The Old Covenant, the Decalogue, and the Rule of Life...

"The covenant made with Israel on Mount Sinai is abolished by Christ, the Mediator of the new covenant (Heb. 8: 8, 9, 13). And the Ten Commandments do not bind us as they were words of that covenant (Exod. 34: 28). I mean, they do not bind us as conditions of that covenant, except we seek to be justified by works. For the law, as a covenant, still stands in force enough to curse those that seek salvation by their own works (Gal. 3: 10) and, if abolished, it is only to those that are in Christ by faith (Gal. 2: 16, 20; Acts 3: 22-25; 15: 10, 11). But the Ten Commandments bind us still, as they were then given to a people that were at that time under the covenant of grace made with Abraham, to show them what duties are holy, just and good, well-pleasing to God, and to be a rule for their conversation. The result of all is that we must still practice moral duties as commanded by Moses, but we must not seek to be justified by our practice. If we use them as a rule of life, not as conditions of justification, they can be no ministration of death, or killing letter to us. Their perfection indeed makes them to be harder terms to procure life by, but a better rule to discover all imperfections, and to guide us to that perfection which we should aim at. And it will be our wisdom not to part with the authority of the decalogue of Moses..."

Walter Marshall. The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification, p 85

Thoughts on the Moral Law and Justification...

In a FaceBook exchange a while back, someone said that the third use of the law was operative in the sanctification of the Christian's life, i.e. in force or in effect. That's a pretty standard Reformed sound bite. But what does that mean? How is the moral law operative in the lives of Christians? Are we to live by keeping the moral law? I think how one answers that question determines whether one falls into a legal view of sanctification or a gospel view. The Westminster Larger Catechism points the way:

WLC Q. 97. What special use is there of the moral law to the regenerate? 

A. Although they that are regenerate, and believe in Christ, be delivered from the moral law as a covenant of works, so as thereby they are neither justified nor condemned; yet besides the general uses thereof common to them with all men, it is of special use, to show them how much they are bound to Christ for his fulfilling it, and enduring the curse thereof in their stead, and for their good; and thereby to provoke them to more thankfulness, and to express the same in their greater care to conform themselves thereunto as the rule of their obedience.

In beginning to answer the question of how Christians are to use the moral law, it's significant that the Divines, first and foremost, remind the believer of his justification. Christians are delivered from the moral law as a covenant of works. They are no longer under the "law" (Rom 6:14b)  and therefore they are no longer under the condemnation of the law (Rom 8:1). They are under grace as a covenant though faith in Christ. Likewise, they are no longer under the law of works as a path or way to keep their justification, or for that matter their salvation (Eph 2:8-9). WSC 33 states: 

Justification is an act of God's free grace, wherein he pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone. 

This is the starting point for the third use of the law. Why remind the believer of what the Confession of Faith, as well as the Larger and Shorter Catechism's have already taught? Because we are by nature legalists, born under the law as a covenant of works. Written on our heart is "Do this and live." Though believers we are still sinners who have a bent towards justifying ourselves. And that's what sinners do. Yet how futile! And because of sin we attempt to do that law-keeping by the corrupt tendency within ourselves to water down the law's standards and elevate the quality of our obedience. If we are going to talk about the moral law in the lives of sinners/saints we need to again and again emphasize the ground of grace upon which they stand.

The first use of the law in believer's lives that the Divines refer to is the "general uses thereof common to them with all men" which is the topic of Question 95:

Q. 95. Of what use is the moral law to all men? 

A. The moral law is of use to all men, to inform them of the holy nature and will of God, and of their duty, binding them to walk accordingly; to convince them of their disability to keep it, and of the sinful pollution of their nature, hearts, and lives: to humble them in the sense of their sin and misery, and thereby help them to a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and of the perfection of his obedience.

So the law informs believers of God's holy nature. It teaches that their duty, as those made in the image of God, is to live in a godly way defined by God's moral law as revealed in Scripture (summed up in the Ten Commandments but not limited to those ten words). And that standard of holy living is non-negotiable. As Jesus taught in Matthew 5, "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." Created in his image and likeness, God's children are meant to be morally like him. Considering that high requirement, it's crucial that believing sinners having a proper view of their natural state as well as having their feet firmly planted on the ground of God's free grace of justification.

... to convince them of their disability to keep it, and of the sinful pollution of their nature, hearts, and lives: to humble them in the sense of their sin and misery, and thereby help them to a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and of the perfection of his obedience.

As the hymn states, "all other ground is sinking sand." The moral law continues in the lives of believers to convince them of their disability to meet the law's requirements and point them to their salvation in Christ who as their Mediator fulfilled all of the law for them - For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes (Rom. 10:4). This is true even though we continue to fall short of the moral law in thought, word, and deed. So the law, as described in this function general to all men including believers, continues to discover to God's people the sinful pollutions which remain in their lives.

This brings us back to Answer 97 and the first mention of the laws' use specific to believers.

Although they that are regenerate, and believe in Christ, be delivered from the moral law as a covenant of works, so as thereby they are neither justified nor condemned; yet besides the general uses thereof common to them with all men, it is of special use, to show them how much they are bound to Christ for his fulfilling it, and enduring the curse thereof in their stead, and for their good; and thereby to provoke them to more thankfulness, and to express the same in their greater care to conform themselves thereunto as the rule of their obedience.

Sounds like our justification in Christ is front and center when it comes to thankfully giving care to conform ourselves more and more to the law as a rule of obedience.

In a sense the gospel of grace scares us. Sinners saved by grace, we are completely dependent (like an infant in his mother's arms) solely on God's initiating and continuing love and grace which he has given in Christ. We don't have and will never have control over that by our works. To paraphrase the Tom Petty song, we were 'free falling' to our death except that the grace and love of God was poured out on us in the Beloved who caught us. And it is that same  sovereign grace that now holds us. Getting used to grace is getting used to God loving us, despite the good that we don't bring to the table and despite the bad that we do. God, apart from our doings, chose us in Christ, sent his Son to die on the cross for us, and Jesus, now at the right hand of the Father, secures our salvation by his mediation in heaven for us. How to explain that? With Paul, I think we'll spend the rest of our lives seeking to comprehend "with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which surpasses all knowledge..."

Christians can walk and chew gum at the same time. As a reasonable and thankful response to God's grace in Christ we can take seriously Christ's command to follow him in accord with the rule of righteousness found in the moral law. And as we walk that path of righteousness our eyes of faith are fixed, not on own works - as if to measure or ascertain some kind of progress, but only upon Christ Jesus as our righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.

Marrow - A Threefold Law, further unpacking...

The Marrow of Modern Divinity by Edward Fisher
with Notes by Thomas Boston

SECTION 2: A threefold Law 

EVANGELISTA, a Minister of the Gospel.
NOMIST, a Legalist.
ANTINOMISTA, an Antinomian.

Evan. Yea, in the Scriptures there is mention made of divers laws, but they may all be comprised under these three, viz.the law of works, the law of faith, and the law of Christ;1 (Rom 3:27, Gal 6:2); and, therefore, I pray you, tell me, when you say the law ought to be a rule of life to a believer, which of these three laws you mean.

Nom. Sir, I know not the difference betwixt them; but this I know, that the law of the ten commandments, commonly called the moral law, ought to be a rule of life to a believer.

Evan. But the law of the ten commandments, or moral law may be either said to be the matter of the law of works, or the matter of the law of Christ: and therefore I pray you to tell me, in whether of these senses you conceive it ought to be a rule of life to a believer?

Nom. Sir, I must confess, I do not know what you mean by this distinction; but this I know, that God requires that every Christian should frame and lead his life according to the ten commandments; the which if he do, then may he expect the blessing of God both upon his own soul and body; and if he do not, then can he expect nothing else but his wrath and curse upon them both.

Evan. The truth is, Nomista, the law of the ten commandments, as it is the matter of the law of works, ought not to be a rule of life to a believer. But in thus saying, you have affirmed that it ought; and therefore therein you have erred from the truth. And now, Antinomista, that I may also know your judgment, when you say the law ought not to be a rule of life to a believer, pray tell me what law do you mean?

