There is some confusion today concerning how Christians should relate to the Mosaic Law. Some argue that it has absolutely no place in the lives of believers, and that we only live and walk by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Consequently, in this blog I wish to address the theological question of how many “purposes” there are for the Law of Moses (hereafter “the Law”). Please note, that this discussion does not address the “moral law” that God has instilled into everyone (i.e., our conscience; cf., Rom 2.12-16); instead, this is about the Law that Moses received directly from God as recorded in the Pentateuch, which is also commonly referred to as the Mosaic Covenant. I approach this topic with some trepidation since some have different understandings and misunderstandings concerning the “purposes” of the Law. To be sure, there are many purposes of the Law, but with respect to theological debate of our time, some argue that there are only 2 fundamental purposes for the Law, while others assert that today there exists 3 purposes for the Law in the lives of believers. I will attempt to address these issues briefly, which almost assuredly means that I will either be misunderstood or offend someone. However, no offense is intended.
The First Purpose of the Law
The first purpose of the Law is easy and virtually everyone agrees as to what it was, which is that it was a covenant between God and Israel that provided for the Jews the “legal” parameters of how they would live with God in the Promise Land. More specifically, it explained how a sinful people (i.e., the Jews) could co-exist with a holy God and worship him while living in the land that he had given them. It is extremely important to be very precise concerning this use of the Law since some over-generalize it, thus leading many into a critical misunderstanding that Law was and still is a means to salvation. The Law was never meant to provide salvation to those who obeyed it (Gal 3.11, Heb 10.1-10). Consequently, the Law was a contractual agreement between the Israelites and the God of Abraham concerning how God would permit them to live in the land that he has promised to Abraham and his descendants. This contract (i.e., covenant) also included instructions as to how they could remain fruitful in the land, a land which God has unconditionally promised to the Jews forever. Consequently, anyone that attempts to apply the entire Law, or just parts of it, to their lives today (e.g., the Seventh Day Adventist) while living outside the Land of Israel has completely misunderstand this first essential function of the Law. The Law explained to Israel how they could enjoy the Lord’s presence and his blessings without offending him by their propensity to sin. Regarding the inevitable occurrence of sin, the Law revealed and explained for the Jews what God required from them for the purpose of providing temporarily atonement for individual breaches of this covenant. Essentially, the Law was too curb the sinfulness God’s people as they lived in the land with him, as well as while they were identified as a people set apart by him for his purposes; otherwise God’s holiness would require that he discipline an unfaithful generation, and even potentially temporarily casting them out of the land (which inevitably happened). For further explanation concerning this purpose for the Law read Deuteronomy 27-34. Some refer to this function as the “civic” purpose of the Law. This designation, however, can cause serious confusion since the Law is often described as having 3 parts: a “moral” component (which identified universal sinful acts [e.g., murder and theft] and godly responsibilities [e.g., marriage and family obligations]), a “cultic” or religious component (identifying how to practice the Hebrew faith), and a “civic” or “social” component (identifying civil responsibilities and reconciling legal disputes). These divisions may help some today understand different emphases found within the Law; however, the Jews in Moses’ day would not have viewed the Law in such a manner. They would have viewed the Law as a whole, all of which would have been morally obligatory. The Law in its entirety was a spiritual covenant between Israel and God, and there was no “non-moral” or secular aspect to it. Moreover, stating that the Law focuses on 3 different areas of Jewish life has little to do with ascertaining whether the Law has 2 or 3 “purposes” for believers today. The Law’s different focuses within the practice of the Hebrew faith is not germane to the current discussion. Nevertheless, at the risk of being misunderstood, the constitutional function of the Law will be referred to as a “civic” purpose of the Law, and it was this specific purpose that was the Law’s original function. Moreover, it should be observed that the Law was given only to the Jews, it was not also given to any Gentiles, nations, or other people groups. It was given to the genetic descendants of Abraham, and it was given to provide the Jews with the necessary directions for obeying and worshipping God while living in the land that he had forever promised to Abraham and his offspring.
