← Back to sermon library

You may turn in your Bibles to 
1 Timothy chapter 1. 1 Timothy chapter 1 as we continue 
our exposition of this letter of Paul to Timothy. Let's pick up reading in chapter 
1 at verse 1. Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, 
by the commandment of God our Savior and the Lord Jesus Christ 
our hope, to Timothy, a true son in the faith, grace, mercy, 
and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord. As 
I urged you when I went into Macedonia, remain in Ephesus, 
that you may charge some, that they teach no other doctrine, 
nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes 
rather than godly edification which is in faith. Now the purpose 
of the commandment is love from a pure heart, from a good conscience 
and from sincere faith. from which some, having strayed, 
have turned aside to idle talk, desiring to be teachers of the 
law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which 
they affirm. But we know that the law is good 
if one uses it lawfully, knowing this, that the law is not made 
for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, 
for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for 
murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for 
fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, 
and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 
according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was 
committed to my trust. And I thank Christ Jesus our 
Lord who has enabled me because he counted me faithful. putting 
me into the ministry, although I was formerly a blasphemer, 
a persecutor, and an insolent man. But I obtained mercy because 
I did it ignorantly in unbelief, and the grace of our Lord was 
exceedingly abundant with faith and love which are in Christ 
Jesus. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptance, 
that Christ Jesus came in the world to save sinners, of whom 
I am chief. However, for this reason I obtained 
mercy. that in me first, Jesus Christ 
might show all longsuffering as a pattern to those who are 
going to believe on him for everlasting life. Now to the King eternal, 
immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory 
forever and ever. Amen. This charge I commit to 
you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made 
concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare. 
having faith and a good conscience, which some, having rejected, 
concerning the faith, have suffered shipwreck, of whom are Hymenaeus 
and Alexander, whom I deliver to Satan, that they may learn 
not to blaspheme." Amen. Well, let us pray. Father, thank 
you for your word and thank you for the instruction that it affords 
to us as a local church. We pray that you would give us 
the grace to receive these things with joy and thanksgiving and 
as a sacred deposit. May we indeed fight for the truth. 
May we be earnest contenders for that faith which was once 
for all delivered to the saints. Give us grace as individuals. 
Give us grace as a local church to guard this trust. And we ask 
this in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. Well, remember 
that last week we considered the specific charge given to 
Timothy in verses 3 to 7. Specifically, Timothy is to stop 
the mouths of the false teachers who plagued the church in Ephesus. We see that in verse 3. As I 
urged you when I went into Macedonia, remain in Ephesus that, here's 
the specific task, you may charge some that they teach no other 
doctrine. They're to teach orthodoxy, not 
heterodoxy. They're not to give heed to fables 
and endless genealogies which cause disputes rather than godly 
edification which is in faith. Paul gives this commandment with 
the expressed purpose of love for the church. The church is 
to flourish in the context of love from a pure heart, from 
a good conscience, and from sincere faith. Unfortunately, there are 
those which have turned, which have strayed. They turn aside 
to the law, and they neither understand what they say nor 
the things which they affirm. So mentioning these false teachers 
who had desires to be teachers of the law, the apostle now begins 
a brief digression. He gives us a contrast and makes 
a claim concerning a proper use of the law. So in verse 7 we 
have these false teachers these claimants, these men, that desired 
to be teachers of the law. Perhaps they were seeking to 
undermine Paul and his approach to the law. We don't know all 
of the background. We don't know all of the ins 
and outs. We do not know why Paul focused on this particular 
use of God's law. But suffice it to say, this is 
corrective. Whatever the false teachers were 
doing, the Apostle sets verses 8 to 11 forth in order to set 
the proper understanding of God's law here in Ephesus. And I want 
