THE PERFECT LAW OF LIBERTY

 

Introduction

Are the ten commandments the believer's rule of faith and life? 

Those who question this thesis are called "antinomians" as being against the law of God. In its most extreme forms, these attacks label antinomians as libertines using this view as a cover for sinning with abandon. Among these calling themselves "Calvinists", their views are best represented by the Second London Confession of Faith when speaking of the law of Moses:

"IT IS OF GREAT USE TO THEM AS WELL AS TO OTHERS; IN THAT AS A RULE OF LIFE INFORMING THEM OF THE WILL OF GOD AND THEIR DUTY, IT DIRECTS AND BINDS THEM TO WALK ACCORDINGLY [Rom. 3:20; 7:7] DISCOVERING ALSO THE SINFUL POLLUTIONS OF THEIR NATURES HEART AND LIVES;"

 The law does not bind anyone to walk according to it. We read in Romans 1:21, "Because that when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened.”  Certainly here, these Gentiles were not bound to walk according to the law. Indeed, exposure to the law produces disobedience in the unbeliever "For when we were once in the flesh the motions of sins which WERE BY THE LAW did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But sin taking occasion by the commandment WROUGHT in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead" (Rom. 7:6,8). The words of Jesus express this thought perfectly "...Full well you reject the commandments of God that you may keep your own traditions" (Mark 7: 9.)

"SO AS EXAMINING THEMSELVES THEREBY THEY MAY COME TO FURTHER CONVICTION OF HUMILIATION FOR AND HATRED AGAINST SIN TOGETHER

The knowledge of the law has never or will ever bring a sinner to Christ. Only grace can accomplish this. Yes, it is true, the law highlights sin. We need only examine the names given in the New Testament for the law: "ministration of condemnation" (2 Cor. 3: 9); "ministration of death" (2 Cor. 3:7).

“WITH A CLEARER SIGHT OF THE NEED THEY HAVE OF CHRIST AND THE PERFECTION OF HIS OBEDIENCE [???]

If this statement is true then what does this passage mean in John 1:17, "For the law was given by Moses; but GRACE AND TRUTH came by Jesus Christ." All the natural mind can understand from the law is rejection and hatred. For a person to look upon Christ in love is by God opening his eyes and giving a new heart to feel with.

 

"IT IS LIKEWISE OF USE TO THE REGENERATE TO RESTRAIN THEIR CORRUPTIONS IN THAT IT FORBIDS SIN; AND THE THREATENINGS OF IT SERVE TO SHOW THAT EVEN THEIR SINS DESERVE; AND WHAT AFFLICTIONS IN THIS LIFE THEY MAY EXPECT FOR THEM ALTHOUGH FREED FROM THE CURSE AND UNALLAYED RIGOR THEREOF THOUGH NOT AS TRUE TO THEM BY THE LAW AS A COVENANT OF WORKS; SO AS MANS DOING OR BECAUSE THE LAW ENCOURAGES TO THE ONE AND DETERS FROM THE OTHER IS F HIS BEING [Rom. 6:12; 13:14; 1 Pet. 3:8-13] UNDER THE LAW AND NOT UNDER GRACE. "  

Believers are not punished for their sins. They are disciplined (Hebrews 12) but Christ received all the punishment for them. It is more of a test than a punishment. In Hebrews 12:1, believers are exhorted to lay aside every weight and the sin that so easily distracts them. This sin prevents believers from running the race of the Christian life patiently. The particular sin is not mentioned and there is no mention of the “moral law" anywhere in the chapter. In fact. we are instructed to "look to Jesus the author and finisher of our faith" (vs. 2). We are instructed to "consider carefully" Jesus who endured hostility against him (vs. 3). These believers had not yet been violently treated as they struggled against sins (vs. 4). These difficulties were all part of the correction that sons received which would over time, if endured patiently, produce peace of righteousness (vs. 11). Indeed, we have not relied on or gone to Mount Sinai (vs. 18) but to Mount Zion the mountain of grace (vs. 22). This teaching is the very opposite of what the confession of faith teaches about the role of the law.

