The Larger Catechism

101 Q. What is the preface to the ten commandments?

A. The preface to the ten commandments is contained in these words, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.[436] Wherein God manifesteth his sovereignty, as being JEHOVAH, the eternal, immutable, and almighty God;[437] having his being in and of himself,[438] and giving being to all his words[439] and works:[440] and that he is a God in covenant, as with Israel of old, so with all his people;[441] who, as he brought them out of their bondage in Egypt, so he delivereth us from our spiritual thraldom;[442] and that therefore we are bound to take him for our God alone, and to keep all his commandments.[443]

Sovereign God

In this preface, we learn three basic truths about God. First of all, it reveals something of God’s sovereign nature. “Wherein God manifesteth his sovereignty, as being JEHOVAH, the eternal, immutable, and almighty God; having his being in and of himself, and giving being to all his words and works:…” The phrase “I am the LORD your God…” reveals the name of God as YHWH, his covenant name (Ex. 6:3). God makes Himself known to His people. The names of God always revealed something of His character and YHWH means He is who He is: “And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” (Ex. 3:14) YHWH is later (in Is. 44:6) revealed as “the King of Israel” (“Thus saith the LORD [YHWH] the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD [YHWH] of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.”). As His name reveals, He is sufficient, needing nothing and depending on no one: “having his being in and of himself, and giving being to all his words and works” (cf. Acts 17:24, 28).

His name reveals His unique nature and manifests His character. We serve, worship, and obey a God whom we know. This God who revealed Himself as YHWH is by virtue of His name sovereign. Vos put it this way:

No creature may question the righteousness of any act of God: to do so is the height of impiety and irreverence. The sovereignty of God also implies that God is ultimate: there is no principle or law above or beyond God to which God himself is responsible. God is responsible only to himself; his own nature is his only law. There is nothing above or beyond him. God’s sovereignty is manifested in a special way in his work of redemption. Redemption from sin is wholly God’s work, and its benefits are bestowed wholly according to God’s sovereign good pleasure. He saves exactly whom he purposes to save, and does so by his absolute, almighty power.

We can only know and understand God because of His revelation. In giving us the commandments, He first reveals Himself to us. By saying “I am YHWH…” much is implied in the name (as enumerated in the catechism). Surely we should remember this as we study the Ten Commandments. They are God’s commandments and God has revealed Himself to us — we must know and understand whom we obey; we obey His commandments and not just abstract moral principles or laws.

 

Covenant God

The second thing we learn is that God is our covenant God: “I am the LORD your God…” The LC says, “that he is a God in covenant, as with Israel of old, so with all his people…” A believer serves his God. A husband loves his wife and not just any wife. The essence of the covenant is that God is our God and that we are His people. We find this in all the expressions of the covenant. It is found in the Abrahamic (Gen. 17:7), the Mosaic (Ex. 6:6, 7; 19:4, 5; Lev. 11:45; Deut. 4:20; 29:13), the Davidic (2K. 11:17; 2Chron. 23:16), and the New Covenant (Jer. 24:7; 31:33; 32:37f.). The God who revealed Himself as the great “I AM” is also our God.

Is this God (as expressed in Exodus 20) our God? Can we say that the God who revealed Himself to Israel and gave the Ten Commandments is the Christian’s God as well? Has He entered into a covenant with us? If He is our God, then His Word ought to binds us. To say this God is our God but these commandments do not pertain to us would demand some sort of an explanation.[1] At least for now, we need to affirm that this same God is in a covenant with us, His New Covenant people. The phrase “and that he is a God in covenant, as with Israel of old, so with all his people” means that as God related to Israel through the covenant so He is “a God in covenant” with us as well.

The phrase therefore teaches two things. One is that God enters into a relationship with His people by means of the covenant.[2] As He did so with Israel, so He did so with us. Secondly, as already implied, we, as New Covenant people, are in a covenant relationship with the same God. The God who gave the Ten Commandments is also our covenant God. Romans 3:29 says, “Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.” It is the same God in both the Old and New Testaments.

God is not polygamous. His covenant is with His people, one people in Christ; we are all one (Jews and Gentiles) in Christ. It is the one people who through history included both Jews and Gentiles; God does not have a separate covenant with the Jews and a different covenant with Gentiles — He only has one wife prepared for Himself (cf. Rev. 21-22).

 

Redeeming God

The preface reveals a wonderful third truth about God. God is a redeeming God. His grace precedes our obedience: “who, as he brought them out of their bondage in Egypt, so he delivereth us from our spiritual thraldom…” As the God in covenant delivered Israel from their bondage in Egypt so He delivered us from our spiritual bondage to sin and under the devil’s power.

The divines used a very powerful and pregnant passage to support this theological statement. They cite Luke 1:74-75: “that we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him all our days.” Using OT language and imagery, Zechariah prophesied that God had “redeemed his people” (v. 68). This redemption is the salvation envisioned and promised in the OT: “has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David, as he spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old, that we should be saved from our enemies…” (vv. 70-71). This is OT language used to explain the role of John the Baptist preparing the way of the Lord. The Messiah’s coming brings about deliverance from our enemies: “to show mercy promised to our fathers and to remember his holy covenant, the oath that he swore to our father Abraham, to grant us that we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him all our days.” That deliverance was in keeping with his “holy covenant” he made with Abraham.

The statement clearly teaches that the coming of Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant and that His coming is also described in terms of deliverance. That deliverance, we learn in the NT, is ultimately more powerful than any deliverance from foreign political powers. That deliverance is “from our spiritual thralldom/bondage.” That is how the NT explains Zechariah’s prophecy in Colossians 1:13-14, “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” Zechariah foresaw their/our deliverance and we clearly understand that deliverance in terms of deliverance from spiritual bondage (and the full redemption of all things to follow).

We have been delivered from a greater bondage and therefore our obligations are greater and not lesser. Vos put it like this:

Every child of God has been redeemed from a “house of bondage” vastly more powerful, cruel, and tyrannical than the physical bondage of ancient Egypt. This statement in the preface to the Ten Commandments causes us to realizes (a) that as Christians, we have been delivered from bitter slavery; and (b) that this deliverance was not our own achievement, but was accomplished by the sovereign, almighty power of God. (Vos)

As Israel received the Ten Commandments with their redemption behind them so we stand before His law with our redemption accomplished. We are in a parallel position. We are the redeemed people before a gracious God who calls us to obey His commandments. As the NIV translated it, “Therefore… in view of God’s mercy…” (Rom. 12:1). We obey in view of His mercies! “For the grace of God has appeared, bring salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness…” (Titus 2:11-12).