to make three observations this evening on verses 8 to 11. First, 
the affirmation concerning the law. Secondly, the qualification 
concerning the law. And thirdly, the explanation 
concerning the law. We have an affirmation, a qualification, 
and then we have explanation by the Apostle Paul. Notice in 
verse 8a, this is the affirmation, but we know. Again, this is a 
contrast between these false teachers, and it is a specific 
claim, and we'll fill that in in just a moment. But notice 
that Paul and Timothy shared this understanding. Paul and 
Timothy had a proper respect for and an understanding of the 
law of God. It is unfortunate today that 
not all Christians share this common appreciation. What Paul 
goes on to say in terms of the content of what it is that we 
know is debated in Christianity today. The content of the claim 
is simple. We know that the law is good. When you talk to Christian people 
today, that's not always the common consent. That's not always 
the common expression. That's not always the same conviction 
among the people of God today. When Paul makes this statement, 
we know that the law is good. He is simply echoing the consistent 
testimony of Holy Scripture. When God spoke the law in the 
garden, it was good. When God spoke the law at Sinai, 
it was good. When God spoke the law in the 
New Testament, it is good. This is the consistent testimony 
from the beginning to the end. It is the testimony in the Old 
Testament. It is the testimony of the Lord 
Jesus. Remember in Matthew 5, 17 to 
20, do not think Do not let it even rise up in your heart. Do 
not even begin to suspect that I came to abrogate or to destroy 
or to abolish the Law and the Prophets. He said, I didn't come 
to abolish, but I came rather to fulfill it. And this is the 
consistent testimony of the Apostle Paul. Romans chapter 3, verse 
31. What then? Do we nullify the 
Law? May it never be. On the contrary, 
we establish the law. Romans chapter 7, Paul the Apostle 
verse 12 says, therefore the law is holy and the commandment 
holy and just and good. Whatever our understanding of, 
whatever our appreciation of, or whatever we believe the law 
is useful for, this one thing must be settled. This is axiomatic. We must approve of, we must agree 
with, and we must side with Timothy and Paul and understand that 
the law is good. We ought to be able to say with 
the psalmist, oh, how I love your law. There are those within 
the Christian church that do not say this. There are those, 
as we go through our material tonight, those people that are 
called antinomians. They don't think that the law 
of God has any application whatsoever to the people of God. They do 
not say, oh, how I love your law. They do not delight in the 
law. They want to try and argue with 
every jot and tittle that the law has no place in the Christian 
life. Now, I come with presupposition. 
I come in a confessional context. I am speaking in agreement with 
what we find in our London Baptist Confession and the Westminster 
Confession of Faith. So just so you know that, George 
Knight says the point in 1 Timothy 1 verse 8 as in Romans 7 is to 
affirm that the law is intrinsically good because it is given by God 
and is not to be considered bad, though it can be mishandled with 
bad results as those who desire to be teachers of the law had 
done." So you see there's a claim or a contrast and a claim concerning 
the goodness of God's law. So that's the affirmation, but 
we know that the law is good. Now notice, secondly, there's 
a qualification. The law is good if, he says. This is a qualification. The 
law is good if one uses it lawfully. The men who desired to be teachers 
of the law more than likely put it into the category of genealogies. They put it into the category 
of the myths and the fables. Remember, that's what they were 
into. That's what really gripped them. 
That's what they were about. Notice in verse four, nor give 
heed to fables and endless genealogies. This is what they delighted in, 
probably the law for those who desired to be teachers of the 
law fell into this particular status. Again, what Knight says 
is the point of this section is to emphasize against the would-be 
teachers of the law that the law is given to deal with moral 
questions, concrete ethics. It's not simply to speculate 
about. It's not in the category of fable. It's not in the category 
of genealogy. If you turn to Titus 3, verse 
9, for just a moment, again, not the same place, but a similar 
sort of a context, a similar sort of an opposition that Titus 
is facing to what Timothy is facing, Titus 3, 9. But avoid 
foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about 
the law, for they are unprofitable and useless. That would be an 
unlawful use of the law. Strivings about it. Speculations 
about it. Treating it as if it's a genealogy. 
