← Back to sermon library

upon Mount Sinai in 10 commandments 
and written in two tables, the four first containing our duty 
towards God and the other six our duty to man. Besides this 
law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people 
of Israel ceremonial laws containing several typical ordinances, partly 
of worship, prefiguring Christ, his graces, actions, sufferings, 
and benefits. and partly holding forth diverse 
instructions of moral duties, all which ceremonial laws, being 
appointed only to the time of Reformation, are by Jesus Christ 
the true Messiah and only Lawgiver, who was furnished with power 
from the Father for that end, abrogated and taken away. To 
them also he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together 
with the state of that people, not obliging any now by virtue 
of that institution, their general equity only being of moral use. 
The moral law doth forever bind all, as well justified persons 
as others, to the obedience thereof, and that not only in regard of 
the matter contained in it, but also in respect to the authority 
of God the creator who gave it. Neither doth Christ and the gospel 
anyway dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation. Although true 
believers be not under the law as a covenant of works to be 
thereby justified or condemned, yet 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. discovering also the sinful pollutions 
of their natures, hearts, and lives. So as examining themselves 
thereby, they may come to further conviction of, humiliation for, 
and hatred against sin, together with a clearer sight of the need 
they have of Christ and the perfection of His obedience. 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 what even 
their sins deserve and what afflictions in this life they may expect 
for them, although freed from the curse and unallayed rigor 
thereof. The promises of it likewise show 
them God's approbation of obedience and what blessings they may expect 
upon the performance thereof, though not as due to them by 
the law as a covenant of works. So as man's doing good and refraining 
from evil, because the law encourageth to the one and deterreth from 
the other, is no evidence of his being under the law and not 
under grace. 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 requireth to be done. Amen. So a wonderful 
summary statement concerning the law of God. as given to us 
in the Holy Scripture, certainly law and gospel, to absolute necessities 
in terms of understanding with reference to the Word of God. 
Well, we have in the first place the revelation of the law of 
God at creation in paragraph one. We'll see how that connects 
to the giving of the law at Sinai. Notice, secondly, the revelation 
of the law of God after the fall in paragraphs two to four. Paragraph 
five highlights the perpetuity of the moral law of God. So the 
confession deals with the ceremonial law and with the judicial law, 
but it goes on to highlight the perpetuity of the moral law in 
paragraph five. And then in paragraph six and 
seven, you have the specific uses of the law of God with reference 
to not only the believer, but it says, and to others. You see 
that in paragraph 6, although true believers be not under the 
law as a covenant of works to be thereby justified or condemned, 
yet it is of great use to them as well as to others. So it's 
useful, not only to believers, but to unbelievers also. So the 
moral law of God has specific utilizations for the people of 
God and for the non-people of God. But if you look specifically 
at the revelation of the law of God at creation, notice it 
says in paragraph 1 that God gave to Adam a law of universal 
obedience written in his heart and a particular precept of not 
eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 
Now later on in the confession, that second type of law will 
be identified as positive law. Moral law is revealed because 
it's right. Positive law is right because 
it's revealed. In other words, there are positive 
laws that God uses for a time. They don't bind all men everywhere 
in every circumstance like the moral law of God does, but positive 
law in the case of Adam was given. This prohibition from eating 
from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, that positive 
law was given as a probationary period for Adam. It was a testing 
for Adam. you'll notice positive law when 
it comes to chapter 22 later in the confession with reference 
to the Sabbath and the confession highlights the Sabbath commandment 
contains elements of moral law and positive law, the moral law 
is that one day out of seven be set apart by the creature 
for the worship of the Creator the positive law is seen in the 
old covenant they would do that on Saturday the positive law 
is seen in the new covenant in that we gather together on Sunday 
So that's what's in view in paragraph one. This law of universal obedience 
written in his heart refers to the moral law. That will be connected 
in paragraph two. Notice, 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 10 Commandments. So what Adam got in the garden 
written on his heart by God was in fact the moral law of God, 
the 10 Commandments. John Lightfoot says, Adam heard 
as much in the garden as Israel did at Sinai, but only in fewer 
words and without thunder. And I think that's a good observation. And I think that's the trajectory 
that the confession is on. Because again, when we argue 
with reference to moral law, it is abiding upon all men everywhere 
at all times. It doesn't matter what covenant 
you're under, it doesn't matter where you live, it doesn't matter 
your ethnicity, no matter whatsoever. It is the revelation of God's 
will, His perfections, and what He demands for His creature as 
creature. So there is this two-fold aspect 
concerning law. We have the law of universal 
obedience in His heart, And then secondly, a particular precept 
of not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and 
evil. And then notice the obligation with reference to the law. It 
goes on in paragraph one to say, by which He bound him and all 
his posterity. So this isn't just something 
for the Jews. It's not the case that the Ten 
Commandments or this Law of universal obedience is something unique 
to the Jewish people or to Israel alone. No, it is an obligation 
upon all men everywhere, so by which he bound him and all his 
posterity. So the Ten Commandments aren't 
just for a particular race or a particular nation, a particular 
ethnicity or a particular people group, or only with reference 
to a particular covenant. The moral law obliges all men 
at all times everywhere. and then notice that the demand 
of the moral law is stipulated. It says, "...by which he bound 