1. Always remember that redemption precedes obedience.

It is because we are redeemed by Christ, we seek to obey His Word. We do not obey to save ourselves but obey in view of His mercies. We believe and are justified and therefore we are saved; in that estate of salvation, we work out our salvation with fear and trembling.

2. If we forget this order, we fall into legalism.

Once we confuse this order (redemption precedes obedience), we will fall into “legalism.” That is, we will tend to believe that our obedience somehow merits God’s favor, pardon, acceptance, etc. We may never explicitly state that our works saves us but our slavish spirit will act as if that were the case.

3. This preface must always accompany our study of the Ten Commandments.

Without it, a Muslim could practically agree with everything. Without it, the “Law” stands on its own with a God commanding obedience. There are no grace and mercy in view and we will stand condemned each time. We must look at the Ten Commandments through the lens of redemptive grace or we will fall prey to works righteousness.

 

Our God and His Commandments

The preface to the Ten Commandments leads us to this point: “and that therefore we are bound to take him for our God alone, and to keep all his commandments.” As Israel had God as their God, that He was their God by means of the covenant, and that He redeemed them, so we are in the same position or condition. We stand as a covenant people redeemed by grace called upon to obey all his commandments.

To put it more plainly, can we truly accept this God as our covenant God and refuse to accept his commandments? What about all the Ten Commandments? Do we get to pick and choose which of the Ten Commandments should bind us? Has God’s moral law for Israel changed?

Hebrews 1:1ff. teach that God continually revealed Himself to his people. But in the final stage of redemptive history, “he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.” If Israel had to obey in terms of the Old Covenant (OC) revelation, then how much for us in terms of the New Covenant: “For since the message declared by angels proved to be reliable, and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?” (Heb. 2:2-3) In the OC, Israel was to obey because God was their God: “Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the LORD your God.” (Lev. 18:30) “Therefore shall ye observe all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them: I am the LORD.” (Lev. 19:37) If that holds true in terms of what they received, how much more for us?

The “lesser to the greater argument” applies here (or an a fortiori argument, an argument from yet a stronger reason). We have a greater and stronger reason to obey His commandments. Somehow we have drawn the opposite conclusion. We reason that since we are in the NC, we are less bound. But God has not become less holy and what He has done for us is far greater than what He did for Israel (in redemptive historical terms). As Peter said (1Pet. 1:15, 16), “But as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.”” The verse he cited comes from Lev. 19:2. The same rule and principle used in the OT applies to us, and even more so. Peter goes on to add this inducement (1Pet. 1:17-19):

And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile, knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot.

Because he cited Leviticus 19:2 to challenge NC believers, we learn something important here. In fact, the casual way with which Peter appeals to the Old Testament should challenge us all. Since he mentioned how the prophets were serving us (1 Pet. 1:12) in the beginning of the chapter, therefore he cites Lev. 19:2 because God’s Word pertains to all of His people.

Peter assumes that the OT writings are authoritative and normative for his Christian readers, regardless of their previous ethnic origin. He makes no distinction between the Jewish and the Gentile Christian in his application, nor does the span of time between Leviticus and his letter mitigate the relevance of God’s ancient revelation of himself. By quoting from Leviticus, Peter establishes the principle that the holiness to which the Christian is called in Christ is consistent with God’s character as revealed in the ancient covenant with Israel. However, Peter does not enjoin on his Christian readers the specifics of the Levitical religion of ancient Israel. In terms of moral transformation, the goal of both the old and the new covenants is the same—to create a people who morally conform to God’s character.[3]

God’s moral character is spelled out in His law. Those laws in the OC and especially the Ten Commandments were not “incidental.” They revealed something of His holy character. For example, the “speed limit” is arbitrary. Its only moral force comes from the Bible’s teaching concerning obedience to civil magistrates. However, there is nothing intrinsically binding in the speed limit since it is arbitrary. God’s law, on the other hand, reveals His character and we are called to be conformed to His character. So the preface reveals “a declaration of God’s authority to enforce, and of his mercy to oblige us to the obedience of, those laws, which he delivers.”[4]

[1] I well understand the dispensational arguments regarding this but we cannot enter into that debate at this time.

[2] An interesting debate within the Reformed camp has recently garnered some attention. Did Adam ever exist outside of the covenant and was the covenant an extra layer placed (graciously) on Adam? See Jeffrey C. Waddington, “Sic et Non. Views in Review: Westminster Seminary California Distinctives? Part III. II. The Reformed Two Kingdoms Doctrine,” The Confessional Presbyterian 10, (2014): 189-204 (esp. 193-194).

[3] Wayne Grudem, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, vol. 17 (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 113.

[4] Ezekiel Hopkins, The Works of Ezekiel Hopkins, 3 vols. (Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1997), 1:271.

 

The Larger Catechism

Questions 100-101

100 Q. What special things are we to consider in the ten commandments?

A. We are to consider in the ten commandments, the preface, the substance of the commandments themselves, and several reasons annexed to some of them, the more to enforce them.

Question 100[1]

This question serves as a brief introduction to what is to come. First, it tells us what is the biggest “division”[2] in the Ten Commandments, namely, the preface and the “substance of the commandments.” How we understand the two parts and how they relate serve as important keys to rightly understanding the purpose of God’s law. The second point reminds us that some of the commandments offer “reasons” for the commandment (e.g., second and fifth commandments). These reasons compel us to obey them that much more. For example, a mother can declare she is your mother and that should be reason enough to obey her. She could also add more details of her relationship to you (I sacrificed for you, gave up many opportunities to be with you, prayed for you, live as an example before you, etc.). This would make the son’s obedience that much more compelling.

 

101 Q. What is the preface to the ten commandments?

A. The preface to the ten commandments is contained in these words, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.[436] Wherein God manifesteth his sovereignty, as being JEHOVAH, the eternal, immutable, and almighty God;[437] having his being in and of himself,[438] and giving being to all his words[439] and works:[440] and that he is a God in covenant, as with Israel of old, so with all his people;[441] who, as he brought them out of their bondage in Egypt, so he delivereth us from our spiritual thraldom;[442] and that therefore we are bound to take him for our God alone, and to keep all his commandments.[443]

[436] Exodus 20:2. I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [437] Isaiah 44:6. Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. [438] Exodus 3:14. And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. [439] Exodus 6:3. And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them. [440] Acts 17:24, 28. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands…. For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. [441] Genesis 17:7. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. Romans 3:29. Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also. [442] Luke 1:74-75. That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life. [443] 1 Peter 1:15, 17-18. But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation…. And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers. Leviticus 18:30. Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the LORD your God. Leviticus 19:37. Therefore shall ye observe all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them: I am the LORD.