Ant. Why, I mean the law of the ten commandments.

Evan. But whether do you mean that law, as it is the matter of the law of works, or as it is the matter of the law of Christ?

Ant. Surely, sir, I do conceive, that the ten commandments are no way to be a rule of life to a believer; for Christ hath delivered him from them.

Evan. But the truth is, the law of the ten commandments, as it is the matter of the law of Christ, ought to be a rule of life to a believer;2 and therefore you having affirmed the contrary, have therein also erred from the truth.

Nom. The truth is, sir, I must confess I never took any notice of this threefold law,3 which, it seems, is mentioned in the New Testament.

Ant. And I must confess, if I took any notice of them, I never understood them.

Evan. Well, give me leave to tell you, that so far as any man comes short of the true knowledge of this threefold law, so far he comes short both of the true knowledge of God and of himself; and therefore I wish you both to consider of it.

Nom. Sir, if it be so, you may do well to be a means to inform us, and help us to the true knowledge of this threefold law; and therefore, I pray you, first tell us what is meant by the law of works.

Notes by Thomas Boston

[1] These terms are scriptural, as appears from the whole texts quoted by our author, namely, (Rom 3:27), "Where is boasting then? it is excluded. By what law? of works? nay: but by the law of faith."(Gal 6:2), "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ." 

By the law of works is meant the law of the ten commandments, as the covenant of works. 

By the law of faith, the gospel, or covenant of grace; for justification being the point upon which the apostle there states the opposition betwixt these two laws, it is evident that the former only is the law that doth not exclude boasting; and that the latter only is it, by which a sinner is justified in a way that doth exclude boasting. 

By the law of Christ, is meant the same law of the ten commandments, as a rule of life, in the hand of a Mediator, to believers already justified, and not any one command of the law only; for "bearing one another's burdens" is a "fulfilling of the law of Christ," as it is a loving one another: but, according to the Scripture, that love is not a fulfilling of one command only, but of the whole law of the ten commands, (Rom 13:8-10)."He that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." It is a fulfilling of the second table directly, and of the first table indirectly and consequentially: therefore, by the law of Christ is meant, not one command only, but the whole law. The law of works is the law to be done, that one may be saved; the law of faith is the law to be believed, that one may be saved; the law of Christ is the law of the Saviour, binding his saved people to all the duties of obedience, (Gal 3:12, Acts 16:31). 

The term law is not here used univocally; for the law of faith is neither in the Scripture sense, nor in the sense of our author, a law, properly so called. The apostle uses that phrase only in imitation of the Jews' manner of speaking, who had the law continually in their mouths. But since the promise of the gospel proposed to faith, is called in Scripture "the law of faith," our author was sufficiently warranted to call it so too. So the law of faith is not a proper preceptive law. 

The law of works, and the law of Christ, are in substance but one law, even the law of the ten commandments the moral law that law which was from the beginning, continuing still the same in its own nature, but vested with different forms. And since that law is perfect, and sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of it, whatever form it be vested with, whether as the law of works or as the law of Christ, all commands of God unto men must needs be comprehended under it, and particularly the command to repent, common to all mankind, pagans not excepted, who doubtless are obliged, as well as others, to turn from sin unto God; as also the command to believe in Christ, binding all to whom the gospel revelation comes, though, in the meantime, this law stands under different forms to those who are in a state of union with Christ by faith, and to those who are not so. The law of Christ is not a new, proper, preceptive law, but the old, proper, preceptive law, which was from the beginning, under a new accidental form. 

The distinction between the law of works and the law of faith cannot be controverted, since the apostle doth so clearly distinguish them, (Rom 3:27). The distinction between the law of works and the law of Christ, as above explained according to the Scriptures, and the mind of our author, is the same in effect with that of the law, as a covenant of works, and as a rule of life to believers, and ought to be admitted, (Westm. Confess. chap. 19, art. 6). For, (1.) Believers are not under, but dead to the law of works, (Rom 6:14), "For ye are not under the law, but under grace."(7:4), "Wherefore my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law, that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead."(1 Cor 9:21), "Being not without law to God, but under the law of Christ." Some copies read here "of God," and "of Christ"; which I mention, not out of any regard to that different reading, but that upon the occasion thereof the sense is owned by the learned to be the same either way. To be under the law to God is, without question, to be under the law of God; whatever it may be judged to import more, it can import no less; therefore to be under the law to Christ, is to be under the law of Christ. This text gives a plain and decisive answer to the question, "How is the believer under the law of God?" namely, as he is under the law to Christ. (2.) The law of Christ is an "easy yoke," and a "light burden," (Matt 11:30); but the law of works, to a sinner, is an insupportable burden, requiring works as the condition of justification and acceptance with God, as is clear from the whole of the apostle's reasoning, (Rom 3). [and therefore it is called the law of works, for otherwise the law of Christ requires works too,] and cursing "every one that continues not in all things written in it to do them," (Gal 3:10). The apostle assures us, that "what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law," (Rom 3:19). The duties of the law of works, as such, are, as I conceive, called by our Lord himself, "heavy burdens, and grievous to be borne," (Matt 23:4)."For they," viz: the Scribes and Pharisees, "bind heavy burdens, and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." These heavy burdens were not human traditions, and rites devised by men; for Christ would not have commanded the observing and doing of these, as in this case he did, (verse 3), "Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do"; neither were they the Mosaic rites and ceremonies, which were not then abrogated, for the Scribes and Pharisees were so far from not moving these burdens with one of their own fingers, that the whole of their religion was confined to them, namely to the rites and ceremonies of Moses' law, and those of their own devising. But the duties of the moral law they laid on others, binding them on with the tie of the law of works, yet made no conscience of them in their own practice: the which duties, nevertheless, our Lord Jesus commanded to be observed and done. 

"He who hath believed on Jesus Christ, [though he be freed from the curse of the law,] is not freed from the command and obedience of the law, but tied thereunto by a new obligation, and a new command from Christ. Which new command from Christ importeth help to obey the command."Practical Use of Saving Knowledge, title, The Third Warrant to Believe, fig. 5. 

What this distinction amounts to is, that thereby a difference is constituted betwixt the ten commandments as coming from an absolute God out of Christ unto sinners, and the same ten commandments as coming from God in Christ unto them; a difference which the children of God, assisting their consciences before him to "receive the law at his mouth," will value as their life, however they disagree about it in words and manner of expression. But that the original indispensable obligation of the law of the ten commandments is in any measure weakened by the believer's taking it as the law of Christ, and not as the law of works; or that the sovereign authority of God the Creator, which is inseparable from it for the ages of eternity, in what channel soever it be conveyed unto men, is thereby laid aside,will appear utterly groundless, upon an impartial consideration of the matter. For is not our Lord Jesus Christ, equally with the Father and the Holy Spirit, JEHOVAH, the Sovereign, Supreme, Most High God, Creator of the world? (Isa 47:4, Jer 23:6, with Psa 83:18, John 1:3, Rev 3:14). Is not the same [or sovereign authority] of God in Christ? (Exo 23:21). Is not he in the Father, and the Father in him? (John 14:11). Nay, doth not all the fullness of the Godhead dwell in him? (Col 2:9). How, then, can the original obligation of the law of the ten commandments, arising from the authority of the Creator, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, be weakened by its being issued unto the believer from and by that blessed channel, the Lord Jesus Christ? 

As for the distinction betwixt the law of faith and the law of Christ, the latter is subordinated unto the former. All men by nature are under the law of works; but taking the benefit of the law of faith, by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, they are set free from the law of works, and brought under the law of Christ.(Matt 11:28,29), "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy ladentake my yoke upon you." 