Treating it as if it's in the class of fable or myth. So Paul 
makes this necessary qualification. We know that the law is good 
if one uses it lawfully. Now we can imply We can infer, 
and we do glean from this statement, that there are, in fact, unlawful 
ways to use God's law. Everybody see that? Everybody 
understand that? This isn't, shouldn't blow your 
minds? Whoa, I didn't get that. We know 
that the law is good if one uses it lawfully. What does that suppose? That men can use it unlawfully. Men can take the law of God and 
use it in an unlawful way. Probably the two biggest abuses 
with reference to the law of God, probably the two biggest 
departures from the biblical doctrine of the law of God are 
legalism and antinomianism. Now, an unlawful use of the law 
of God is when we take the law and we preach it to sinners and 
we tell them, you obey this and you will enter into heaven. The 
Bible is clear. The Bible is absolutely certain 
that by the deeds of the law, no flesh will be justified in 
his sight. So if I stood up in this pulpit 
and I said, try a little harder, do a little better, be a better 
guy or a better gal and you will enter into heaven. That's unlawful. I'm abusing my place as a minister 
of the gospel. I'm not a minister of the gospel 
at that point. I'm a minister of the law and 
a bad one. Legalism is an attack upon the 
law of God. That's why people, you know, 
we think they have a high view. We think the legalist has a high 
doctrine of the law. No, he hates the law. He despises 
the law. He disdains the law. But equally 
pernicious is antinomianism. That is the position, or that 
is the view, that the law has no place in the Christian life. And unfortunately, they come 
to this passage to try and justify that position as we move through. We'll see that. But those are 
two unlawful uses of the law. You cannot misuse the law that 
way and have everything go well for your soul. Legalism is bad. Legalism is wrong. Legalism is 
an attempt to gut the Christian message. Now, I'm talking about 
legalism strictly defined, teaching acceptance with God through law, 
acceptance with God through merit. Now, we use the term to appeal 
to legalism and sanctification. And that's a real issue, and 
that's a real problem, too. And that's a real misuse of the 
law, also, that we ought not to do. Specifically, in the context, 
what I think we need to understand is this idea that we can be accepted 
with God by the works of the law. But as well, this idea that 
we don't need the law. Antinomian. We reject the law. So that's the implication that 
flows out of this qualification. So thus far, we have an affirmation. We've got affirmation. We've 
got qualification. We've got implication. We've 
got it all going on. Now let's look at the explanation concerning 
the law. Verses 9 to 11. This is where 
we'll spend the bulk of our time, the remainder of our time. Verses 
9 to 11 under three considerations. First, the use identified. The use identified. Look at what 
Paul says. But we know that the law is good. Here's the qualification. If 
one uses it lawfully, knowing this, Now, Paul is only speaking 
to one particular use. I agree with Calvin. Calvin says 
the apostle did not intend to argue about the whole office 
of the law. In other words, there's other 
passages that speak to the use of the law. There are other passages 
in the New Testament that we need to take into consideration 
when we understand what the Bible sets forth as a proper understanding 
of the law. Paul is dealing with one specific 
use. As I'll argue later, and as I 
believe you already know, the Reformed traditionally have identified 
three uses of the law. Notice what the Apostle says 
here, knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous 
person. Now the antinomian concludes 
this, we are righteous by virtue of justification by faith alone. And since we are righteous, therefore 
the law is not made for us. There's a certain logic involved 
in such a supposition or an approach. Knowing this, Paul says the law 
is not made for a righteous person. If we're righteous in Christ, 
we've been justified freely by His grace, we've received the 
imputed righteousness of Christ that you Reformed people like 
to blather on about, then why would you ever submit that we're 
under the law? Well, I don't think it flies. 