 

Introduction

The important role of the preface to the ten commandments must be carefully understood. If we do not take it seriously or we relativize it, then the ten commandments will merely stand out as external laws from God having no real and personal relationship to us. The preface helps us to see that we obey a redemptive God and not some sovereign arbitrary deity who wields absolute authority as our creator (cf. like Allah). The preface sets the right context for the commandments.

Furthermore, people debate over the binding nature of this or that commandment (especially the fourth). That may be all well and good (though it is not) but those concerns cannot be rightly answered if the believer does not accurately grasp the role of the preface. In fact, unless one can affirm the preface for himself, the ten commandments will elude him. It is in the preface we learn of our specific relationship to the Law maker.

Unfortunately, some have used the preface to disregard the ten commandments. They argue that the preface automatically limits itself to the Israelites: “This law was given to Israel exclusively, which is seen in the opening word.”[3] The law should have been rejected, they argue.

It was a fatal thing, which all the people did when they answered together, “all that the Lord hath spoken we will do.” It was a presumptuous declaration, which sprung from self-confidence and showed clearly that they had no appreciation for that Grace, which had visited them in Egypt and brought them hitherto. They had received grace, they needed grace. With the vow they had made, they had put themselves under the law. The legal covenant had its beginning with the rejection of the Covenant of Grace, and the legal covenant ends with the acceptance of Grace.[4]

This sort of argument borders on being ridiculous because God’s redeemed people were not allowed to “choose” or reject God’s covenant of grace with them. God’s redemption bound them to Himself.[5] They did not stand before God at Mt. Sinai to “negotiate” the terms of their relationship with their Redeemer (who brought them out of Egypt). The sovereign God did not bring through the Red Sea and the desert to solicit their feedback and then broker a covenant relationship. Furthermore, this implies that God had less than perfect intentions. Did God give the law to “trap” them, to make it worse for Israel after He redeemed them? Gaebelein’s reasoning makes God look like a diabolical jinni who offered Israel something that would ultimately harm them.

We cannot see how this truncated view of biblical history does justice to the Bible’s overall redemptive teaching. It assumes what God commanded was only for the Jews. Rather, we should look at it in a way similar to Michael Horton. “The Old Testament is not merely the part of our Bibles that predicted a coming Messiah and was rendered irrelevant when that Messiah arrived; it is part of one full, complete, running drama of redemption, and beginning with Matthew’s Gospel is like walking into a movie halfway into the story. It is like thinking you are telling a good joke when all you can remember is the punch line.”[6]

Israel’s redemption from Egypt was not just for them but a “down payment on the great redemption to be accomplished” by Christ.[7] That is, it is just one act of redemption in the history of redemption signifying the ultimate redemption to come. Their “exodus” was our exodus and in their experience of God’s deliverance from Egypt, they began to experience the ultimate deliverance to come in Christ. The OT pointed to Christ and to what He would do (Lk. 24:25ff.) and the exodus pointed to Christ’s redemption.

The OT moved beyond the great deliverance from Egypt. Jeremiah announced that another deliverance would come: “Therefore, behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when it shall no longer be said, ‘As the LORD lives who brought up the people of Israel out of the land of Egypt,’ but ‘As the LORD lives who brought up the people of Israel out of the north country and out of all the countries where he had driven them.’ For I will bring them back to their own land that I gave to their fathers.” (Jer. 16:14, 15) But that deliverance gave way to the ultimate deliverance, namely, their deliverance from their sin. Zechariah, John the Baptist’s father, blessed the Lord because “he has visited and redeemed his people and has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David…” (Lk. 1:68ff.) Each deliverance gave way to this final deliverance in Christ.

But the great deliverance accomplished through Jesus Christ would surpass every other deliverance. The old Passover is replaced by the new one, for which Christ Himself has become the sacrificed Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7). The deliverance from Egypt became our deliverance from the power of darkness, from the slavery of sin, so that we might receive a place in the kingdom of Christ (Col. 1:13; 1 Peter 2:9).[8]

The interpretation we offered works on the fundamental assumption of God’s overall redemptive purpose in Scripture — the same God working out His covenant of grace in history in the OT culminates it in Christ. It is the same covenant of grace administered differently in the various covenants but the substance is the same in all. To discount the preface and the Decalogue chops off the redemptive flow of biblical history. We should be able to personally embrace Ex. 20:2, “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.”

If this preface was sufficient to compel the Israelites to obey God then the reasons for our obedience are that much stronger. That is, if political and national liberation sufficed to bind Israel to God (though the liberation was much more than political and national), then our liberation from sin and our eternal redemption should bind us to Him that much more. The least we could do, as it were, is to obey the Ten Commandments. Greater redemption should not bind us to something less (which seems to be the general thrust of many who reject the Ten Commandments).

[1] Both Vos and Ridgley chose not to comment on this question. They listed the question and answer but neither one gave any explanation. This is not the most helpful question and the LC would have remained intact without it. Also, this question needs no “proof text” since it merely observes what is already plain in the ten commandments. It could say, “We find the ten commandments in these commandments of God.” This statement merely notes what appears to be evident.

[2] Division is not the best word because the ten commandments work as a whole.

[3] Arno C. Gaebelein, The Book of Exodus: A Complete Analysis of Exodus with Annotations (New York: “Our Hope” Publication Office, 1912), 49.

[4] Arno C. Gaebelein, The Book of Exodus, 48.

[5] Sadly, even a Reformed NT scholar said something similar in his essay. See T. David Gordon, “Abraham and Sinai Contrasted in Galatians 3:6-14,” in The Law is not of Faith: Essays on Works and Grace in the Mosaic Covenant, ed. Bryan D. Estelle, J. V. Fesko, and David Van Drunen (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2009), 251.

[6] Michael Horton, The Law of Perfect Freedom (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1993), 28.

[7] Horton, The Law of Perfect Freedom, 28.

[8] Jochem Douma, The Ten Commandments: Manual for the Christian Life, trans. Nelson D. Kloosterman (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1996), 6.