[2] The law of the ten commandments, being the natural law, was written on Adam's heart on his creation; while as yet it was neither the law of works, nor the law of Christ, in the sense wherein these terms are used in Scripture, and by our author. But after man was created, and put into the garden, this natural law, having made man liable to fall away from God, a threatening of eternal death in case of disobedience, had also a promise of eternal life annexed to it in case of obedience; in virtue of while he, having done his work, might thereupon plead and demand the reward of eternal life. Thus it became the law of works, whereof the ten commandments were, and are still the matter. All mankind being ruined by the breach of this law, Jesus Christ obeys and dies in the room of the elect, that they might be saved; they being united to him by faith, are, through his obedience and satisfaction imputed to them, freed from eternal death, and become heirs of everlasting life; so that the law of works being fully satisfied, expires as to them, as it would have done of course in the case of Adam's having stood the time of his trial: howbeit it remains in full force as to unbelievers. But the natural law of the ten commandments [which can never expire or determine, but is obligatory in all possible states of the creature, in earth, heaven, or hell] is, from the moment the law of works expires as to believers, issued forth to them [still liable to infirmities, though not to falling away like Adam] in the channel of the covenant of grace, bearing a promise of help to obey, (Ezek 36:27), and, agreeable to their state before the Lord, having annexed to it a promise of the tokens of God's fatherly love, for the sake of Christ, in case of that obedience; and a threatening of God's fatherly displeasure in case of their disobedience. (John 14:21), "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father; and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him."(Psa 89:31-33), "If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless, my loving kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail." Thus it becomes the law of Christ to them; of which law also the same ten commandments are likewise the matter. In the threatenings of this law there is no revenging wrath; and in the promises of it no proper conditionalty of works; but here is the order in the covenant of grace, to which the law of Christ belongs; a beautiful order of grace, obedience, particular favours, and chastisements for disobedience. Thus the ten commandments stand, both in the law of works and in the law of Christ at the same time, being the common matter of both; but as they are the matter of [i.e. stand in] the law of works, they are actually a part of the law of works; howbeit, as they are the matter of, or stand in, the law of Christ, they are actually a part, not of the law of works, but of the law of Christ. And as they stand in the law of Christ, our author expressly asserts, against the Antinomian, that they ought to be a rule of life to a believer; but that they ought to be a rule of life to a believer, as they stand in the law of works, he justly denies, against the legalist. Even as when one and the same crime stands forbidden in the laws of different independent kingdoms, it is manifest that the rule of life to the subjects in that particular is the prohibition, as it stands in the law of that kingdom whereof they are subjects respectively, and not as it stands in the law of that kingdom of which they are not subjects. 

[3] Not of the terms here used to express it by, but of the things thereby meant, viz: the covenant of works, the covenant of grace, and the law as a rule of life to believers, in whatever terms these things be expressed.

Sinai and The Covenant of Works

Extended Excerpt From The Marrow of Modern Divinity
by Edward Fisher with Notes by Thomas Boston
EVANGELISTA, a Minister of the Gospel.
NOMIST, a Legalist.
ANTINOMISTA, an Antinomian.
NEOPHYTUS, a Young Christian.

Chapter II, Section II, 3  The law, as the covenant of works, added to the promise.
Ant. But whether were the ten commandments, as they were delivered to them on Mount Sinai, the covenant of works or no?

Evan. They were delivered to them as the covenant of works. ¹

Nom. But, by your favour, sir, you know that these people were the posterity of Abraham, and therefore under that covenant of grace which God made with their father; and therefore I do not think
that they were delivered to them as the covenant of works; for you know the Lord never delivers the covenant of works to any that are under the covenant of grace.

Evan. Indeed it is true, the Lord did manifest so much love to the body of this nation, that all the natural seed of Abraham were externally, and by profession, under the covenant of grace made with their father Abraham; though, it is to be feared, many of them were still under the covenant of works made with their father Adam. ²

Nom. But, sir, you know, in the preface to the ten commandments, the Lord calls himself by the name of their God in general; and therefore it should seem that they were all of them the people of God. ³

Evan. That is nothing to the purpose; ⁴ for many wicked and ungodly men, being in the visible church, and under the external covenant, are called the chosen of God, and the people of God, though they be not so. In like manner were many of these Israelites called the people of God, though indeed they were not so.

Nom. But, sir, was the same covenant of works made with them that was made with Adam?

Evan. For the general substance of the duty, the law delivered on Mount Sinai, and formerly engraven on man's heart, was one and the same; so that at Mount Sinai the Lord delivered no new thing, only it came more gently to Adam before his fall, but after his fall came thunder with it.

Nom. Ay, sir, but as yourself said, the ten commandments, as they were written in Adam's heart, were but the matter of the covenant of works, and not the covenant itself, till the form was annexed to them, that is to say, till God and man were thereupon agreed: now, we do not find that God and these people did agree upon any such terms at Mount Sinai.

Evan. No; ⁵ say you so? do you not remember that the Lord consented and agreed, when he said, (Lev 18:5), "Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them"; and in Deuteronomy 27:26, when he said, "Cursed is he that confirmeth not all the words of this law, to do them?" And do you not remember that the people consented, (Exo 19:8), and agreed, when they said, "All that the Lord hath spoken we will do?" And doth not the apostle Paul give evidence that these words were the form of the covenant of works, when he says, (Rom 10:5), "Moses describeth that righteousness which is of the law, that the man that doeth these things shall live in them"; and when he says, (Gal 3:10), "For it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them?" ⁶ And in Deuteronomy 4:13, Moses, in express terms, calls it a covenant, saying, "And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even the ten commandments, and he wrote them upon tables of stone." Now, this was not the covenant of grace; for Moses afterwards, (Deut 5:3), speaking of this covenant, says, "God made not this covenant with your fathers, but with you"; and by "fathers" all the patriarchs unto Adam may be meant, [says Mr. Ainsworth,] who had the promise of the covenant of Christ. ⁷ Therefore, if it had been the covenant of grace, he would have said, God did make this covenant with them, rather than that he did not. ⁸

Nom. And do any of our godly and modern writers agree with you on this point?

Evan. Yes, indeed. Polonus says, "The covenant of works is that in which God promiseth everlasting life unto a man that in all respects performeth perfect obedience to the law of works, adding thereunto threatenings of eternal death, if he shall not perform perfect obedience thereto. God made this covenant in the beginning with the first man Adam, whilst he was in the first estate of integrity: the same covenant God did repeat and make again by Moses with the people of Israel." And Dr. Preston, on the New Covenant, [p. 317,] says, "The covenant of works runs in these terms, 'Do this and thou shalt live, and I will be thy God.' This was the covenant which was made with Adam, and the covenant that is expressed by Moses in the moral law." And Mr. Pemble [Vind. Fid. p. 152] says, "By the covenant of works, we understand what we call in one word 'the law,' namely, that means of bringing man to salvation, which is by perfect obedience unto the will of God. Hereof there are also two several administrations; the first is with Adam before his fall, when immortality and happiness were promised to man, and confirmed by an external symbol of the tree of life, upon condition that he continued obedient to God, as well in all other things, as in that particular commandment of not eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The second administration of this covenant was the renewing thereof with the Israelites at Mount Sinai; where, after the light of nature began to grow darker, and corruption had in time worn out the characters of religion and virtue first grave in man's heart, ⁹ God revived the law by a compendious and full declaration of all duties required of man towards God or his neighbour, expressed in the decalogue; according to the tenor of which law God entered into covenant with the Israelites, promising to be their God in bestowing upon them all blessings of life and happiness, upon condition that they would be his people, obeying all things that he had commanded; which condition they accepted of, promising an absolute obedience, (Exo 19:8), 'all things which the Lord hath said we will do'; and also submitting themselves to all punishment in case they disobeyed, saying, 'Amen' to the curse of the law, 'Cursed be every one that confirmeth not all the words of the law: and all the people shall say, Amen.'" And Mr. Walker, on the Covenant, [p. 128,] says, that "the first part of the covenant, which God made with Israel at Horeb, was nothing else but a renewing of the old covenant of works, ¹⁰ which God made with Adam in paradise." And it is generally laid down by our divines, that we are by Christ delivered from the law as it is a covenant. ¹¹

Nom. But, sir, were the children of Israel at this time better able to perform the condition of the covenant of works, than either Adam or any of the old patriarchs were, that God renewed it now with them, rather than before?