Paul addresses righteous people in Romans chapter 13. Paul addresses 
those who have been justified freely by his grace, and when 
he comes to define how they are to interact with one another, 
he says they're to love one another. And he doesn't say, I want you 
to define love in any old way that you want. I want you to 
go to Hollywood and figure out what love looks like. I want 
you to read the latest romance novel. I want you to define... No, no. Love that Paul is dealing 
with in Romans 13 is defined by the Decalogue, by the moral 
law of God Most High. So it cannot be the case that 
in Romans 13 the law is made for a righteous person, And in 
1 Timothy 1, the law is not made for a righteous person. We simply 
don't have that inconsistency in the Apostle Paul. Let's try 
this interpretation. The righteous person means anyone 
living in external conformity to the law, whether Christian 
or not. The righteous person means anyone 
who lives in external conformity to the law, whether Christian 
or non-Christian. The law defines proper behavior 
and rebukes those not in conformity to it. It is not for the righteous 
person, for the righteous person is already doing what the law 
says. It's only when we violate, it's 
only when we step outside, it's only when we go astray that that 
law then speaks to us in a particular manner. The law's usefulness 
here is seen in its power to restrain wicked men from their 
sin. Now, as many of you know, when 
we've gone through this material, the illustration that I use is 
the law's forbidding counterfeiting. I don't suspect, I know most 
of you pretty well, I don't suspect that's your pet sin. If it is, 
you're doing a fine job. I hope you're not passing phony 
20s off on me. Not that I take 20s from you 
anyway. The counterfeiting laws out there, 
who are they made for? Not for us. They're made for 
counterfeiters. So in a sense, when a Christian, 
a justified freely by grace righteous person, lies, perjures, steals, 
which unfortunately Christians sometimes do, the law is for 
them! Right? Yes, everybody get this. This is important. This is Reformed 
theology 101. The specific use that Paul has 
in view is what has historically been called the civil use of 
the law. And what the civil use of the 
law is, now it's hard to put it into an airtight category. 
This is what it most seems to me to be. It is that law wherein 
the intent is to restrain men from being as wicked as they 
could possibly be. It's not made for a righteous 
person because the righteous person, Christian or non-Christian, 
is already living in conformity to it. Moeller defines the civil 
use this way, the political or civil use according to which 
the law serves the commonwealth or body politic as a force for 
the restraint of sin. Maybe the false teachers, maybe 
these desiring to be teachers of the law claim that Paul was 
an antinomian, claim that Paul did not think the law had application. 
Claim that Paul did not think there was a use for the law of 
God. Paul says we know this. We know 
that the law is good. We know that the law is good 
if it is used lawfully. Now I'm going to pull one particular 
example of how the law can be used. Lawfully, as Calvin says, 
he doesn't speak or argue about the whole office of the law. 
There's other portions in Paul where he deals with those other 
two uses, and we'll just briefly touch on that tonight. I just 
want you to get what Paul is doing here. The apostle refers 
to this use to show that the law is concerned with concrete 
ethical norms. It's not for you to speculate 
about having coffee. It's to restrain wicked men from 
rape. murder, molestation. You guys 
want to babble on about genealogies and about fables? You guys want 
to babble on with, you know, endless speculations concerning 
the law? No, the law of God is put in 
place by the Lord, not for righteous people who are already living 
in external conformity unto it. It is put there so that wicked 
men can be restrained. That's what Paul is highlighting. Not given to speculate about. 
That's the use identified. Notice the law described. There's 
a general introduction in verse 9, but for the lawless and insubordinate. The civil use of the law is given 
for those who need its discipline and restraint. You see, the law 
is given for the lawless and insubordinate. Now what Paul 
does, many have recognized, is basically rehearse the Decalogue 
or the Ten Words. This becomes more apparent in 
the second half. Notice, let's just jump down 
a little bit when he picks up murderers of fathers and mothers. Murderers of fathers and mothers. 
What does that recall? It recalls the fifth commandment. Probably has the idea of smiting 
or striking one's parents and reflects Exodus chapter 21. That's 
the fifth word. What about manslayers? I hope 
you're thinking, not just numerically, but commandment, the sixth commandment, 
right? The sixth word is given, there's 
clarification given in Exodus 21. Notice the next ones, for 
fornicators, for sodomites. What word is that? You're right, 
the seventh commandment. You see, when Paul comes to deal 
with law and says there is a lawful and a right use for it, and he 
speaks specifically of this civil use, he's not talking about Roman 
law. He's not talking about the law 
of the church in Ephesus. He's talking about God's transcendent 
moral law, which was given first in the garden, codified at Sinai, 
transcending the covenantal arrangement. It is that which was prophesied 
in Jeremiah 31 to be written on the hearts of men. Notice 
he doesn't stop at fornicators and sodomites. He then says kidnappers. Kidnappers would be an exaggerated 
form of stealing or theft. It would be the eighth word. 