him in all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual 
obedience." If you turn to the book of Galatians in chapter 
3, the apostle underscores this. It is the backdrop for which 
he is teaching justification by faith alone. He's saying that 
the law, if we seek to perform a righteousness in light of law 
or according to law, we will always come up short. The demand 
of the law is what we find in paragraph one, personal, entire, 
exact, and perpetual obedience. It's never been the case where 
God says, do your best, If, you know, you get a D+, then you're 
okay. We're shooting for A+, but if 
you don't get that and you're on the curve at some point, well, 
then that's okay. That's never been the demand 
of God. Notice in Galatians, well, chapter 2, he's emphasizing 
justification by faith alone. In chapter 1, we notice that 
that is what takes him to write this particular letter to the 
Galatians. Notice in 1.6, I marvel that you are turning away so 
soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different 
gospel, which is not another, but there are some who trouble 
you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or 
an angel from heaven preach any other gospel to you than what 
we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said 
before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel 
to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. And essentially 
what had happened in these churches that were located in southern 
Galatia, after Paul's first missionary journey through there, where 
he made disciples and founded the churches, The Judaizers came 
along and said it was okay and it was good that the people of 
God believe on Jesus as the Messiah, but they must also be circumcised 
and keep the laws of Moses, keep the ceremonies of Moses. You 
can see that in chapter 5 very clearly. He says in verse 2, 
Indeed, I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ 
will profit you nothing. He's not talking about circumcision 
in terms of ethnicity or cultural practice. He is treating circumcision 
in a religious manner here. So if you get circumcised or 
you become circumcised, you are basically saying, I pursue the 
path of law at this point. And that's why he says, if you 
do that, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again 
to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the 
whole law. So it's either Christ and his righteousness or it's 
you and your righteousness. And again, this book really does 
destroy the notion of Roman Catholicism with a faith plus faithfulness 
approach to the Christian life. For Paul, it's either Christ 
for righteousness or it's you for righteousness. And if it's 
you for righteousness, then it must be personal, entire, exact, 
and perpetual obedience. Which, of course, Paul knows 
you're not able to do that. That's why he says, I testify 
again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor 
to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from 
Christ, you attempt to be justified by law. You have fallen from 
grace. For we through the Spirit eagerly 
wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Christ Jesus 
neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything but faith working 
through love. So going back to chapter three, 
notice what he emphasizes in verses 10 and following. He says, 
for as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse, 
for it is written, Curse it is everyone who does not continue, 
notice, in all things which are written in the book of the law, 
to do them." And that's from Deuteronomy chapter 27. It's 
not in a few things. You know, you missed a few of 
those commandments, but the other ones you did really well on. 
And as a result of that, the good outweighs the bad, so therefore 
you can enter in. No, that's never been the demand 
of God relative to His law. Curse it is everyone who does 
not continue in all things which are written in the book of the 
law to do that." So I think the apostle marshals this as an evidence 
as to why it's got to be justification by faith alone. Because if you 
choose works, you need to be perfect. And then he highlights 
verse 11, that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God 
is evident, for the just shall live by faith. So he's saying 
this isn't unique and new in redemptive history. Everybody 
justified in the Old Testament was justified by grace alone, 
through faith alone, and Christ alone as well. And then verse 
12, yet the law is not of faith, but the man who does them shall 
live by them. So, going back to the confession, 
when it demands or highlights the demand of God in terms of 
personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience, the confession 
is not joking here. And this, again, underscores 
the need for the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. And then on 
the heels of that, there is this sanction. Notice at the end of 
paragraph one, promised life upon the fulfilling and threatened 
death upon the breach of it and endued him with power and ability 
to keep it. So there is a promise of life 
upon fulfillment. Go back to Genesis chapter two. 
Not sure that everybody always sees this, but it's good to point 
out. Genesis chapter two, specifically in verses 15 to 17. This is in the section where 
we see positive law having been given by God to Adam in order 
to serve as a probationary period. Do you notice in 2.15, then the 
Lord God took the man, put him in the garden of Eden to tend 
and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man saying, of 
every tree of the garden you may freely eat, but of the tree 
of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat. For 
in the day that you eat of it, you shall surely die. So notice 
there's no positive statement. If you manage successfully to 
keep this probationary law, then living you shall live. But that's 
the obvious implication from the threatened sanction. So notice 
in verse 16, and the Lord God commanded the man saying of every 
tree of the garden, you may freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge 
of good and evil, you shall not eat. So there's the prohibition. 
And if Adam does eat, in the day that you eat of it, you shall 
surely die. So, by necessary inference, if 
he doesn't eat, then he won't die. If he doesn't eat, then 
he will be confirmed in eternal righteousness. If he doesn't 
eat, then he has successfully passed the probationary period. 
So, that's what the confession highlights. Promised life upon 
the fulfilling, and then threatened death upon the breach of it. 
Dying you shall die. We've dealt with that recently 
in our Sunday ministry, so we won't spend a lot of time there. 