The Larger Catechism

Question 98

98. Q. Where is the moral law summarily comprehended?

A. The moral law is summarily comprehended in the ten commandments, which were delivered by the voice of God upon Mount Sinai, and written by him in two tables of stone;[420] and are recorded in the twentieth chapter of Exodus. The four first commandments containing our duty to God, and the other six our duty to man.[421]

 

Scriptural Defense and Commentary

[420] Deuteronomy 10:4. And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the LORD spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them unto me. Exodus 34:1-4. And the LORD said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest. And be ready in the morning, and come up in the morning unto mount Sinai, and present thyself there to me in the top of the mount. And no man shall come up with thee, neither let any man be seen throughout all the mount; neither let the flocks nor herds feed before that mount. And he hewed two tables of stone like unto the first; and Moses rose up early in the morning, and went up unto mount Sinai, as the LORD had commanded him, and took in his hand the two tables of stone. [421] Matthew 22:37-40. Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

 

Introduction

Most Christians believe that the Ten Commandments are very important and that in some sense, they should be obeyed. Most of us regard the Ten Commandments as being unique or special and yet cannot really explain why they must be so regarded. That is, we all heard about the Ten Commandments but why do we regard them more than the other laws in the Bible? For example, should we not obey the laws concerning how a man is to regard his own brother’s wife should his brother die (Levirate[1] Marriage, see Deut. 25:5ff.)? After all, it is something God commanded. If we say that it pertains only to Israel, then could not the same be said of the Ten Commandments since the preface clearly has their deliverance in mind?

Another sad fact complicates the matter. Though many speak of the Ten Commandments, these same people cannot tell you what those Ten Commandments are.[2] In short, most Christians tend to believe that the Ten Commandments are important and relevant but only a few of them can actually recount them.

The divines developed the topic of “moral law” before explaining its teaching on the Ten Commandments. These Ten Commandments are actually part of God’s moral law. The general idea of the moral law leads us to the specific moral laws of the Ten Commandments.

 

Summarily Comprehended

The LC answers, “The moral law is summarily comprehended in the ten commandments…” That is, the God’s moral law finds its summary teaching in the Ten Commandments. They are not the complete and exhaustive teaching of the moral law but its summary. Thomas Vincent says the commandments contain “the sum and chief heads of the law.”[3] Ezekiel Hopkins suggests that the Bible is “the Statute-Book of God’s Kingdom” in which is “the whole body of the heavenly law…” Then he adds, “And the Decalogue, or Ten Commandments, is a summary or brief epitome of those laws…”[4]

If we continued to study the “moral law,” we would eventually be compelled to become more specific. For example, we can speak about how our country is governed by laws. Some political parties believe we are bound to those laws while another group may take it lightly. Those are important issues. But in the end, those laws of our country must become concrete and specific. Where are these laws to be found?

The same question about the “moral law” can be asked. Where do we find this moral law? They can be found in summary form in the Ten Commandments. In fact, Vos argues, “Rightly interpreted, they include every moral duty enjoined by God.” There is a reason for this kind of thinking. If the Ten Commandments serve as a summary teaching of God’s moral law, then all moral duties could find their connection to one of the Ten Commandments by direct application, by inference, etc. Though his statement may be difficult to prove from each moral commandment of the Bible, yet his is a reasonable conclusion.

 

Uniquely Given by God

When the Jews compiled the law from the Bible, they counted 248 to be positive prescriptions and 365 to be negative.[5] Yet the Ten Commandments stood out. In Deut. 10:4, Moses said, “And he wrote on the tablets, in the same writing as before, the Ten Commandments that the LORD had spoken to you on the mountain out of the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly. And the LORD gave them to me.” What we learn from Moses at this point is that the first and possibly the second set of tablets were written by God Himself (Deut. 10:3; Exodus 34:1, 4, 8). So the LC correctly states that the Ten Commandments “were delivered by the voice of God upon Mount Sinai, and written by him in two tables of stone; and are recorded in the twentieth chapter of Exodus.”

Only the Ten Commandments were written by God’s finger (“the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God” Ex. 31:18). This point is clearly stated in Ex. 32:16, “The tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the tablets.” These commandments were unique because of the way God gave them to His people.

Furthermore, these commandments are called the “Ten Words” (hence Decalogue [tou\ß de÷ka lo/gouß], Ex. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4). In fact, the Ten Words seem to distinguish itself from words like commandments, statutes, and regulations in the OT. That is, only these ten are called “words” (debarim).[6] Douglas Stuart states explicitly that “nothing in Exodus 20 is described as ‘commandment’ or ‘law’ or the like.”[7] They are also deemed to be “the words of the covenant” (ty$îrV;bAh yâérVbî;d) (Ex. 34:28) or “his covenant” as in Deut. 4:13: “And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone.” For that reason, they were kept in the “ark of the covenant.”

Additionally, the Ten Words came to Israel in the most frightening manner (“thunder and the flashes of lightning and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking” Ex. 20:18). They were entering into a covenant with God and these Words served as the terms of that covenant. This manner of delivery was calculated to engender holy fear. The great Ezekiel Hopkins put it like this:

The wisdom of God designed it so, on purpose to possess the people with the greater reverence of it; and to awaken in their souls a due respect to those old despised dictates of their natures, when they should see the same laws revived and invigorated with so much circumstance and terror: for, indeed, the Decalogue is not so much the enacting of any new law, as a reviving of the old by a more solemn proclamation.[8]

So the Ten Commandments clearly stood out in Israel’s history. They were not routine “laws” but unique in their role in God’s people’s lives. One commentator offers an interesting and helpful comparison:

If the American legal corpus is used as an analogy, it could be said that the ten “words” of Exod 20 are somewhat like the Constitution of the United States (legally binding in a most basic, foundational way but more than a mere set of individual laws) and the laws that follow (cf. 21:1, “These are the laws you are to set before them”) somewhat analogous to the various sections of federal law dealing with all sorts of particular matters that have been enacted legislatively over time. The one group is absolutely “constitutional” or “foundational”; the other is specifically regulatory, following from the principles articulated in the more basic “constitution.”[9]

But Israel quickly broke the covenant almost as soon they received it. So Moses threw them (Ex. 32:19) and they broke. When Moses was recounting these events in Deuteronomy, we learn something profound and significant about the second set of tablets (which replaced the broken ones). As Peter Craigie observed, “The shattering of the first tablets symbolized the breaking of the covenant relationship because of Israel’s sin in making the calf. The second writing of the law and the gift of the tablets is indicative of the graciousness of God and the response of God to the intercession of Moses.”[10] Yes, they broke it but God restored it and continued to maintain the covenant.

The Ten Commandments played a significant role in Israel’s history. The prophets used the Ten Commandments to rebuke Israel.[11] “The prophets of Israel did not appeal to the law of Moses in only general terms. More specifically, each of the original Ten Commandments that summarize God’s law are applied to their contemporaries.”[12] Surely, their placement in the ark of the covenant indicated their unique status. It was common for ANE rulers to deposit the copy of the covenant before the shrine of their deity.[13] So the Ten Commandments served a unique role in the lives of God’s people.