Perhaps the clearest summary of this understanding of the role of the law of Moses in the Christian life can be found in the Stockholm Baptist Confession of Faith of 1861:

 

"WE BELIEVE THAT THE LAW OF GOD HAS FOR ITS END TO BE; 1) A RESTRAINT FOR THE UNGODLY TO RESTRAIN THEM FROM PERFORMING ALL THE EVIL PURPOSE OR THEIR HEART;

This view is rejected by Hebrews 12. Only grace can restrain sin.

2) A SCHOOLMASTER TO BRING SINNERS TO CHRIST, IN AS MUCH AS IT SETS BEFORE THEM THE JUST CLAIMS OF GOD AND HIS WRATH OVER SIN SHOWS THEM THEIR INABILITY TO FULFILL THESE CLAIMS AND THUS AWAKENS IN THEM THE NEED OF GRACE AND THE FORGIVENESS OF SIN;

 

Both KJV and the NIV insert the word "lead" in Gal. 3:24 when it comes to the law bringing us to Christ. But the word lead is not in the Greek text. The NET version does a better translation, "Thus the law had become our guardian until Christ so that we could be declared righteous by faith" Much has been made of the Greek word translated "guardian" (paidogogos) by some. the NET Study Bible quoting BDAG's Greek-Enq1ish Lexicon states: “the man, usually a slave whose duty it was to conduct a boy or youth... to and from school and to SUPERINTEND his conduct generally he was not a teacher despite the present meaning of the derivative 'pedagogue'. When the young man became of age the paidogogos was no longer needed". He was a disciplinarian. We read in the previous verse, "But before faith came we were kept under the law, shut up into the faith which should afterwards be revealed". This translation can be a bit deceptive to the average reader. The phrase "kept under" is better translated "imprisoned" BDAG states on this Greek word (sugkleio) it put them under compulsion to be disobedient or given them over to disobedience". The "guardian" or was "to detain or confine" BDAG states "The terminology is consistent with the Roman use of prisons principally for holding of prisoners until disposition of their cases" So the law of Moses never “lead" anyone to Christ. Indeed except for those Jews who believed that Jesus had fulfilled the law, the majority of the Jewish nation received him not" (John 12:11).  

 

3) A TOOL FOR THE WALK OF BELIEVERS TO BE FOLLOWED IN THE SPIRIT IN THE NEW COVENANT; - AND THAT THEREFORE WITH THESE ENDS IN VIEW THE LAW OUGHT TO BE INCULCATED IN ALL" (William McGloth1in, Baptist Confessions of Faith, American Baptist Publication Society, 1911):

There is no place in the writings of the apostles where we are told that the law of Moses ought to be our rule of life. This is an assumption and imposition on the text of the New Testament. The fictitious "moral law" is never mentioned as what believers ought to turn to. It is the law of liberty and the royal law written in our hearts by the Spirit of God and through the power of Christ in us that can accomplish any Christian walk.

The “tables of stone” & 11 Corinthians 3:3f

Forasmuch as you are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart.
One of the alleged scriptural defenses for the idea that there is a difference between the law and "the moral law" is that the tables of stone were distinguished from the rest of the so-called "ceremonial" and "civil laws" of ancient Israel. The Jews made no such distinction. Indeed, Hebrews 9:4 calls the tables where the ten commandments were written the "tables of the covenant". In Exodus 34:28 we read tablets called "the tables the words of the Covenant, the ten commandments". In Deuteronomy, they are called the "tables of the covenant" (9:9, 11, 15). So, the distinction between moral, ceremonial, and civil laws was a foreign concept in the Old Testament. They were all integrated.

The tables were used as a convenient symbol for the entire Mosaic. covenant. But included in the ten commandments was the command to hold Saturday as a Sabbath. Yet the apostles instructed against this for the church as Paul wrote in Colossians 2:16, "Let no man, therefore, judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of a holiday or of the new moon or of the Sabbath days". It is important to note that in the Greek text, there is no definite article before any of these nouns. It is not a particular Sabbath day that Paul is talking about but any day that is considered a Sabbath day is an indefinite noun. As Wallace says, an indefinite noun is unmarked (without a definite article) in that next to nothing is revealed about it apart from its membership in a class of others that share the same designation" (David Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan 1996, pg. 244). So, although. Paul felt no conflict, being a Jew in going to the temple to perform purifications (Acts 21:16), he opposed the imposition of ANY part of the Mosaic Covenant on Gentiles.