A Second Purpose of the Law
Paul identified another purpose of the Law in Galatians 3.15-4.7, which is to convict people of their sin and their need for atonement, justification, and redemption. In short, the Law also taught Jews (as well as people today regardless of their ethnicity) of their need for a savior. This purpose is at times referred to as the “theological” or Christocentric use for the Law, and on this purpose Evangelicals agree. The Law was never a conduit for salvation (contrary to what some from the New Perspective may suggest, or others that promote various forms of a “works based” soteriologies). Paul explained that a purpose for the Law now was that of an educator (i.e., a tutor). It teaches sinners of their need for a savior, which Moses himself prophesied would someday come (Dt 18.15). It should be noted that this was always a purpose of the Law. The Law always revealed to the Jews, and by extension all people, that they were sinners, and therefore in need of redemption and atonement. While Gentiles were not required to enact the Law in their own countries, once exposed to its contents they would certainly learn what they already knew about themselves, which is that they are sinners and thus in need of redemption. And finally we now know that Jesus Christ is the perfect sacrifice for our sins, and thus he is the only savior available for all humanity (Acts 4.12, Jn 14.6).
A Third Purpose of the Law
Whether or not there is a “third purpose” of the Law is where the majority of disagreement occurs. Those who believe there is a third function of the Law assert it may be used as an instrument to educate believers concerning the will of God with respect to specific issues, topics, and question, thus aiding the believer’s ability to experience practical or progressive sanctification (as opposed to positional sanctification). This third function of the Law may be referred to as the “didactic purpose.” However, some argue that advocating for such a purpose is a contradiction to what it means to be a Christian. The argument being that promoting the Law as functional in the life of a believer misdirects them from living by faith in Christ alone; consequently, they deny that the Law possesses any didactic benefit or function for anyone that has received Christ (e.g., some modern Lutherans and Reformed theologians). Regardless of what some theologians may argue, in order to answer the question of whether there is a “third purpose” of the Law one simply needs to look at the example set forth by the apostle Paul (who originally identified the second purpose of the Law). For example, twice the apostle Paul quoted a commandment found in the Law (Dt 25.4) in order to provide guidance to believers on matters involving Christian practice. Paul first quoted Deuteronomy 25.4 in 1 Corinthians 9.9 and then again later in 1 Timothy 5.18. The issue at hand was whether pastors should receive remuneration for ministries to their churches. Paul’s appeal to the Law in this instant fulfills neither a Christocentric function (i.e., leading one to faith in Christ), or civic purpose of the Law (i.e., explaining to the Jews what God required of them while living in the Land). The importance of these passages is that they demonstrate that Paul practiced a third use of the Law (whether purposefully or not one can only guess—heaven only knows if Paul would have engaged in this debate). This practice of Paul demonstrates that he believed that the Law provided insight for believers with respect to what was correct or godly behavior in the eyes of God. If Paul did not believe there was a didactic purpose for the Law, then he would not have employed commandments found in the Law to teach the church at Corinth or his disciple Timothy what God viewed as appropriate behavior and/or responsibilities of believers. He certainly would have refrained from using it if he thought it might promote some twisted form of legalism; thus, confusing believers on how to walk by faith in Christ. Nevertheless, Paul saw no danger in employing commandments found in the Law in order to teach believers how they should live with one another and walk with God. Conversely, Paul never taught believers that they should only seek the Holy Spirit’s guidance concerning matters pertaining to godliness. No, Paul gladly used the Law to educate Christians with respect to what God expected from them. Consequently, with the current discussion in view, it is a well defended conclusion to assert that there is in fact a “third” function of the Law. Moreover, Paul himself who wrote that “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3.16-17). When Paul referred to “all Scripture” he was most definitely referring to the Law, as well as the entire Old Testament, since at that time there was no “New Testament” to which Christians could turn. Consequently, the Law has a didactic function for believers today, and without question it is an essential aid for helping Christians walk in the Spirit as they seek to obey the Lord Jesus Christ to the glory of God the Father. While the Law can aid us in walking in a sanctified manner, it is not the source of our sanctification. Obedience to anything found in the Law, or the rest of the Old Testament for that matter, does not make us holier people, only Christ provides us with positional sanctification (i.e., eternal life and salvation), as well as progressive sanctification (walking faithfully with him throughout our daily lives as we seek to fulfill his will through the guidance of the Holy Spirit). Consequently, while both the Old and New Testaments teach us about the Lord, godliness, what he expects of us, and his will for our lives, it is only the Lord Jesus Christ who makes us holy.
Doc.
Copyright ©, 2014 Monte Shanks