Evan. No, indeed; God did not renew it with them now, and not before, because they were better able to keep it, but because they had more need to be made acquainted what the covenant of works is, than those before. For though it is true the ten commandments, which were at first perfectly written in Adam's heart, were much obliterated ¹² by his fall, yet some impressions and relics thereof still remained; ¹³ and Adam himself was very sensible of his fall, and the rest of the fathers were helped by tradition; ¹⁴ and, says Cameron, "God did speak to the patriarchs from heaven, yea, and he spake unto them by his angels"; ¹⁵ but now, by this time, sin had almost obliterated and defaced the impressions of the law written in their hearts; ¹⁶ and by their being so long in Egypt, they were so corrupted, that the instructions and ordinances of their fathers were almost worn out of mind; and their fall in Adam was almost forgotten, as the apostle testifies, (Rom 5:13,14), saying, "Before the time of the law, sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law." Nay, in that long course of time betwixt Adam and Moses, men had forgotten what was sin; so, although God had made a promise of blessing to Abraham, and to all his seed, that would plead interest in it, ¹⁷ yet these people at this time were proud and secure, and heedless of their estate; and though "sin was in them, and death reigned over them," yet they being without a law to evidence this sin and death unto their consciences, ¹⁸ they did not impute it unto themselves, they would not own it, nor charge themselves with it; and so, by consequence, found no need of pleading the promise made to Abraham; ¹⁹ (Rom 5:20), therefore, "the law entered," that Adam's offence and their own actual transgression might abound, so that now the Lord saw it needful, that there should be a new edition and publication of the covenant of works, the sooner to compel the elect unbelievers to come to Christ, the promised seed, and that the grace of God in Christ to the elect believers might appear the more exceeding glorious. So that you see the Lord's intention therein was, that they, by looking upon this covenant might be put in mind what was their duty of old, when they were in Adam's loins; yea, and what was their duty still, if they would stand to that covenant, and so go the old and natural way to work; yea, and hereby they were also to see what was their present infirmity in not doing their duty: ²⁰ that so they seeing an impossibility of obtaining life by that way of works, first appointed in paradise, they might be humbled, and more heedfully mind the promise made to their father Abraham, and hasten to lay hold on the Messiah, or promised seed.

Nom. Then, sir, it seems that the Lord did not renew the covenant of works with them, to the intent that they should obtain eternal life by their yielding obedience to it?

Evan. No, indeed; God never made the covenant of works with any man since the fall, either with expectation that he should fulfil it, ²¹ or to give him life by it; for God never appoints any thing to an end, to the which it is utterly unsuitable and improper. Now the law, as it is the covenant of works, is become weak and unprofitable to the purpose of salvation; ²² and, therefore, God never appointed it to man, since the fall, to that end. And besides, it is manifest that the purpose of God, in the covenant made with Abraham, was to give life and salvation by grace and promise; and, therefore, his purpose in renewing the covenant of works, was not, neither could be, to give life and salvation by working; for then there would have been contradictions in the covenants, and instability in him that made them. Wherefore let no man imagine that God published the covenant of works on Mount Sinai, as though he had been mutable, and so changed his determination in that covenant made with Abraham; neither, yet let any man suppose, that God now in process of time had found out a better way for man's salvation than he knew before: for, as the covenant of grace made with Abraham had been needless, if the covenant of works made with Adam would have given him and his believing seed life; so, after the covenant of grace was once made, it was needless to renew the covenant of works, to the end that righteousness of life should be had by the observation of it. The which will yet more evidently appear, if we consider, that the apostle, speaking of the covenant of works as it was given on Mount Sinai, says, "It was added because of transgressions," (Gal 3:19). It was not set up as a solid rule of righteousness, as it was given to Adam in paradise, but was added or put to; ²³ it was not set up as a thing in gross by itself.

Nom. Then, sir, it should seem that the covenant of works was added to the covenant of grace, to make it more complete.

Evan. O no! you are not so to understand the apostle, as though it were added by way of ingrediency as a part of the covenant of grace, as if that covenant had been incomplete without the covenant of works; for then the same covenant should have consisted of contradictory materials, and so it should have overthrown itself; for, says the apostle, "If it be by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace: but if it be of works, then it is no more of grace; otherwise work is no more work," (Rom 11:6). But it was added by way of subserviency and attendance, the better to advance and make effectual the covenant of grace; so that although the same covenant that was made with Adam was renewed on Mount Sinai, yet I say still, it was not for the same purpose. For this was it that God aimed at, in making the covenant of works with man in innocency, to have that which was his due from man: ²⁴ but God made it with the Israelites for no other end, than that man, being thereby convinced of his weakness, might flee to Christ. So that it was renewed only to help forward and introduce another and a better covenant; and so to be a manuduction unto Christ, viz: to discover sin, to waken the conscience, and to convince them of their own impotency, and so drive them out of themselves to Christ. Know it then, I beseech you, that all this while there was no other way of life given, either in whole, or in part, than the covenant of grace. All this while God did but pursue the design of his own grace; and, therefore, was there no inconsistency either in God's will or acts; only such was his mercy, that he subordinated the covenant of works, and made it subservient to the covenant of grace, and so to tend to evangelical purposes.

Nom. But yet, sir, methinks it is somewhat strange that the Lord should put them upon doing the law, and also promise them life for doing, and yet never intend it.

Evan. Though he did so, yet did he neither require of them that which was unjust, nor yet dissemble with them in the promise; for the Lord may justly require perfect obedience at all men's hands, by virtue of that covenant which was made with them in Adam; and if any man could yield perfect obedience to the law, both in doing and suffering, he should have eternal life; for we may not deny [says Calvin] but that the reward of eternal salvation belongeth to the upright obedience of the law. ²⁵ But God knew well enough that the Israelites were never able to yield such an obedience: and yet he saw it meet to propound eternal life to them upon these terms; that so he might speak to them in their own humour, as indeed it was meet: for they swelled with mad assurance in themselves, saying, "All that the Lord commandeth we will do," and be obedient, (Exo 19:8). Well, said the Lord, if you will needs be doing, why here is a law to be kept; and if you can fully observe the righteousness of it, you shall be saved: sending them of purpose to the law, to awaken and convince them, to sentence and humble them, and to make them see their own folly in seeking for life that way; in short, to make them see the terms under which they stood, that so they might be brought out of themselves, and expect nothing from the law, in relation to life, but all from Christ. For how should a man see his need of life by Christ, if he do not first see that he is fallen from the way of life? and how should he understand how far he had strayed from the way of life, unless he do first find what is that way of life? Therefore it was needful that the Lord should deal with them after such a manner to drive them out of themselves, and from all confidence in the works of the law; that so, by faith in Christ, they might obtain righteousness and life. And just so did our Saviour also deal with that young expounder of the law, (Matt 19:16), who it seems, was sick of the same disease: "Good Master," says he, "what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" He doth not, says Calvin, simply ask, which way or by what means he should come to eternal life, but what good he should do to get it; whereby it appears, that he was a proud justiciary, one that swelled in fleshly opinion that he could keep the law, and be saved by it; therefore he is worthily sent to the law to work himself weary, and to see need to come to Christ for rest. And thus you see that the Lord, to the former promises made to the fathers, added a fiery law; which he gave from Mount Sinai, in thundering and lightning, and with a terrible voice, to the stubborn and stiff-necked Israel; whereby to break and tame them, and to make them sigh and long for the promised Redeemer.