 

Two Tablets

The catechism further adds, “The four first commandments containing our duty to God, and the other six our duty to man.” Jesus said, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (Mt. 22:37-40) Jesus is joining Deut. 6:5 (“Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength”) and Lev. 19:18b (“love your neighbor as yourself ”). These two commandments served as the perfect summary of the Ten Commandments. The first one focuses on man’s duty to God (the first four commandments – vertical) and the second on our duties to man (the last six commandments – horizontal).

Jesus crystalized the Ten Commandments in terms of Deut. 6:5 and Lev. 19:18b. We can all see how Jesus’ two commandments can serve as the perfect distillation of the Ten Words. We also notice the use of individual commandments in the NT (some, not all). Paul appeals to the fifth commandment (Eph. 6:1-3) and Jesus lists some of the commandments in Luke 18:20 (the rich ruler). The Ten Commandments did not die in the Old Testament; they continue on in the New Covenant.

The least we can do is actually to know what the Ten Commandments are. If you think you have kept most of them, then you will need to study the next question in the LC which will help you to correctly interpret those commandments.

[1] Derived from the Latin levir (husband’s brother).

[2] Cf. Michael Horton, The Law of Perfect Freedom (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1993), 18-20.

[3] Thomas Vincent, The Shorter Catechism Explained From Scripture (1674; repr., Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1980), 113.

[4] Ezekiel Hopkins, The Works of Ezekiel Hopkins, 3 vols. (Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1997), 1:237.

[5] Robert West, The 10 Commandments Then and Now (Uhrichsville, OH: Barbour, 2013).

[6] Cf. Mark Rooker, The Ten Commandments: Ethics for the Twenty-First Century, NAC Studies in Bible & Theology (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010), 3. However, Jesus does call them “commandments” in Luke 18:20.

[7] Douglas K. Stuart, Exodus, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 440. Cf. also T. Desmond Alexander, From Paradise to the Promised Land: An Introduction to the Pentateuch, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 211 who makes a similar point (argued differently).

[8] Ezekiel Hopkins, The Works of Ezekiel Hopkins, 3 vols. (Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1997), 1:239.

[9] Douglas K. Stuart, Exodus, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006), 440-441.

[10] Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 199-200.

[11] Cf. O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Prophets (Phillipsburg: P & R, 2004), 143ff.

[12] Robertson, The Christ of the Prophets, 149.

[13] Cf. Rooker, The Ten Commandments, 4-6. I believe the two tablets were copies representing the two members of the covenant parties.

The Larger Catechism

Question 97

 97. Q. 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,[414] so as thereby they are neither justified[415] nor condemned;[416] 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;[417] and thereby to provoke them to more thankfulness,[418] and to express the same in their greater care to conform themselves thereunto as the rule of their obedience.[419]

 

Scriptural Defense and Commentary

[414] Romans 6:14. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Romans 7:4, 6. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God…. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. Galatians 4:4-5. But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. [415] Romans 3:20. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. [416] Galatians 5:23. Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. Romans 8:1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. [417] Romans 7:24-25. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. Galatians 3:13-14. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Romans 8:3-4. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. [418] Luke 1:68-69, 74-75. Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David…. That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life. Colossians 1:12-14. Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins. [419] Romans 7:22. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man. Romans 12:2. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. Titus 2:11-14. For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

 

Introduction

This question carefully answers how the law must function in the life of a believer. Some call this the third use of the law. This is the “special use” of the law for believers. The divines precisely explained how it cannot be used and then how it ought to be used by the regenerate.

Historically, many have charged the Lutherans of denying the third use of the law (tertius usus legis).[1] But the Formula of Concord seems to call for the third use of the law. Krauth’s summary teaching of the Formula is as follows, “The Law of God…has also a third use, to wit, that it be diligently taught unto regenerate men, to all of whom much of the flesh still clings, that they may have a sure rule by which their entire life is to be shaped and governed.”[2] The Formula cannot unequivocally affirm the third use. Obedience to the law as obedience tends to be viewed slavishly (the phrase “extorted from people” is used). As Luther clearly taught only two uses of the law,[3] so Lutherans greatly suspect any positive use of the law. For example, one Lutheran writer wrote, “If the reproving sin be regarded a part of the preaching of the gospel, the gospel is converted into a species of law; and the plan of salvation peculiar to the gospel is either obscured or entirely denied.”[4] Here, the Lutheran law and gospel distinction compels them to pit the reproving of sin against the preaching of the gospel. Some Lutherans admit that the WCF rightly distinguishes the law from the gospel but they also believe the distinction “does not have the prominent place …that it has in Lutheran theology.”[5] Reformed theologians believe their distinction is too radical while Lutherans believe ours is not radical enough.

There is one thing the Lutherans rightly noted about the law. Their great suspicion of the law compelled them to explain exactly how the law can function in a believer. The scholastic Lutheran Hollazius (David Hollaz, 1648-1714) stated that the law can serve as “the rule of a holy life” but the law cannot “confer new strength for a spiritual and holy life…”[6] Looking to the law itself will not confer new strength; this negative portrayal of the law can be found in many of Paul’s own teaching.

 

Delivered from the Law

Before explaining the positive use of the moral law for the believer, the LC judicially delineates in what ways we must not use the law: “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…” Question 94 already taught that “no man” can attain “to righteousness and life by the moral law.” Christ does not initially save believers and then leave them to obey the moral law to get to heaven.

 

1. Delivered from the Covenant of Works for justification

A believer must approach the law with this clear understanding of how his obedience functions in terms of the covenant. The Lord delivered him from obeying the moral law as a means of fulfilling the covenant of works for his justification: delivered from the moral law as covenant of works, so as thereby they are [not] justified … That is, even (especially) as a believer, he must not look to God’s law as a way of becoming justified before God: “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight” (Rom. 3:20). As Ridgley stated, “though the law was a covenant of works to him [i.e. Christ], it ceases to be so to those who are interested in him.”[7]

Believers have been “delivered” from this. We no longer stare at the law to “get right with God.” In Christ, through faith in Him, we have been declared righteous in His sight. Vos says, “He is instantly and forever delivered from all useless labor of trying to save himself by obedience to the law…” The old Adam (“Adam the first”) often creeps in and tries to get us to obey God as a covenant of works for our justification. This simple truth of deliverance must always be in the forefront of our minds — we did not deliver ourselves but Christ delivered us and it is from that gracious vantage point (and only from that foundation) we obey.

