have given us the one who never fell short the one who was born of woman born under the law who fully kept your law and thus qualified himself to be our redeemer and so we praise you that we can have bodies that are clean souls that have been cleansed that we stand before you as righteous as the Lord Jesus Christ himself we praise you that you have given us your spirit that we might walk in a way that is pleasing to you we pray that you would only continue to supply us with your spirit that we might walk in a way that glorifies you that is more and more pleasing to you as we keep our gaze fixed upon the Lord Jesus Christ Amen