Thomas Boston's Notes [1] As to this point, there are different sentiments among orthodox divines; though all of them do agree, that the way of salvation was the same under the Old and New Testament, and that the Sinai covenant, whatever it was, carried no prejudice to the promise made unto Abraham, and the way of salvation therein revealed, but served to lead men to Jesus Christ. Our author is far from being singular in this decision of this question. I adduce only the testimonies of three late learned writers, "That God made such a covenant [viz: the covenant of works] with our first parents, is confirmed by several parts of Scripture," (Hosea 6:7, Gal 4:24),Willison's Sacr. Cat. p. 3. The words of the text last quoted are these: "For these are the two covenants, the one from the Mount Sinai which gendereth to bondage." Hence it appears, that in the judgment of this author, the covenant from Mount Sinai was the covenant of works, otherwise there is no shadow of reason from this text for what it is adduced to prove. The Rev. Messrs. Flint and M'Claren, in their elaborate and seasonable treatise against Professor Simpson's doctrine, [for which I make no question but their names will be in honour with posterity] speak to the same purpose. The former having adduced the fore-cited text, (Gal 4:24), says, Jam duo federa, etc., that is, "Now here are two covenants mentioned, the first the legal one, by sin rendered ineffectual, entered into with Adam, and now again promulgate." [Exam. Doctr. Joh. Simp. p. 125.] And afterwards, speaking of the law of works, he adds, Atque hoc est illud fadus, etc., that is, "And this is that covenant promulgate on Mount Sinai, which is called one of the covenants," (Gal 4:24). Ibid. p. 131. The words of the latter, speaking of the covenant of works are these, "Yea, it is expressly called a covenant," (Hosea 6, Gal 4). And Mr. Gillespie proves strongly, that Galations 4 is understood of the covenant of works and grace. See his Ark of the Testament, part 1. chap. 5. p. 180. The New Scheme Examined, p. 176. The delivering of the ten commandments on Mount Sinai as the covenant of works, necessarily includes in it the delivering of them as a perfect rule of righteousness; forasmuch as that covenant did always contain in it such a rule, the true knowledge of which the Israelites were at that time in great want of, as our author afterwards teaches.

[2] The strength of the objection in the preceding paragraph lies here, namely, that at this rate, the same person, at one and the same time, were both under the covenant of works, and under the covenant of grace, which is absurd. Ans. The unbelieving Israelites were under the covenant of grace made with their father Abraham externally and by profession, in respect of their visible church state; but under the covenant of works made with their father Adam internally and really, in respect of the state of their souls before the Lord. Herein there is no absurdity; for to this day many in the visible church are thus, in these different respects, under both covenants. Farther, as to believers among them, they were internally and really, as well as externally, under the covenant of grace; and only externally under the covenant of works, and that, not as a covenant co-ordinate with, but subordinate and subservient unto, the covenant of grace: and in this there is no more inconsistency than in the former.

[3] As delivered from the covenant of works, by virtue of the covenant of grace.

[4] That will not, indeed, prove them all to have been the people of God in the sense before given, for the reason here adduced by our author.

Howbeit, the preface to the ten commandments deserves a particular notice in the matter of the Sinai transaction, (Exo 20:2), "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." Hence it is evident to me, that the covenant of grace was delivered to the Israelites on Mount Sinai. For the Son of God, the messenger of the covenant of grace, spoke these words to a select people, the natural seed of Abraham, typical of his whole spiritual seed. He avoucheth himself to be their God; namely, in virtue of the promise, or covenant made with Abraham, (Gen 17:7), "I will establish my covenant to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee": and their God, which brought them out of the land of Egypt; according to the promise made to Abraham at the most solemn renewal of the covenant with him.(Gen 15:14), "Afterwards shall they come out with great substance. And he first declares himself their God, and then requires obedience, according to the manner of the covenant with Abraham, (Gen 17:1); "I am the Almighty God, [i.e. in the language of the covenant, The Almighty God TO THEE, to make THEE for ever blest through the promised SEED,] walk thou before me, and be thou perfect." But that the covenant of works was also, for special ends, repeated and delivered to the Israelites on Mount Sinai, I cannot refuse, 1. Because of the apostle's testimony, (Gal 4:24), "These are the two covenants; the one from Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage." For the children of this Sinai covenant the apostle here treats of, are excluded from the eternal inheritance, as Ishmael was from Canaan, the type of it, (verse 30), "Cast out the bond-woman and her son; for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman"; but this could never be said of the children of the covenant of grace under any dispensation, though both the law and covenant from Sinai itself, and its children, were even before the coming of Christ under a sentence of exclusion, to be executed on them respectively in due time. 2. The nature of the covenant of works is most expressly in the New Testament brought in, propounded, and explained from the Mosaical dispensation. The commands of it from Exodus 20 by our blessed Saviour, (Matt 19:17-19), "If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, thou shalt not commit adultery," etc. The promise of it, (Rom 10:5), "Moses describes the righteousness which is of the law, that the man which doth these things shall live by them." The commands and promise of it together, see Luke 10:25-28. The terrible sanction of it, Galations 3:10. For it is written [viz: Deuteronomy 27:26,] "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." 3. To this may be added the opposition betwixt the law and grace, so frequently inculcated in the New Testament, especially in Paul's epistles. See one text for all, (Gal 3:12), "And the law is not of faith, but the man that doeth them shall live in them." 4. The law from Mount Sinai was a covenant, (Gal 4:24), "These are the two covenants, the one from the Mount Sinai"; and such a covenant as had a semblance of disannulling the covenant of grace, (Gal 3:17), "The covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law which was 430 years after, cannot disannul"; yea, such an one as did, in its own nature, bear a method of obtaining the inheritance, so far different from that of the promise, that it was inconsistent with it; "For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise," (Gal 3:18), wherefore the covenant of the law from Mount Sinai could not be the covenant of grace, unless one will make this last not only a covenant seeming to destroy itself, but really inconsistent: but it was the covenant of works, which indeed had such a semblance, and in its own nature did bear such a method as before noted; howbeit, as Ainsworth says, "The covenant of the law now given could not disannul the covenant of grace," (Gal 3:17). Annot. on Exodus 19:1

Wherefore I conceive the two covenants to have been both delivered on Mount Sinai to the Israelites. First, The covenant of grace made with Abraham, contained in the preface, repeated and promulgate there unto Israel, to be believed and embraced by faith, that they might be saved; to which were annexed the ten commandments, given by the Mediator Christ, the head of the covenant, as a rule of life to his covenant people. Secondly, the covenant of works made with Adam, contained in the same ten commands, delivered with thunderings and lightnings, the meaning of which was afterwards cleared by Moses, describing the righteousness of the law and sanction thereof, repeated and promulgate to the Israelites there, as the original perfect rule of righteousness, to be obeyed; and yet were they no more bound hereby to seek righteousness by the law than the young man was by our Saviour's saying to him, (Matt 19:17,18), "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandmentsThou shalt do no murder," etc. The latter was a repetition of the former.

Thus there is no confounding of the two covenants of grace and works; but the latter was added to the former as subservient unto it, to turn their eyes towards the promise, or covenant of grace: "God gave it to Abraham by promise. Wherefore then serveth the law? it was added, because of transgressions, till the Seed should come," (Gal 3:18,19). So it was unto the promise given to Abraham, that this subservient covenant was added; and that promise we have found in the preface to the ten commands. To it, then was the subservient covenant, according to the apostle, added, put, or set to, as the word properly signifies. So it was no part of the covenant of grace, the which was entire to the fathers, before the time that was set to it; and yet is, to the New Testament church, after that is taken away from it: for, says the apostle, "It was added till the seed should come." Hence it appears that the covenant of grace was, both in itself, and in God's intention, the principal part of the Sinai transaction: nevertheless, the covenant of works was the most conspicuous part of it, and lay most open to the view of the people. According to this account of the Sinai transaction, the ten commands, there delivered, must come under a twofold notion or consideration; namely, as the law of Christ, and as the law of works: and this is not strange, if it is considered, that they were twice written on tables of stone, by the Lord himself,the first tables the work of God, (Exo 32:16), which were broken in pieces, (verse 19), called the tables of the covenant, (Deut 9:11,15)the second tables, the work of Moses, the typical Mediator, (Exo 34:1), deposited at first [it would seem] in the tabernacle mentioned, (33:7), afterward, at the rearing of the tabernacle with all its furniture, laid up in the ark within the tabernacle, (25:16); and whether or not, some such thing is intimated, by the double accentuation of the decalogue, let the learned determine; but to the ocular inspection it is evident, that the preface to the ten commands, (Exo 20:2, Deut 5:6), stands in the original, both as a part of a sentence joined to the first commands, and also as an entire sentence, separated from it, and shut up by itself.

Upon the whole, one may compare with this the first promulgation of the covenant of grace, by the messenger of the covenant in paradise, (Gen 3:15), and the flaming sword placed there by the same hand, "turning every way to keep the way of the tree of life."

