# Not Under the Law, But Under Grace



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

I'd like to gain a better understanding of the role of the law in the lives of believers. 

In churches today, at least the ones I've attended, there's not much said about the law, other than that we're not under the law now, but under grace. I can't remember the 10 commandments ever even being listed in a sermon, let alone expounded upon. 

Does anybody know of any good online articles or sermons that discuss the law? I think ideally I'm looking for something that has as a starting point a discussion of verses that are commonly used to show that we are not under law but under grace, how/why these verses don't say what is commonly thought, and then discusses the proper use and purpose of the law.

In addition to the articles or sermons, for those who may have come from a similar background, were there particular verses or passages that caught your attention that God used to show you that the law was more than just an OT set of rules for the people of Israel?


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

Matthew's article The Nature of the Moral Law looks like a good starting point.


----------



## Average Joey (Feb 7, 2005)

I looked on Spurgeon`s website and found this sermon on James 2:17:

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/3434.htm


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> I looked on Spurgeon`s website and found this sermon on James 2:17:
> http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/3434.htm


Joe,
Thanks for checking around for me. It turns out that this sermon wasn't quite what I'm looking for. Nevertheless, it was a blessing to read and I appreciate it. 

One thing I always like about Spurgeon's sermons is the illustrations and word pictures he often uses. I liked the illustration he used at the end of the pilot on the ship to illustrate that faith without works is dead.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by blhowes_
> Matthew's article The Nature of the Moral Law looks like a good starting point.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Feb 7, 2005)

Check out the article matthew also wrote on the Sabbath...he lays a foundation of law and necessity in the believer's life.


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by matthew11v25_
> Check out the article matthew also wrote on the Sabbath...he lays a foundation of law and necessity in the believer's life.


Matthew,
Thanks. I printed it out and will read it on the way home.
Bob


----------



## Average Joey (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by blhowes_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> ...



I was actually hoping there was a sermon online from him for James 2:8.If that is something you wanted a sermon for?


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Average Joey_
> I was actually hoping there was a sermon online from him for James 2:8.If that is something you wanted a sermon for?



I guess, in general, and for starters, I'm looking for something that addresses this idea, from Matthew's article _The Nature of the Moral Law_:


> The error that many Christians believe is that the Law was given to men so that they could be justified by it. *They then believe that after Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, the Law becomes obsolete in the shadow of the grace offered in the Gospel*.



It seems that, because of the prevalent view, the schoolmaster that's designed to bring people to Christ (Gal 3:24), is completely bypassed. The law doesn't seem to be used to bring anybody to Christ, and after somebody believes in Jesus, there still doesn't seem to be any use for the law since we're under grace. As Matthew said, it has become obsolete. 

What I'm really looking for is something that discusses verses people use to come to the conclusion that the Law is obsolete, how they're looking at those verses incorrectly, and then how these and other verses address our relationship to the law.

Does that make sense?

Regarding what you asked about James 2:8, maybe something more like James 2:9-11 would be more along the lines that I'm looking for. (unless Spurgeon talks about the Royal Law's relationship to the 10 commandments.

[Edited on 2-7-2005 by blhowes]


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

I wanted to do a search, at A Puritan's Mind and on the internet, but I can't remember the word. Its one of those fancy words you guys use to describe a church that believes the law is not relevant to Christians nowadays. Does anybody know the word I'm trying to think of?

[Edited on 2-7-2005 by blhowes]


----------



## JohnV (Feb 7, 2005)

Bob, are you thinking of 'Theonomy'?


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by JohnV_
> Bob, are you thinking of 'Theonomy'?


No, that wasn't it. I think it may have been anti___ something


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Feb 7, 2005)

Antinomian.


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> Antinomian.


That's the word. Thanks.


----------



## ReformedWretch (Feb 7, 2005)

I love the final words of Matthews article!



> Obedience to the Law demonstrates we are covenant people, and conforms us into the image of Jesus Christ, where the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily. Neglect of the Law demonstrates we are cursed; it demonstrates we are repulsed by the divine nature of God and do not desire to be conformed into that image. We are then covenant breakers, lawbreakers, and lawless, now under malediction. To say, then, that in the New Testament we are under grace, and not under Law, is to say we have no relation to the attributes of God. This in turn means we have no relation to the attributes of Christ’s divinity, and no relationship to the reason He lived a perfect life in the plan of Redemption. Such a move to Antinomian ideas is contrary to the Gospel and repudiation of it.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Feb 7, 2005)

Bob, if you don't have the book already I highly recommend the Marrow of Modern Divinity by edward Fisher with notes by Thomas Boston. It has a great treatment on the use of the law in both the covenant of works and grace.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Feb 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> Bob, if you don't have the book already I highly recommend the Marrow of Modern Divinity by edward Fisher with notes by Thomas Boston. It has a great treatment on the use of the law in both the covenant of works and grace.





Also, Thomas Watson's treatment on _The Ten Commandments_ is worth adding to the reading list.


----------



## blhowes (Feb 7, 2005)

Patrick and Andrew,
Thanks for your recommendations. I found copies of both online and will add them to my reading list.
Bob


----------



## blhowes (Feb 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by joshua_
> There are those who hold to an extreme New Covenant Theology (and I do stress "an", there are some New Covenant Theologies who aren't quite Covenantal in their understanding, yet they do see a great importantce in the law, especially the 10 Commandmenst), who would say that the Sermon on the Mount by Christ was a "greater" law than those given at Sinai. To say such is foolishness. We read all the time that "the law of the Lord is perfect." i.e. lacking in nothing. If the law that Christ was preaching was "greater", that implies a deficiency in the earlier law, thus a deficiency in God. We know that such is preposterous.


I agree. It seems that some people think that when Jesus said "...but I say unto you", he was putting his words somehow in contrast to the words that Moses spake. And this is just after, in verses 17 to 19, Jesus talks about the permanence of the law. Here's what Gill says:


> Mat 5:22 - *But I say unto you*,.... This is a Rabbinical way of speaking, used when a question is determined, and a false notion is refuted; it is a magisterial form of expression, and well suits with Christ, the great teacher and master in Israel; who spake as one having authority, opposing himself, not to the law of "Moses, thou shalt not kill"; but to the false gloss the ancient doctors had put upon it, with which their later ones agreed.



[Edited on 2-8-2005 by blhowes]


----------