 

2. Delivered from the Condemnation in the Covenant of Works

The catechism further adds that as believers we have been “delivered from the moral law as covenant of works, so as thereby they are … [not] condemned…” Though the law serves as a rule of our obedience, it cannot ultimately condemn us when we disobey. The punitive sanctions of the law have been fully met through Jesus’ death. For that reason, Paul declares, “There is therefore now (νῦν) no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus…” (Rom 8:1). All believers do not stand condemned right now (νῦν). Because they have believed in Christ, God no longer condemns them. Because of what Christ accomplished in behalf of His people, right at this moment, there is no condemnation for those who are in Him by faith. It is now and not later, now and not earlier — as we stand by faith in the Lord Jesus, there is now no condemnation for those who have placed their faith in Christ Jesus.

It often works this way in our hearts. We seek to obey and eventually we fail and so, we feel condemned. Rightly, God’s law condemns us as law breakers. In turn, instinctively we seek to “do better” and “try harder.” We fail again and the useless and vain cycle starts all over again. But the legal requirements of the law have been met by Christ; He paid the penalty for our sins. No ultimate condemnation awaits if we are in Christ. We must repent of our personal sins and turn to the Lord for forgiveness. He will abundantly pardon. Spurgeon said, “My Lord is more ready to pardon than you to sin, more able to forgive than you to transgress.”[8] Legally delivered from the condemnation of the law (and there is no double jeopardy in the heavenly court) we turn to our heavenly Father for His pardoning grace.

Our Father may be displeased but we can never be condemned. “If God is for us, who can be against us?” Then Paul eventually asks, “Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died — more that that, who was raised — who is at the right of God, who indeed is interceding for us.” (Rom. 8:31-34) God is the one who justified us in Christ. He alone could condemn us and in view of all our sins, that possibility looks real and frightening. Yet, Paul’s answer to the question settles the matter. If we lived under any legal condemnation, then the answer is that Christ died! That is the Bible’s answer. My condemnation means death but Christ died for me and not only that, He has been raised and is interceding for me.

We can fall into a great danger at this point. When we disobey, we must realize that our Heavenly Father’s displeasure is real and substantial. We should not minimize this. Thomas Ridgley carefully brings this point out in his exposition of the Larger Catechism. I will comment on his explanation thought by thought instead of offering one large block quote.

• “We must distinguish, however, between a believer’s actions being condemned by the law, or his being reproved by it, and laid under conviction, for sins daily committed; and his being in a condemned state, according to the sentence of the law.” That is, being condemned by the law and feeling condemned or under conviction are different from each other. To feel condemned is not the same as being condemned.

• “We are far from denying that a believer is under an obligation to condemn or abhor himself, that is, to confess that he deserves to be condemned by God, for the sins which he commits; for were God to mark these, or to punish him according to the demerit of them, he could not stand. Thus the psalmist says, though speaking of himself as a believer, and consequently in a justified state, ‘Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.’ [Ps. 143:2]” That is, a believer can reprove himself and confess that he deserves God’s condemnation. Recognizing the just demerits of our sins and feeling the weight of our transgressions are appropriate responses of those who are truly justified in Christ. We self abhorring is not inconsistent with our state of being justified in Christ and therefore no longer under condemnation.

• “This a believer may say, and yet not conclude himself to be in a state of condemnation; inasmuch as he sees himself by faith to have ground to determine that he is delivered from the law, and so not condemned by it, as a covenant of works.”[9] Lastly, Ridgley notes that a believer can say and experience these things and yet conclude he is not in a state of condemnation since he has placed his faith in Christ.

 

Special Use: Bound to Christ

When we understand those things mentioned above, then we can better apply the following teaching on how believers ought to respond to the law of God. The answer defines the “special use” of the moral law for believers: “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…”

 

1. General uses

Believers are not exempt from the “general uses” of the moral law. As it applies to all men, it also applies to them. Believers are no less bound to obey God than anyone else. Question 95 summarizes those general uses.

 

2. Special use

Having explained how we should understand our transgressions of the law, we now can better appreciate the special use of the moral law for believers: “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…” As we immediately recognize our failures, we also see how wonderful our Lord is for fulfilling all the requirements of the moral law and also for taking upon Himself the curse of disobeying God’s law.

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13-14). Struggling with sin, we wonder if there is any hope. In the midst of this tension and struggle (“Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?”), Paul ends up declaring, “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Rom. 8:25) — the answer is not trying harder or making greater resolutions (though they are not per se wrong) but realizing our hope and faith must be in what God has done for us in Christ. Believers feel their debt to God’s grace. My every failure helps me to see how much Christ did for me. That is the special use of the moral law — I see all that Christ has done for me (active and passive obedience) and feel bound to Him.

 

Provokes Thankfulness

Of course, as we see Christ’s sufficiency and our failures, we should be thankful to the Lord: “and thereby to provoke them to more thankfulness…” In Col. 1:12-14, Paul thanks God for his salvation — “giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light.” When we look at the moral law and see how incapable we are, we begin to appreciate and to thank God for Christ who died for us and paid our debt.

The catechism presents a unique challenge to our understanding. When we see all that Christ has done for us by fulfilling what was required and undergoing the curse for us, we should erupt with thanksgiving. Every believer has this for which he can be thankful. This should provoke him to thankfulness. If we weigh this correctly and see it rightly, then we will always have a solid reason for thankfulness. If the law has done its work to show our desperate wickedness and we see how wonderfully Christ has delivered us, then we have great reasons for thankfulness.

If we turn this argument around, we can say, if you cannot be thankful in view of what Christ has done for you, then something is seriously wrong. Could it be that you think lightly of what Jesus has done? Could it be that you think lightly of your offences? Could it be that you think highly of your own abilities and goodness? If not, why are you not thankful?

 

Greater Care to Conform

Seeing that our Lord has done it all for us, a holy sense of obligation grips our souls: “and to express the same in their greater care to conform themselves thereunto as the rule of their obedience.” Our thankfulness expresses itself in the great care with which we seek to conform ourselves to God’s law. The indicatives of the Bible lead to the imperatives (Rom. 12 and Eph. 4). Vos says, “A Christian should express his thankfulness to God not only in words of prayer and praise, but also in taking care to live according to God’s moral law as the rule of obedience.” As he who is forgiven much loves much so as we understand we have been delivered from much, we should obey much. “The grace of God, therefore, is so far from leading to licentiousness, that all who have experienced it are put by it upon the exercise of that obedience which they owe to God as their rightful Lord and Sovereign, and to Christ as their gracious Redeemer, whom they love entirely, and therefore keep his commandments.”[10]

The last phrase “the rule of their obedience” means that believers seek to conform their lives according to God’s moral law instead of the world’s standards. Some tend to believe they are saved by Christ so that they can run around with impunity. True believers are debtors to grace and the love of Christ constrains them. They want to please Him who purchased them.