Some might point to Jesus' statement concerning the "weightier matters" of the law" as evidence that there were some parts of the law more important than others (Matt. 23:23). This is true. The weightier matters Jesus mentioned were justice, mercy, and faith. But he goes on to say, "These ought ye to have done and NOT LEAVE THE OTHERS UNDONE". So, the law was viewed by Jesus as a complete system. The weightier matters were not the only thing to perform. Neither could it be separated from the rest. There was no separation in the commands of the law.

The Law of Liberty

So, what is the law of liberty that James wrote about? To some, it just the ten commandments warmed over.

This "perfect law of liberty" is a law that meets a higher standard. James 1:25 says it all, "But whosoever looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues therein, he BEING NOT A FORGETFUL HEARER BUT A DOER OF THE WORK. This man shall be blessed in his deed". He does NOT forget! Why does he not forget? Paul answers this in 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". The Mosaic law was weak because of us. It would take an INTERNAL law, a perfect law — which is Christ himself! Thus this law of liberty is also called the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). Christ is the perfect law of liberty! This new law is written not in or stone, but in the heart on tables of flesh (2 Cor. 3:3). This perfect law of liberty is the same as us being the "epistles of Christ". Christ did what the law of Moses could not do, thus becoming our new law. This is why the scriptures say that we are dead to the law and alive to Christ; that we are not under law but under Christ. We are no longer bound to the law since it was killed being nailed to the cross with Christ, "Blotting out the HANDWRITING OF ORDINANCES THAT WAS AGAINST US WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO US AND TOOK IT OUT OF THE WAY" (Col. 2:14). Hence this new law is called the "LAW OF CHRIST" and we are under it (I Cor. 9:21). It is called the law of the Spirit IN CHRIST (Rom. 8:2).

Who Is The Law For?

This is a critical question. If the ten commandments are to be used as a standard for all men, including believers, then why does Paul say this; "Knowing this that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers for manslayers" (1 Tim. 1:9). This is the proper use of the law (vs. 8). Do the people here resemble the description given elsewhere of believers by Paul?

Compare. "Know you not that the UNRIGHTEOUS shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor effeminate nor abusers of themselves with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor revilers nor extortioners shall inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Cor. 6). Christians USE TO BE these things but not any longer (vs. 11).

For those who speak of a "moral law" as if the rest of the law of Moses had no moral implications, let them look at the sins mentioned in verse 9 of 1 Timothy “profane" (3rd commandment); ''manslayers" (6th commandment); "murderers of mothers and fathers" (5th commandment); "whoremongers" (7th commandment); "liars and perjured persons" (9th commandment). "Unholy men" includes those who violate any of the other commandments. Some might argue that the Sabbath is not clearly mentioned here. That point will be covered later. The- point is that the commandments meant by the "moral law" are not meant for believers.

This is NOT to say that the moral standards mentioned here are not a valid lifestyle for Christians. They are. But they are NOT the focus of a Christian. The focus for a Christian MUST be Christ and His grace! What does this mean? It means that a Christian must not evaluate his relationship with God by his keeping or not keeping the ten commandments. God's love for his elect is UNCONDITIONAL!

The essence of all of this is that the Royal Law (James 2:8) can ONLY be carried out by Jesus. Christ, through his death guaranteed that the "righteousness of the law” be fulfilled in us (Rom. 8:4) So why are we still speaking of the "moral law"? Why not use apostolic terms like the law of liberty, the law of Christ, and the royal law? These terms — “moral law”, "ceremonial law", and "civil law” were unknown distinctions to the Jews. They originated with the Roman Catholic Church and through them, to the Reformers, who influenced some Baptists to adopt them.