In fact, Paul is using the exaggerated forms as Knight supposes so that 
he can bring in more teaching from Exodus 21. And then he speaks of liars, 
perjurers. That's the ninth commandment. Noticeably absent is the tenth 
word. I think there's a reason for 
that. Because the tenth word is internalized. The civil use 
of the law is primarily about the restraint of outward, external 
wickedness. It refers to criminal activity. Well, to covet is always a sin, 
but it's not a crime. At least not yet. Hopefully it will not become 
a crime. God will always deal with every sin. The magistrate 
is to deal with outward acts of evil. External acts of evil 
works. They're not to punish mind crime. They're not to punish thoughts 
that are impure. We don't want the magistrate 
doing that. So going back to the first table, 
if the latter half looks so similar to the Decalogue, some argue 
that the first four statements correspond to the first four 
commandments in the Decalogue. I simply highlight that for you. I believe it is the case. George Knight argues effectively 
that it is the case. But when we look at ungodly, 
the first commandment, you shall have no other gods before me. 
Well, certainly to reject the true and living God is the highest 
expression of ungodliness. The second word is more of a 
generic term, sinners. Again, Knight shows in several 
places used in the New Testament, there is a connotation to idolatry, 
which would be the second word, unholy. To take the name of the 
Lord God Almighty in vain. That is to breach the third word. And then profane. This is where 
just about everybody jumps ship. But night holds fast. The profanation 
of the Lord's Day Sabbath. The breaking of the fourth commandment. If it is not a stretch, and it 
certainly isn't, to see the latter half as flowing from and being 
a part of God's law revealed again first at creation and then 
at Sinai, certainly we ought not to stumble on the first table 
of the law being highlighted as well. And as I mentioned, 
George Knight comments on the aggravated forms. And by that, 
I mean the fifth word doesn't just condemn disobedience or 
dishonoring the parents. It condemns murdering them. It 
condemns smiting them. The eighth word doesn't deal 
with property theft, but rather with the theft of men. stealing 
people and selling them into slavery. Knight says, by using 
these aggravated forms from Exodus 21, Paul may be showing the false 
teachers and the church that when the Old Testament applied 
and worked out the principles of the law, it did so in this 
very specific way of dealing with people's sins. Sinai was 
not speculation. Sinai was not a good idea. Sinai 
wasn't a bunch of recommendations for life in the land. The case 
law applications takes the principles, the 10 words, and works them 
out in society. When you work through 21 to 23 
in Exodus, when you work through that bulk of material in Deuteronomy, 
after the giving of the Decalogue, what is going on? What is going 
on is that God, through Moses, is working out the principles 
of the law and how they apply in concrete situations in day-to-day 
living. I think Knight's on to something 
here. He says, the list would therefore 
carry with it, then, a double-edged thrust. Its ethical application 
of the Decalogue echoes the Old Testament itself and thus gives 
both an example of how the law is to function and a refutation 
of the would-be law teachers." Beautiful. If anybody says, we're 
antinomians, we have no business with the law of God, you just 
bring them right over here to 1 Timothy 1, verses 8-11. They say, but we're righteous 
people. Yeah, and so are the Roman Christians, 
and yet Paul applied law to them. The civil use is that use of 
the law which serves to restrain sin, or to restrain outward acts 
of sin. Those who are in conformity, 
those who do not counterfeit, the counterfeit laws simply do 
not apply to them. The law against murder isn't 
for you if you're not murdering. It's not hard, doesn't really 
dazzle the imagination here. And then notice, he underscores 
with a comprehensive standard. At the end of his list, he then 
says, for perjurers and if there is any other thing that is contrary 
to sound doctrine. The Word of God provides the 
standard for sound doctrine. Deviation is heresy and must 
be rejected. You see, the Decalogue, the principles 
of the law, are worked out in further detail in those books. Paul here does a similar convention. And if there is any other thing 
that is contrary to sound doctrine, and then notice, thirdly, by 
way of explanation, the standard for sound teaching. He says, 
according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was 
committed to my trust. The gospel is the source and 
the standard of sound doctrine. The gospel is the source and 
the standard of sound doctrine, which this explanation of the 
law is according to. The gospel testifies or tells 
of this blessed God. In fact, this statement, verse 
11, underscores this reality. The language of Calvin in this 
clause, he maintains that his gospel is so far from being opposed 
to the law that it is a powerful confirmation of it. Those of 
you who were here on Wednesday night, I quoted J. Gresson Machen. Remember in Deuteronomy 30, standing 
on the plains of Moab, looking forward to New Covenant blessings, 
looking forward to that day when God would change the heart, when 
God would put it in His people to obey the law. We see a happy 
people, we see an obedient people. Not in order to be justified, 
but because they've been regenerated, because they've been justified. 