[1] See Richard Muller’s section on usus legis (in Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms).

[2] Charles P. Krauth, The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology: As Represented in the Augsburg Confession, and in the History and Literature of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1875), 314. This is actually his translation of the Formula. He does not include the entire section that adds: “It is concerning the third function of the law that a controversy has arisen among a few theologians. The question therefore is whether or not the law is to be urged upon reborn Christians. One party said Yes, the other says No.”

[3] See Timothy Wengert, Law and Gospel: Philip Melanchthon’s Debate with John Agricola of Eisleben over Poenitentia, Texts & Studies in Reformation & Post-Reformation Thought (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997), 191ff. Wengert also demonstrates that Melanchthon, on the other hand, taught the third use of the law — “that they may practice obedience” (196).

[4] Henry E. Jacobs, “Gospel,” ed. Henry Eyster Jacobs and John A. W. Haas, The Lutheran Cyclopedia (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1899), 201. This is contrary to Titus 2:11-14.

[5] Jacobs, “Gospel,” 202.

[6] Heinrich Schmid, The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Verified from the Original Sources, trans. Charles A. Hay and Henry E. Jacobs, Second English Edition, Revised according to the Sixth German Edition. (Philadelphia, PA: Lutheran Publication Society, 1889), 523: “in sanctification the Law is at hand as a normative principle, or the rule of a holy life; it prescribes and teaches what is to be done and what omitted, and binds to obedience, but it does not confer new strength for a spiritual and holy life; therefore the Gospel comes in as a succor and productive principle, which furnishes strength and power to men, enabling them rightly to walk in the ways of God.”

[7] Thomas Ridgley, A Body of Divinity, vol. 2 (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1855), 304.

[8] M&E, Aug. 22.

[9] Thomas Ridgley, A Body of Divinity, vol. 2 (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1855), 304.

[10] Thomas Ridgley, A Body of Divinity, vol. 2 (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1855), 305.

The Larger Catechism

Questions 94-95

94. Q. Is there any use of the moral law to man since the fall?

A. Although no man, since the fall, can attain to righteousness and life by the moral law:[402] yet there is great use thereof, as well common to all men, as peculiar either to the unregenerate, or the regenerate.[403]

95. Q. 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 the will of God,[404] and of their duty, binding them to walk accordingly;[405] to convince them of their disability to keep it, and of the sinful pollution of their nature, hearts, and lives:[406] to humble them in the sense of their sin and misery,[407] and thereby help them to a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ,[408] and of the perfection of his obedience.[409]

Scriptural Defense and Commentary

[402] Romans 8:3. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh. Galatians 2:16. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. [403] 1 Timothy 1:8. But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully. [404] Leviticus 11:44-45. For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy. Leviticus 20:7-8. Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy: for I am the LORD your God. And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am the LORD which sanctify you. Romans 8:12. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. [405] Micah 6:8. He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? James 2:10-11. For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. [406] Psalm 19:11-12. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. Romans 3:20. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Romans 7:7. What shall we say then? is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. [407] Romans 3:9, 23. What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin…. For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. [408] Galatians 3:21-22. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. [409] Romans 10:4. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

 

Introduction

These questions teach us how to use the law. Question 97 explains how believers should use the moral law. Questions 94-95 teach us how the moral law relates to humanity in general and question 96 shows how the moral law functions for the unbeliever (the unregenerate). God’s moral law is useful for everyone because God legislates what every human being must and cannot do.

Some would argue that we cannot “legislate” morality and therefore we have no business telling the world what they can and cannot do. We should not push our own private and personal view of morality on others. Yet, like it or not, someone is always advancing a moral agenda or code. On the other hand, the Larger Catechism focuses primarily on its role on humanity rather than offering a “plan” for national and international laws. Of course one can argue for what the implications of God’s moral law might be in the public sphere (both national and international) but that will not be our concern in this study.

 

Any Use?

Question 94 raises an important question. Can we even talk about God’s perfect moral law since we fell into sin? (“Is there any use of the moral law to man since the fall?”) The answer quickly dispenses with a wrong understanding of the moral law (after the fall). The biblical assumption is that “no man, since the fall, can attain to righteousness and life by the moral law…” No matter how well we obey, we will not become “righteous” sufficient enough to merit eternal life. Gal. 2:26 clearly affirms what ought to be common knowledge among all believers: “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law…” This truth must first be grasped before we proceed in our study of the moral law — because of the fall, by obedience to the moral law, we cannot attain a righteousness acceptable to God. Eternal life cannot be gained by our own personal obedience to the moral law. Though God requires perfection (to the moral law), because of our fallen condition, we cannot become righteous through our obedience. Vos highlights this very point when he said, “The truth is that unregenerate people cannot keep the moral law at all so as to please God; even their “good works” are sins that need to be repented of, and true believers in Christ, by divine grace, are enabled to keep the moral law only in a partial and inadequate way, so that their “good works” are acceptable to God only by reason of Christ’s mediation.” (Vos)

The “natural” response to this understanding will be quite simple. If we cannot attain righteousness and life by obeying the moral law, then of what use is it? That answer is not specifically spelled out in answer 94 except the simple declaration that it is of “great use.” God’s moral law is useful to all men, for both the regenerate and unregenerate though its usefulness will ultimately differ between the two. As Paul said, “But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully.” (1Tim. 1:8)

 

Use for All Men

Question 95 asks, “Of what use is the moral law to all men?” We should expect the moral law to be useful because God gave it to man. His moral law, when rightly understood, can be useful in five ways.

 

1. It reveals God’s nature and will.

“The moral law is of use to all men, to inform them of the holy nature and the will of God…” All men can learn about who God is and what he requires through His law. They reveal His holy nature and His own will for us. In Lev. 20:7-8 we read, “Consecrate yourselves, therefore, and be holy, for I am the LORD your God. Keep my statutes and do them; I am the LORD who sanctifies you.” God calls His people to be holy because He is their God. In the two verses, a parallelism exists: “be holy” parallels “keep my statutes and do them” because in both verses, God is their God. Yet in Lev. 11:44-45, we learn God’s people must be holy because He is Holy (“Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy… You shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.”). God is holy and His law expresses His holy nature because in keeping them, we become holy. God is good and therefore He does good so the Psalmists cries, “You are good and do good; teach me your statutes.” (Ps. 119:68)

Often man’s law can be arbitrary, unrelated to his nature or character. He may demand truthfulness from you while he himself is a liar. But God’s law reveals something about Himself, that He is holy and that He demands our obedience to His will. We should not look upon God’s law as a mere restraint, arbitrarily placed upon us to impede our happiness. His law is always holy, always good (“your rules are good” Ps. 119:39) because God is good and holy.