Those who emphasize the "ten commandments" emphasize sin and death. "The sting of death is sin, and the STRENGTH of sin is the LAW" (I Cor. 15:56.) It is the "law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2). Christ "is the end of the law" to those that believe (Rom. 10:4). This is not a condemnation of the law of Moses; it is spiritual (Rom. 7:14); it is holy (Rom. 7:2). It makes us (believers not non-Christians) aware of our sins "(Rom. 7:7) You have to be given spiritual eyes to see the spiritual meaning of the law, I otherwise like Paul said, one could as a Pharisee be "blameless" by the fulfilling of outward acts while murdering Christians (Phil. 3:5-6); Acts 25:8). So, if reliance on the works of the law brings sin and death why are some Christians still speaking of it and secretly measuring themselves in a score-card fashion as to whether they have broken any of the ten commandments? Why do they constantly preach about them in their sermons?

In Romans 7 we read that the only way believers can be serve "in the newness of Spirit” ONLY if we are declared "dead to the law" in which we served "in the oldness of the letter" (7:6). Notice the word "delivered" in verse 6; the Greek word katargeo meaning "to release someone from an obligation" (BDAG, Greek—English Lexicon). To emphasize the element of release we have the antonym of this word in the same verse “being dead wherein we SERVED". The Greek word katecho, means being held bound. In some contexts this word could indicate imprisonment (BDAG) We were slaves to sin, "servants to sin" (Rom. 6:17). We became slaves "to Christ and righteousness (Rom. 16:19; Eph. 6:6). As Jesus said, one cannot serve two masters either he must hate one and love the other (Matt. 6:24). So, it is with the "moral law" and grace. We are under one or the other not under both. The "moral law" which is good works death in us (Rom. 7:13.)

The difference between a legalistic view of the law and a spiritual view of the law can be seen in Romans 7. There are four laws found in this chapter. There is the “law of God after the inward man” also called “the law of my mind" (vs. 22-23). There is a "law in my members" which is also called “the law of sin” (vs. 22-23). All these four laws are INWARD. They can be reduced to two "laws" or principles. A believer is torn between these two internal forces. The conflict will continue until we are glorified and our bodies ''of death" are transformed (vs. 25). The believer's mind, which is that of Christ (I Cor. 2:16), serves the law of God (which is not some external code like the "ten commandments” but an inward law written in the heart and performed as a "walk” by the power of Christ and the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 12:9; 2 Tim. 1:7). The minds of believers delights and follows the law of God. The body inside believers (the old man) cannot obey the law of God and hates it.

The Sabbath Question

There is no place in the book of Acts or in the epistles where believers are commanded to observe the Sabbath. This should be fatal blow to any who assert that the ten commandments are a rule of faith and life for believers today! Sunday is never called the Sabbath; it is called the first day of the week. If the "moral law” was not part of what Christ fulfilled when HE spoke of the law, then why are we not commanded to observe it? Indeed, Paul tells his Gentile hearers that they are not under any obligation to observe any Sabbaths (Col. 2:6). Now the true Sabbath is found in Hebrews where it is a REST from our works. "There remains, therefore, a rest unto the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also has ceased from his own works, as God DID FROM HIS" (Heb. 4:9-10). This understanding of a SPIRITUAL Sabbath was certainly not the understanding written by Moses in Exodus 20:8. No Jew would have understood it this way. Of course, the term "Sabbath" simply means seven. So, the Sabbath is the seventh day. Some have tried to explain the Sabbath command in Exodus as something beneficial for men and the land. Yet as far as we know there are no statements to that effect in the Old Testament. Does God get tired? Does he need to rest? No. That rest in Exodus was a shadow of the rest that the people of God entered by faith from their works. This idea falls right in line with what Jesus (the Lord of the Sabbath) said about the Sabbath — it was made for man and not man being made for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27).

Conclusion

Antinomians are not against the law of God. Neither are they against the law of Moses. But they are against using the law of Moses or its false reduction into the "moral law" as a rule of faith and practice.

In this we ARE antinomians. We believe in the royal law as a lifestyle and walk enabled by Christ and the Holy Spirit. To those who still wish to focus on the law written on stone and still consider us antinomians – if what we have said be antinomianism let them make the best of it!