The natural response to God at that point is lawful obedience 
to Him. Machen said it this way, the 
gospel does not abrogate God's law, but it makes men love it 
with their hearts. Doesn't get rid of it, but makes 
men love it. That's why the psalmist can sing, 
oh how I love your law. This is why Jesus can say, if 
you love me, keep my commandments. This is why the apostle can take 
that law and say, obey it. You've been changed. You've been 
thoroughly purged. You've been justified freely 
by His grace. The law of God is now internalized. 
The Lord has written it upon your hearts. He has put this 
new desire in you. This is why the Apostle John 
says the commandments are not burdensome. I've often thought 
for the Christian, if any of the Ten Commandments is a drag, 
if it's a burden, if it's grievous, there's something wrong with 
you. It's not a problem with the law, it's a problem with 
you. Oh, how I hate that law. Oh, 
how I despise that particular law. This jives, or this is why our 
confession says, neither are the aforementioned uses of the 
law contrary to the grace of the gospel, but do sweetly comply 
with it. The spirit of Christ subduing 
and enabling the will of man to do that freely and cheerfully, 
which the will of God revealed in the law requires to be done. So it's according to the glorious 
gospel of the blessed God, and then Paul adds this, which was 
committed to my trust. Again, I think Paul wants The 
audience, he wants the hearers, he wants those in Ephesus to 
know that what he speaks is true. What he speaks is sound doctrine. What he speaks promotes health. It is the false teachers, it 
is those who desire to be teachers of the law, those who have not 
been called by the commandment of God and of our Lord Jesus, 
they are the ones to be rejected. they're the ones to be refused 
and then this then provides the transition for the next section 
in verses 12 and following wherein Paul highlights something of 
his own call to the ministry and the fact that God committed 
to him this particular task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles. Well brethren, we see In this 
statement, we've not fully explored every use of the law, but in 
this particular situation, in this particular context, the 
law of God is good. As I've said, if you reflect 
upon our confession of faith, it does, in my estimation, clearly 
and beautifully summarize and accurately teach the law of God. The law was given at creation. 
I love what that Puritan John Lightfoot said. He said, as much 
in the garden as Israel did at Sinai, but only in fewer words 
and without thunder. God made man in his image. God put in him that law. having the law of God written 
in their hearts and power to fulfill it. London Baptist Confession, 
Chapter 4, Paragraph 2 of Creation. In the Law of God Chapter, Paragraph 
19, Chapter 19, Paragraph 2, The same law that was first written 
in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness 
after the fall, and was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in ten 
commandments, and written in two tablets, the fourth first 
containing our duty towards God, and the other six our duty to 
man. So we see the law of creation, 
we see the law at Sinai, we see the law in the New Covenant. 
When the prophet Jeremiah, or God through the prophet, says, 
I will write my law on their hearts, they didn't ask the prophet, 
what law is he talking about? They knew what law, the Decalogue. There would be a day, New Covenant 
era, when those who were part of the covenant community would 
say with the psalmist, oh, how I love your law. We have seen 
or sketched at least two abuses or to unlawful uses of the law, 
legalism and antinomianism. Just by way of a corollary, I 
just suggest this to you, covenant theology and the doctrine of 
justification by faith alone protects sets up a parameter, 
sets up a hedge, sets up a wall against deviation into legalism 
or into antinomianism. Covenant theology, specifically 
the doctrine of justification by faith alone, protects from 
those two unlawful uses of the law, legalism and antinomianism. Thirdly, I mentioned the threefold 
use of the law. Take out a piece of paper now 
and give everybody a pencil and have you write down the other 
two. We're going to take a test tonight, students, because I 
know you've heard this. I know you've heard it from this 
pulpit. I know you've heard it up in that fellowship hall. We've 
got the civil use. The second is called the pedagogical 
use. Pedagogue simply means a child 
tutor. The pedagogical use is simply 
Romans 3.20. Therefore, by the deeds of the 
law, no flesh will be justified in his sight. For by the law 
is the knowledge of sin. Paul says in Romans 7, I would 
not have known about lust, unless the law says, you shall not covet. It is the law of God that is 
the child tutor. It is the law of God that is 
the pedagogue. It shows us our sin. It destroys 
us. It consumes us. It causes us 
to reflect upon the fact that we have fallen short of the glory 
of God. And then the third use is the 
normative use. After the law sends us to Christ 
for justification, Christ saves us, puts the Spirit in us, and 
then sends us to the law as the rule of life, as the standard 
or the pattern for our sanctification. It is a wonderful and a blessed 
arrangement wherein the Lord God Most High uses this law for 
the good of His people. So we've got that threefold use 
of the law, Paul again confining his attention in this instance 
to that one particular. Romans 13 would be normative. 