[5] Here, there is a large addition in the ninth edition of this book, London, 1699. It well deserves a place, and is as follows: "I do not say, God made the covenant of works with them, that they might obtain life and salvation thereby; no, the law was become weak through the flesh, as to any such purpose, (Rom 8:3). But he repeated, or gave a new edition of the law, and that, as a covenant of works, for their humbling and conviction; and so do his ministers preach the law to unconverted sinners still, that they who 'desire to be under the law may hear what the law says,' (Gal 4:21). And as to what you say of their not agreeing to this covenant, I pray take notice, that the covenant of works was made with Adam, not for himself only, but as he was a public person representing all his posterity, and so that covenant was made with the whole nature of man in him, as appears by Adam's sin and curse coming upon all, (Rom 5:12, Gal 3:10). Hence all men are born under that covenant, whether they agree to it or no; though, indeed, there is by nature such a proneness in all to desire to be under that covenant, and to work for life, that if natural men's consent were asked, they would readily [though ignorantly] take upon them to do all that the Lord requireth; for do you not remember," etc.

[6] That the conditional promise, (Lev 18:5), [to which agrees Exodus 19:8,] and the dreadful threatening, (Deut 27:26), were both given to the Israelites, as well as the ten commands, is beyond question; and that according to the apostle, (Rom 10:5, Gal 3:10), they were the form of the covenant of works, is as evident as the repeating of the words, and expounding them so, can make it. How, then, one can refuse the covenant of works to have been given to the Israelites, I cannot see. Mark the Westminster Confession upon the head of the covenant of works; "The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience." And this account of the being and nature of that covenant is there proved from these very texts among others, Romans 10:5, Galatians 3:10, chap. 7, art. 2.

[7] "But the covenant of the law [adds he] came after, as the apostle observeth, (Gen 3:17).They had a greater benefit than their fathers; for though the law could not give them life, yet it was a schoolmaster unto, i.e., to bring them unto, Christ." (Gal 3:21-24). Ainsworth on Deuteronomy 5:3.

[8] The transaction at Sinai or Horeb [for they are but one mountain] was a mixed dispensation; there was the promise or covenant of grace, and also the law; the one a covenant to be believed, the other a covenant to be done, and thus the apostle states, the difference betwixt these two, (Gal 3:12), "And the law is not of faith, but the man that DOETH them shall live in them." As to the former, viz: the covenant to be believed, it was given to their fathers as well as to them. Of the latter, viz: the covenant to be done, Moses speaks expressly, (Deut 4:12,13), "The Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire, and he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to PERFORM [or DO] even ten commandments." And (5:3), he tells the people no less expressly, that "the Lord made not THIS COVENANT with their fathers."

[9] That is, had worn them out, in the same measure and degree as the light of nature was darkened; but neither the one nor the other was ever fully done. (Rom 2:14,15).

[10] Wherein I differ from this learned author as to this point, and for what reasons, may be seen earlier [footnote #4].

[11] But not as it is a rule of life, which is the other member of that distinction.

[12] Both in the heart of Adam himself, and of his descendants in the first ages of the world.

[13] Both with him and them.

[14] The doctrine of the fall, with whatsoever other doctrine was necessary to salvation, was handed down from Adam, the fathers communicating the same to their children and children's children. There were but eleven patriarchs before the flood; 1. Adam, 2. Seth, 3. Enos, 4. Cainan, 5. Mahalaleel, 6. Jared, 7. Enoch, 8, Methuselah, 9. Lamech, 10. Noah, 11. Shem. Adam having lived 930 years, (Gen 5:5), was known to Lamech, Noah's father, with whom he lived 66 years, and much longer with the rest of the fathers before him; so that Lamech, and those before him, might have the doctrine from Adam's own mouth. Methuselah lived with Adam 243 years, and with Shem 98 years before the deluge. See Genesis 5. And what Shem, who, after the deluge, lived 502 years, (Gen 11:10,11), had learned from Methuselah, he had occasion to teach Arphaxad, Salah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, Terah, Abraham, Isaac, (Gen 21:5,), and Jacob, to whose 51st year he [viz: Shem] reached. Genesis 11:10, and 21:5, and 25:26, compared. [Vid. Bail. Op. Hist. Chron. p. 2, 3.] Thus one may perceive, how the nature of the law and covenant of works given to Adam, might be far better known to them, than to the Israelites after their long bondage in Egypt.

[15] That is, and besides all this, God spake to the patriarchs immediately and by angels. But neither of these do we find during the time of the bondage in Egypt, until the angel of the Lord appeared to Moses in the bush, and ordered him to go and bring the people out of Egypt, (Exo 3).

[16] The remaining impressions of the law on the hearts of the Israelites.

[17] By faith; believing, embracing, and appropriating it to themselves, (Heb 11:13, Jer 3:4).

[18] Inasmuch as the remaining impressions of the law on their hearts were so weak, that they were not sufficient for the purpose.

[19] By faith proposing it as their only defence, and opposing it to the demands of the law or covenant of works, as their only plea.

[20] How far they came short of, and could not reach unto the obedience they owed unto God, according to the perfection of the holy law.

[21] Nor before the fall neither, properly speaking; but the expression is agreeable to Scripture style, (Isa 5:4), "Wherefore when I looked it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?"

[22] (Rom 8:3), "For what the law could not DO, in that it was weak through the flesh; God sending his own Son," etc.

[23] It was not set up by itself as an entire rule of righteousness, to which alone they were to look who desired righteousness and salvation, as it was in the case of upright Adam, "For no man, since the fall, can attain to righteousness and life by the moral law," Lar. Cat. quest. 94. But it was added to the covenant of grace, that by looking at it men might see what kind of righteousness it is by which they can be justified in the sight of God; and that by means thereof, finding themselves destitute of that righteousness, they might be moved to embrace the covenant of grace, in which that righteousness is held forth to be received by faith.

[24] This was the end of the work, namely, of making the covenant of works with Adam, but not of the repeating of it at Sinai; it was also the end or design of the worker, namely of God, who made that covenant with Adam, to have his due from man, and he got it from the Man Christ Jesus.

[25] That is, the perfect obedience of the law; as it is said, (Eccl 7:29), "God made man upright."

Year End - Loose Ends - Grace...

Joshua (Joshua 24), after recounting God’s mercy and His faithfulness to the promises in delivering Israel from all her enemies, exhorts the Israelites to put away their false gods, to fear the LORD and serve Him in sincerity and truth. The Israelites essentially declare, “We will do it!” Joshua, truly understanding the perfection required by anyone who would serve God on the ground of their own works and also knowing the weak view the people had of the righteousness demanded by God, replies unto the people, "Ye cannot serve Jehovah; for he is a holy God; he is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgression nor your sins.” They could not serve God in a holiness of their own and they could not atone for the pollution of their sins.

The Israelites had a need. It was that their watered-down law-keeping mindset had to be humbled and stopped in its tracks by the very Law that they presumed to fulfill. This was in order that they then might be lifted up by the LORD’s free mercy.

Calvin: “But Scripture humbles us more, and at the same time elevates us. For besides forbidding us to glory in works, because they are the gratuitous gifts of God, it tells us that they are always defiled by some degrees of impurity, so that they cannot satisfy God when they are tested by the standard of his justice; but that lest our activity should be destroyed, they please merely by pardon.” — i.e. God’s free mercy and pardon in Christ alone...

and in WCF 14:2,

“… But the principal acts of saving faith are accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of grace.“

“… the righteous acts of the saints.”

And how are the acts of the saints constituted righteous? By what merit? By what obedience? By their own intrinsic holiness? No. Indeed, by the Holy Spirit we have been given a new sanctified heart and will in order that we might now seek to obey, even obey completely. Yet in this life - though now saints yet remaining sinners - no thought, no word, no deed - no matter how “holy” - is without some stain of sin. 