 

2. It reveals man’s duty.

“The moral law is of use to all men, to inform them… of their duty, binding them to walk accordingly…” Micah declared, “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (6:8) In this, Micah plainly states what is good. The good they ought to do had been spelled out in God’s law summarized here as “to do justice, and to love kindness and to walk humbly with your God.” God’s law perfectly reveals what man’s duty entails.

Without the moral law, we speculate and debate — everything remains a fog. Modern secular ethicists appeal to many theories for what is right and wrong but in the end, they increasingly ape the status quo (what is becomes what ought to be). God’s law gives light and clearly sets forth what we ought to do – often contrary to what modern thinkers believe. He binds us to His Word — disregarding it or disagreeing with it does not diminish its binding nature on us. A flagrant thief may disregard all the laws of the land but the officers still act to defend its binding nature (or at least they ought to do that).

 

3. It convinces them of their sinfulness.

“The moral law is of use to all men, … to convince them of their disability to keep it, and of the sinful pollution of their nature, hearts, and lives…” God’s law has the ability to convince men and women of their sinfulness. Paul declared this about the tenth commandment: “Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”” (Rom. 7:7) Under the light of God’s searching law, we see with clarity where we sinned. Before that, a nagging thought may bring us discomfort but the clarity of God’s law exposes the particulars of our sins.

One can find a perfect example of how this really works in a book about various mission fields. This account comes from J.D. Crowley (somewhere near Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos):

After I taught on the Ten Commandments, a middle-aged man said, ‘I’ve broken every one of these commandments many, many times; how can I possibly be reconciled to God?’ Others nodded their heads as if to say that they were wondering the same thing. In twelve years here, I’ve never had anyone ask me that question or seem to be under so much conviction.

I skipped ahead and gave them a short explanation about the Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world on the cross. They actually started clapping and praising God spontaneously, as if a great burden had been lifted. It was a perfect example of God’s law preparing people for God’s grace. I believe that some came into the kingdom right then and there as the light went on in their hearts and minds.[1]

God’s law indeed reveals and convicts us. “Moreover by them is thy servant warned” (Ps. 19:11). Paul declared, “[B]y the law is the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20). We think ourselves to be better than we really are; God’s law unmasks us and exposes the pollution of our hearts and undoes us (“the sinful pollution of their nature, hearts, and lives”).

The catechism also adds that it convinces humanity “of their disability to keep it.” As it exposes, our failure to keep it convinces us that we are wholly disabled. We can easily imagine that the law simply “corrects” us (like a “Stop” sign). Once we see it, we can happily change our course and do what is right (so we imagine). But it is not so easy. Actually, the law cannot help us or empower us to obey. It can only expose and condemn. We may change here and there but over time (unless deception sets in, and it usually does) we just witness failure after failure. The person either spurns and suppresses the law’s demand or externalizes it so that he can pretend to have kept it.[2] If enough light (by God’s grace) comes in, the person will see his own disability.

 

4. It humbles them of their sin and misery.

“The moral law is of use to all men, … to humble them in the sense of their sin and misery…” That disability we spoke of can humble and compel us to see the gravity of our sins and miseries. When under conviction, we will not offer this trite response, “Well, we’re only human. What can I say? It is just the way it is.” The sinner is compelled to declare that he has come short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23) and that he, if not all men, is under sin (Rom. 3:9). The obstacle to this progression is man’s own hard-hearted sinfulness. Only the Spirit can break through this. Vos observed,

The moral law of God is calculated to humble men because of their sin and misery: the more keenly they realize their failure and inability really to keep the law, the more they must be humbled because of their sinful condition. Only where the lie that the law can be really obeyed is cherished, as by the Pharisees, can men be blind to their own sinfuless and consequently filled with pride. (Vos)

Sadly, most men shirk off this conviction early on. They will not come to terms with it but will drown it with drink, stifle it with busy-ness, suppress it with atheism, etc. Whatever it takes, they seek to silence the conviction of the law to their own damnation. A person with a terminal disease may deny its presence but he cannot repel its reality and eventual consequences. So it is better to admit our lost condition so that we might find healing or remedy for our sinfulness.

 

5. It points to man’s need for Christ.

“The moral law is of use to all men, … thereby help them to a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and of the perfection of his obedience.” The law should lead us to Christ (Gal. 3:21-22; Rom. 10:4) — when we see our lost condition, Christ will become that much more sweeter to our souls. By grace, we’ll see that Christ obeyed when we haven’t, that He is perfect when we are utterly sinful. Our need for Him becomes clearer only as we see our sinful miserable condition.

Many men and women (young and old) in the church have a vague “feeling” or idea about needing Christ. They hear that Christ is the answer but can’t seem to understand what exactly was the question. They may mouth the words that they are sinners and need Christ but they cannot cry out, “What must I do to be saved?” They cannot believe with all their heart these saving spiritual truths because they have never truly come to terms with their own sinful condition. Like most men (and some women), they don’t feel they need a doctor until it is too late.

We can see how the law relates to the gospel. The law leads us to the gospel and the gospel (once believed) helps us to obey the law. Law, when it has properly done its work, opens the door to the Lord Jesus Christ. Some believe this preparatory work of the law is absolutely required before coming to Christ (which is not true) but have we not overreacted toward the opposite direction? Have we not offered the solution without truly presenting the problem (which is our sin)? Unfortunately, we cannot properly understand our problem until we clearly understand the demands of the law. Since our generation has lost its traditional moral understanding, we desperately need to study the law.

 

[1] Tim Keesee, Dispatches from the Front: Stories of Gospel Advance in the World’s Difficult Places (Wheaton: Crossway, 2014), 102.

[2] A female attorney believed she was quite moral because of her superficial understanding of God’s law. She reasoned, “Since I was not committing adultery or murder, since I wasn’t stealing or lying, since I represented Chinese refugees on the side, I thought I was an exemplary Christian.” Most people would draw the same conclusion. Once we externalize the law’s demands, then we will come out squeaky clean. See the excellent interview in World (July 12, 2014), 28-29.