How do you know what love is? You don't murder your brother, 
you don't commit adultery with his wife, you don't steal from 
him. That is the normative use. Normatively, every Christian 
ought to seek, by the grace of God, being filled with the Spirit, 
of course, not to disobey that word. So let's just finish on 
that pedagogue, that child tutor. If you have never seen yourself 
as sinful and guilty before God, may I say, look to Sinai. You shall have no other gods 
before me. You shall not make for yourself 
an idol. You say, well, you know, I don't 
have another God. I don't make idols. I'm not like 
the heathen with their poles and their rocks. I'm not like 
those rock stars with their money and their sacks. I'm just a regular 
guy. If you're not worshiping the 
true and the living God, more than likely you're worshiping 
yourself. Probably the biggest idol in most people's lives is 
not the sex, the drugs, and the rock and roll. Those are symptomatic 
of a pre-commitment. The biggest idol in most people's 
lives is that guy that looks at you from the mirror. That's your idol. That's who 
you love. That's who you're committed to. 
That's who you worship. You know how I know this is the 
case? 2 Corinthians chapter 5. 2 Corinthians chapter 5. We do not commend ourselves again 
to you, but give you opportunity to boast on our behalf, that 
you may have an answer for those who boast in appearance and not 
in heart. For if we are beside ourselves, 
it is for God. Or if we are of sound mind, it 
is for you. For the love of Christ compels 
us, because we judge thus, that if one died for all, then all 
died, and he died for all, that those who live should live no 
longer for themselves. You see, that is the orientation. That is the disposition. You 
may not bow at Baal's feet. You may not lob your children 
into Molot's arms. You may not worship President 
Obama. But mark my words, outside of 
Christ, the person, the being, that gets your religious devotion, 
that gets your religious affection, that gets your energy, is yourself. And you see one of the purposes 
of the cross is to break that wicked attachment. That those 
who live should live no longer for themselves but for him who 
died for them and rose again. First and second word condemns 
everybody. Probably most Christians here 
practicing the normative views have to confess God, forgive 
me for having other gods before you. God, forgive me for being 
a self-idolater. God, forgive me for being so 
consumed with me. What about that third word? Again, 
looking at Sinai as that pedagogue, as that child tutor that hopefully 
will direct us to Calvary. What about that third word? You 
shall not misuse. You shall not take the name of 
the Lord your God in vain. It happens all the time. We even 
abbreviate it now. I know this is going to sound 
trite, but OMG? Oh, but we're meaning, oh my 
gosh. That's really not how I ever interpret OMG. Oh, you're just 
being fastidious and you're being a stickler. Well, you know in 
Matthew we read that men will give an account for every idle 
word they speak. Idle words. Fourth Commandment. We are a Sabbatarian Church. Our confessional standard is 
committed to the Puritan Sabbath. Now, I understand application 
is the tough one when it comes to the fourth word. But where's 
our hearts? Where's our desire? I understand 
works of mercy. I understand works of necessity. I get all those qualifiers. But 
for those of us who didn't work a 90-hour week, or those of us 
who aren't police officers, or those of us who aren't whatever 
it is, where's our heart? The fifth word. Kids, look at 
Sinai on this one. Sure, you may not want to smite 
your parents, and that's good. Because they'll probably smite 
you right back. You may not want to murder your parents, and that's 
good. But you remember, the apostle 
is using some exaggerated forms. And exaggerated doesn't mean 
outlandish, and it can never happen. Look at that guy in Deuteronomy 
21. But what about that word, honor 
your father and your mother? What about Paul's use of it in 
the book of Ephesians? Children, obey your parents and 
the Lord, for this is right. You see, that pedagogue ought 
to be telling you, flee to Christ, because you don't honor your 
parents the way you should. You don't obey your parents the 
way you should. You better seek refuge at the foot of the cross. 