How is it then that we are not also rebuked, as were the Israelites, when we seek to serve God? Indeed often we are as the Holy Spirit brings us again and again to the foot of the cross that we would see the bankruptcy of our persons and of our works. And yet also, seeing and hearing the good news again, that we are accepted as righteous by God not by our works but due only to His free grace and mercy in Christ... the blessing of salvation that we receive and abide in through faith alone. We should never confuse our “righteous acts” in this life with the perfection required by the Law. Our works are acceptable only through the perfect obedience, merit, and mediation of our Savior and Advocate in heaven, Jesus Christ.

“The righteous shall live by faith.” As we seek to obey, it is through faith in Christ alone that our works are cleansed and lifted up to God. Our works rise up to God as acceptable only through the blood of Christ: “how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” The writer of Hebrews was writing to believers.

“for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, that no man should glory. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them.”

“Prepared” in that “he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him in love: having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved: in whom we have our redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace…”

Yes, as Scripture teaches, it is all by grace. And as my wont - a quote from Calvin:

In regard to this liberty there is a remarkable passage in the Epistle to the Romans, where Paul argues, “Sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace,” (Romans 6:14) For after he had exhorted believers, “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof: Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God;” they might have objected that they still bore about with them a body full of lust, that sin still dwelt in them. He therefore comforts them by adding, that they are freed from the law; as if he had said, Although you feel that sin is not yet extinguished, and that righteousness does not plainly live in you, you have no cause for fear and dejection, as if God were always offended because of the remains of sin, since by grace you are freed from the law, and your works are not tried by its standard.

I don’t think our obedience or Godly living is diminished or weakened by extolling the truth that salvation, start to finish, is by God's grace. Rather, our persons as well as our obedience are cleansed, purified, i.e. made acceptable through the satisfaction of Christ’s own perfect obedience and death. In sanctification the only sure ground upon which sinner/saints walk and live unto God is the grace of the gospel.

Justification, Sanctification - and all that... Further Considerations

This post is late to the party, as they say, but I wanted to share some thoughts on a passage of Scripture that was in the spotlight a while back. This is offered as part of the conversation not from a pastor/theologian but a ploughboy theologian, and hopefully it will add a worthwhile wrinkle...

Rick Phillips recently "critiqued" Tullian Tchividjian's post, Unburdened, as did several others. Go read both. I don't intend to get into what I think is behind all the criticism that has recently been directed Tullian's way. But I do think part of that criticism has to do with an ongoing debate about the role of law and gospel in the sanctification of the justified sinner.

What I want to do in this post is simply look at one segment of Phillip's essay and then offer some thoughts. In his critique, Phillips takes Tullian to task for not reading 1 John 5 in context. If I'm understanding him, he is saying that John is writing about sanctification to the exclusion of justification, about our obedience not Christ's, and that the faith of which John speaks of is a faith pointing to the experiential change within believers.

To wit, Tullian explains: "Though the commandments are indeed burdensome, that burden has been laid on the shoulders of another. Jesus Christ, who demands that we be perfect, achieves perfection in our place... God's commandments are not burdensome because we do not carry them."

Let me note that what Tullian says here is absolutely and wonderfully true. But it is true of something that John is not writing about. And when applied as the explanation for what John actually is writing about in this verse, it is absolutely and horribly false. John is writing about sanctification, in which believers gain assurance of salvation through our practical obedience to God's commands.

Horribly false? Justification has no bearing on or connection to this passage? The passage is soley about sanctification and the assurance believers derive from their obedience? Whereas Tullian is emphasizing the burden of obedience to the commandments that one at times inwardly experiences as a sinner, albeit a regenerate sinner, Phillips seems to be emphasizing the other side of the coin:

So why does John then state that the commandments are not burdensome? The answer is given in verse 4: "For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world -- our faith."

John is referring to the mighty work of God's grace in our regeneration, which has changed everything for us experientially.

I read Phillips as saying that "our faith" which overcomes the world is a faith that primarily results in an inward change that experientially changes everything! Does he mean, that the inward change is such that as a believer I never feel a burden or struggle to obey the law? It's always helps to look at concrete examples when talking about our obedience.

When someone unexpectedly points out one of your faults with an air of condemnation is your first inclination to effortlessly turn the other cheek and gratefully receive the criticism? Or, if you're like me, is your first impulse to defend and justify yourself even though you know that's the wrong direction to take? And if you do give a response that is in keeping with God's law, isn't it more than likely that - feeling unjustly attacked - you grit your teeth while ignoring your negative inward feelings, force a smile and feebly reply, "Thank you for your feedback. I'll prayerfully consider your words?" Often being a hypocrite to how we strongly (and wrongly) feel and then choosing to be true to our purpose of godly living is painfully hard. One would hardly describe that as the unburdened response of obedience. Do you feel that you have kept God's commandments as he intended? More than likely you feel a sense of shame at your defensiveness and inability to inwardly obey even though you did so outwardly. I'm not sure how much assurance I would be taking from my obedience in this example. Anyone who is married knows exactly what I'm talking about. In fact, it's in those closed door back and forth collisions with another fallen human being that the fly on the wall witnessses the extent of our burdenless keeping of God's commandments.

Moving on... Phillips stops his interpretation at 1 John 5: 4. But why stop there? Doesn't verse 5 play into the context?

4 For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world-our faith. 5 Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

What is the context that John may have had in mind for the phrase "overcomes the world?" One place to look can be found in his gospel, John 16: 31-33, culminating with these verses:

Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe? Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me. These things have I spoken unto you, that in me ye may have peace. In the world ye have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

John knew that when the world's push came to shove, he and all of the disciples did not bear the burden of Christ's commandments. They scattered and left Jesus alone. Jesus knowing this was to be the case pointed them to himself as the One who would comfort them in their failed obedience. To bear Christ's commandments is an obedience that chooses to die to self. And self doesn't naturally will itself to die. The world at that moment appeared to have overcome the disciples! It's the world that brings tribulation to any who would determine to walk in Christ's commandments.

Also in 1 John 2:12-14 -

I write unto you, my little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.
I write unto you, fathers, because ye know him who is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the evil one. I have written unto you, little children, because ye know the Father. I have written unto you, fathers, because ye know him who is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the evil one.

and 1 John 4:4 -

Ye are of God, my little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you than he that is in the world.

What is the faith that overcomes the world of which John speaks in 1 John 5: 4? Is it a faith that changes us inwardly creating the ability to keep or bear the commandments? Well, that is part of it. But do not temptation and sin still raise their ugly heads within us when difficult situations arise, at times drawing us away from the required denial of self to the temptation or outright denial of Christ's commands? Might this faith which John mentions refer not only to our regeneration and new nature in Christ but also a faith that looks to Christ who, through his death and resurrection, is the One that has overcome the world for us?

The faith that looks solely to Christ and his finished work is the faith that receives forgiveness and cleansing of conscience for weak, imperfect obedience, even when we scatter and "leave Christ alone." And let's be honest, our obedience isn't what it ought to be. According to WCF our obedience is weak, still stained with the remnant of sin, and far short of true obedience to God's law:

WCF 13.2. This sanctification is throughout, in the whole man; yet imperfect in this life, there abiding still some remnants of corruption in every part; whence ariseth a continual and irreconcilable war, the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.

WCF 16.4. They who, in their obedience, attain to the greatest height which is possible in this life, are so far from being able to supererogate, and to do more than God requires, as that they fall short of much which in duty they are bound to do.

5. We cannot by our best works merit pardon of sin, or eternal life at the hand of God, by reason of the great disproportion that is between them and the glory to come; and the infinite distance that is between us and God, whom, by them, we can neither profit, nor satisfy for the debt of our former sins, but when we have done all we can, we have done but our duty, and are unprofitable servants: and because, as they are good, they proceed from his Spirit; and as they are wrought by us, they are defiled, and mixed with so much weakness and imperfection, that they cannot endure the severity of God's judgment.

6. Notwithstanding, the persons of believers being accepted through Christ, their good works also are accepted in him; not as though they were in this life wholly unblamable and unreprovable in God's sight; but that he, looking upon them in his Son, is pleased to accept and reward that which is sincere, although accompanied with many weaknesses and imperfections.