What about that sixth word? Yeah, we don't cut people's throats, 
thankfully. We don't shoot people for recreational 
purposes. Dianne Feinstein that said, we 
can hunt people. That's just so bizarre. There's no law in America. Just 
so you all know, if you heard that sound bite, it's really 
not OK to hunt people in America. Just want to clarify that for 
my dear Canadian brethren. We may not actually physically 
end somebody's life. We may not stop their heart. 
We may not stop the blood flow through the various functions 
in the body. But if you hate your brother, 
you've broken the sixth word. Let's keep looking at Sinai there 
for a moment, because Moses is going to tell us we need Jesus 
on that seventh word. Yeah, I've never been a fan of 
that internet pornography. I've never actually engaged in 
adultery. I've never actually committed 
fornication. Jesus uses the minimal. If Paul is exaggerating the use, 
Jesus says if you've looked upon a woman and you've lost it in 
your heart, you haven't acted upon it, you haven't pursued 
it, you haven't texted, you haven't flirted, you have entertained 
it in your heart, what's Jesus say? What's Sinai Thunder say? Guilty. The eighth word. I don't steal, I don't take gold 
bullion from the bank. Do you steal time? Do you steal 
from your employer? Do you steal from the government? 
Don't say, well, they steal from us. Two wrongs don't make a right. We're not ethical situational 
ethicists here. We're not supposed to steal. 
We're not supposed to lie. We're not supposed to shave off 
the rough edges of truth. We're not supposed to put ourselves 
in the best possible light all the time. The ninth word condemns 
that. Don't bear false witness. In 
that tenth word, this was the one that God used with reference 
specifically to Paul. I've always wondered about that 
particular instance. He's converted by Jesus on the 
road to Damascus when he's expounding, you know, certain parts and applications 
of the law. In Romans 7, he talks about covetousness 
and his own lustful heart. Who here hasn't coveted? Don't 
even think to raise your hand, because you're not going to make 
it here. No. Wow, you're impressive. No. The 10th word is like what 
we find here. And if there is any other thing 
that is contrary to sound doctrine. I've shared with you before the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice has a general article, General 
Article 134. I think it's 134. That means if 1 to 133 didn't 
get you, there's 134. We can use that against you. You see, Sinai shows us our need 
for calvary. That's the pedagogical use. If you are not a believer in 
Christ tonight, listen to that law, reflect upon that word, 
and run. Run as fast as you can to find 
refuge in the one alone who perfectly kept that law who died as a sacrifice 
and who rose again so that everyone who looks to him in faith will 
receive pardon for sin and the imputation of his righteousness." 
That's why the gospel is the gospel. That's why it's good 
news, because it answers to men who are steeped in bad news. Sinai preaches destruction. The law, or the gospel of Jesus 
Christ, I'm talking in terms of the pedagogue, the gospel 
is deliverance. Sinai also preaches the normative 
use, the civil use, but with reference to that second use, 
it is telling you, flee to the Lord Jesus for redemption. Well, let us pray. Our Father, 
we thank You for Your Word, and we thank You for its clarity, 
and I pray, God, that the Word would have been clear tonight. 
I pray that we'd all have a good understanding, that we would 
be able to affirm with the Apostle, we know that the Law is good, 
if one uses it lawfully. Keep us from legalism, keep us 
from antinomianism, keep us from these departures from Your Holy 
Word, and God, help us now to go to live in light of these 
truths, to know the power and the presence of the Spirit, to 
say with the psalmist, oh, how I love your law, and may we reflect 
each and every day upon justifying grace, upon the blessings of 
being found in Jesus Christ. And it's in his name that we 
pray, amen.