John is pointing out that the one who overcomes the world is the one who believes in the Son of God and the work of salvation that he accomplished for his own. But aren't our works/obedience also that which overcomes the world in this life? Well, I'll give a qualified, yes! What then are the works that overcome the world unto eternal life? Doing the works of God.  Again, John's gospel adds some context:

Work not for the food which perisheth, but for the food which abideth unto eternal life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him the Father, even God, hath sealed. They said therefore unto him, What must we do, that we may work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. (John 6:27-29)

Finally, what John writes in 1 John 4 has to be taken into consideration when unpacking chapter 5 verses 2-5 and the relative burden of commandments:

Herein was the love of God manifested in us, that God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No man hath beheld God at any time: if we love one another, God abideth in us, and his love is perfected in us... We love, because he first loved us. (1 John 4:9-12, 19)

"He first loved us" is inseparable from "we love," the keeping of his commandments. It is the good news of God's love, that he sent his Son to be a propitiation for the sins of his elect that changes everything! Believing that gospel, especially since my obedience is continually imperfect and wanting, is the faith that is overcomes. It is this faith that is active in doing the works of God. And it is that gospel, that he first loved us, which supplies grace and power unto sanctification, even salvation (Rom. 1:16). Not just for the future, but it is this gospel of forgiveness and righteousness through faith in Christ alone which now transforms the burdens of the law into a thankful direction of obedience.

Rather than blurring the line between law and gospel and insisting on a sharp separation between Justification and Sanctification, might it be that John is writing just the opposite. We love (obedience to law), because Christ loved us (gospel). Both very distinct yet closely related. We obey (law-keeping), because Christ obeyed for us (law-keeping for us). The law points the way of our obligation which is our reasonable duty, yet as sinners we can never fully accomplish. The gospel announces Christ's satisfactory fulfillment of that obligation for us. The burden of that obligation of the law is lifted because Christ lifted it by bearing it for us. Apart from Christ's bearing the death penalty for our law-breaking (demanded by the law) and keeping the law perfectly for us (required for eternal life) - all of our "sincere obedience" would indeed be unacceptable.

It is the grace of God proclaimed and supplied in the gospel which comforts our conscience, assures us that our obedience/works of the moral law done in faith are sanctified and pleasing to our Father, as well as aids us in our obedience as we battle against the sin which still clings to us. As John Calvin wrote,

In short, I affirm, that not by our own merit but by faith alone, are both our persons and works justified; and that the justification [sanctification] of works depends on the justification [forensic] of the person, as the effect on the cause. (Acts of the Council of Trent with the Antidote)

Law/Gospel Distinction According to Cranmer: Law & Mercy

In the mid-16th century, reformer Thomas Cranmer struck the right note regarding the attitude and disposition the believer is to bring to the hearing of God's Holy Law and his thankful response of obedience.  That note?  When contemplating obedience to God's law never let the word 'Mercy' - found only in the Gospel - be far from one's lips... 

GOD spake these words, and said; I am the Lord thy God: Thou shalt have none other gods but me.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor worship them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, and visit the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, and shew mercy unto thousands in them that love me, and keep my commandments.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless, that taketh his Name in vain.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath-day. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all that thou hast to do; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. In it thou shalt do no manner of work, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, thy man-servant, and thy maid-servant, thy cattle, and the stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and ail that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Honour thy father and thy mother; that thy days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Thou shalt do no murder.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Thou shalt not commit adultery.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Thou shalt not steal.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.    

 Minister. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.     

Minister. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his servant, nor his maid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is his.     

People. Lord, have mercy upon us, and write all these thy laws in our hearts, we beseech thee.

John Owen & Thomas Boston - Distinctions: The Law of Works, The Law of Christ, the Grace of the Gospel...

Thomas Boston writes in his Notes, found in Edward Fisher's The Marrow of Modern Divinity:

No longer under Law

The law of works is the law to be done, that one may be saved; the law of faith is the law to be believed, that one may be saved; the law of Christ is the law of the Saviour, binding his saved people to all the duties of obedience, (Gal 3:12, Acts 16:31)...

The law of works, and the law of Christ, are in substance but one law, even the law of the ten commandments - the moral law - that law which was from the beginning, continuing still the same in its own nature, but vested with different forms. And since that law is perfect, and sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of it, whatever form it be vested with, whether as the law of works or as the law of Christ, all commands of God unto men must needs be comprehended under it...

The distinction between the law of works and the law of Christ, as above explained according to the Scriptures, and the mind of our author, is the same in effect with that of the law, as a covenant of works, and as a rule of life to believers, and ought to be admitted, (Westm. Confess. chap. 19, art. 6). For, (1.) Believers are not under, but dead to the law of works, (Rom 6:14), "For ye are not under the law, but under grace..."

"The law of Christ is an "easy yoke," and a "light burden," (Matt 11:30); but the law of works, to a sinner, is an insupportable burden, requiring works as the condition of justification and acceptance with God, as is clear from the whole of the apostle's reasoning, (Rom 3)."

The point being that the commands of the moral law are, in substance, embodied in both the law as a covenant of works and the law of Christ or third use of the law.  Both are law that command and are binding.  The distinction has to do with the "why" of obedience.  For one under the law as a covenant of works the motive to obey is fear of condemnation/death and the now false hope of meriting eternal life.  For the believer in Christ the motive to obey is gratitude born of grace with no need to fulfill the law's demands whatsoever, for Christ has finished that burdensome task:

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. (Romans 8:1-4)

The good news is that Jesus Christ has fulfilled the righteous requirement of the law for his people.  He has born the law's penalty for sin and has also kept perfectly all the moral demands of the law.  And he has done this for all those who are his - who walk not according to the flesh (i.e. works) but according to the Spirit (i.e faith in Christ).

"The tree must first be, and then the fruit; for the apples make not the tree, but the tree makes the apples. So faith first maketh the person, which afterwards brings forth works. Therefore to do the law without faith, is to make the apples of wood and earth without the tree, which is not to make apples, but mere fantasies." (Fisher, Chapter 3:8)

John Owen writes about believers no longer under the dominion of sin (Romans 6:14), yet who find themselves still struggling against it.  Here he highlights the distinction between Christ's two words, i.e. the law and the gospel and their two different roles in the redemptive economy:

"This, then, is the present case supposed and determined by the apostle: “You that are believers are all of you conflicting with sin. You find it always restless and disquieting, sometimes strong and powerful. When it is in conjunction with any urgent temptation, you are afraid it will utterly prevail over you, to the ruin of your souls. Hence you are wearied with it, groan under it, and cry out for deliverance from it.” All these things the apostle at large insists on in this and the next chapter. “But now,” saith he, “be of good comfort; notwithstanding all these things, and all your fears upon them, sin shall not prevail, it shall not have the dominion, it shall never ruin your souls.” But what ground have we for this hope? what assurance of this success? “This you have,” saith the apostle, “ ‘Ye are not under the law, but under grace;’ or the rule of the grace of God in Christ Jesus, administered in the gospel.” But how doth this give relief? “Why, it is the ordinance, the instrument of God, which he will use unto this end — namely, the communication of such supplies of grace and spiritual strength as shall eternally defeat the dominion of sin.” 

"This is one principal difference between the law and the gospel, and was ever so esteemed in the church of God, until all communication of efficacious grace began to be called in question:  

"The law guides, directs, commands, all things that are against the interest and rule of sin. It [the law] judgeth and condemneth both the things that promote it  [rule of sin] and the persons that do them; it [the law] frightens and terrifies the consciences of those who are under its dominion. But if you shall say unto it, “What then shall we do? this tyrant, this enemy, is too hard for us. What aid and assistance against it [sin] will you [law] afford unto us? what power will you communicate unto its destruction?” Here the law is utterly silent, or says that nothing of this nature is committed unto it of God; nay, the strength it hath it gives unto sin for the condemnation of the sinner: “The strength of sin is the law.” But the gospel, or the grace of it, is the means and instrument of God for the communication of internal spiritual strength unto believers. By it do they receive supplies of the Spirit or aids of grace for the subduing of sin and the destruction of its dominion. By it they may say they can do all things, through Him that enables them.  [bracketed explanatory words and emphasis added]

[A Treatise of the Dominion of Sin and Grace by John Owen]