And then notice at the end, and endued him with power and ability 
to keep it. So God made man upright, Ecclesiastes 
729. Adam was endued with the power 
to comply with the law of God. He had it in him. But he also 
had in him the ability to sin. He had within him that tendency, 
or proclivity rather, to go ahead and rebel against the living 
and true God. So that's the revelation of the 
law of God at creation. Again, that's very important 
for our understanding of the unfolding of the concept of law 
throughout scripture. You see a lot of connection between 
Genesis 1 to 3 and the rest of the Bible. And so if we want 
to understand the law of God, yes, Exodus 20, yes, Deuteronomy 
5, the giving of the commandments, certainly Exodus and Deuteronomy 
in terms of ceremonial law and in terms of judicial law, but 
to get a full understanding of the law as given by God, we need 
to go back to the beginning. We need to understand that what 
we have in this confessional statement is valid, it's legit. God gave to Adam a law of universal 
obedience written in his heart and a particular precept of not 
eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 
And if you turn to Romans chapter 2, Romans chapter 2, this underscores 
the reality that all men everywhere are under this obligation, and 
all men everywhere have that law written in their hearts. 
They have some semblance of God's law in their heart, they just 
distort it, they twist it, and they live not in light of it. But Paul indicates this in 214 
of Romans. For when Gentiles who do not 
have the law by nature do the things in the law, these, although 
not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work 
of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing 
witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else 
excusing them. And we shouldn't underestimate 
or minimize this aspect of the law of God. For the most part, 
persons out there engaged in all manner of lawlessness and 
wickedness, at some point, at some level, at some secret place 
in their heart, they know what they're doing is wrong. If you 
look back just a moment to chapter one in Romans, notice in verse 
32, who knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who 
practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same, 
but also approve of those who practice that. Man knows ultimately 
that he is a rebel before a holy God. Again, he suppresses that 
truth and unrighteousness. He tries to escape the implications 
of that. He tries to, you know, numb his 
conscience to the reality of what it is that he's doing. but 
man as God's creature has something of the law written in his heart, 
and it's helpful for us to understand that when we come to evangelize 
and when we come to tell them about their sin and their need 
for the Savior. Any questions or comments about paragraph one? 
Yes, sir. the moral law in the first clause? 
No, I would take it to the moral law in the first clause because 
when we drop down to paragraph two, the same law that was first 
written in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness 
after the fall. So all men everywhere aren't 
under the stipulation prohibition of eating from the tree of the 
knowledge of good and evil. Does that make sense? Yes. Could you 
repeat that little piece you said about relations and preach 
any other That's in Galatians 1, 6 to 9. So Paul comes out 
of the gate in Galatians 1, and it's intriguing because 1 Corinthians 
is a letter that deals with a lot of sort of practical issues in 
the life of the church. In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul has 
to sort of reprimand the Corinthian church because someone in the 
midst of the church had his father's wife, The Corinthians knew about 
it, and instead of dealing with it, they were arrogant about 
it. You've got, you know, issues concerning meat sacrifice to 
idols. You've got, you know, strong 
brothers causing weak brothers to stumble. You've got Paul needing 
to clarify instructions concerning the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 
chapter 11. So a lot of real practical issues in the letter 
to the Corinthians, the first letter to the Corinthians. When 
you read the first chapter of 1 Corinthians 1, Paul speaks 
in very glowing and very loving and very kind language. He doesn't 
unchurch them, he doesn't dechurch them, he doesn't dischurch them, 
but rather he does address their particular issues. Now in Galatians 
1, He does have a brief greeting, but then he gets right into it 
in verses six to nine. I can't believe, I'm marveling, 
I'm shocked that you're turning away from him who called you 
in the grace of the gospel. And so some have recognized that 
the matter of sanctification that 1 Corinthians is more about, 
the apostle is severe and he does reprimand them and he does 
rebuke them and he does deal with that to be sure. But Galatians 
1, there's a necessity, there's a sort of coming right out of 
the gate and letting them have it, you know, right off the bat, 
because justification is being jeopardized. This thought that 
we need Jesus plus Moses in order for salvation, or faith in Jesus 
plus circumcision in order for salvation, provokes or evokes 
from Paul this very earnest response to correct them and to stop them 
from continuing down that particular path. Now in paragraphs 2 to 
4 you see the revelation of the law of God after the fall. We 
know that Adam does not abide in terms of the covenant of works, 
he does not abide in terms of that probationary period, he 
takes the fruit, he rebels against God, and in Adam all die. Well, 
some might suggest, well, then what, with reference, a question, 
what happens to the law after that? Well, we see this, first 
of all, in its subsequent function from Adam to Moses. Notice in 
paragraph two, the same law that was first written in the heart 
of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness after the 
fall. In other words, he's not suggesting 
that there was no law in that period. Rather, that law of universal 
obedience written on the heart of man continues to be in play. Even though Adam sins, and even 
though his posterity dies in him, that does not mitigate the 
place of the law in the life of the creature. The creature 
still has that responsibility to obey God. So there is this 
requirement to obey the law prior to Sinai. If you look at the 
Bible prior to Sinai, you see the execution of God's justice 
and judgment upon various persons. Why does he do that? Or how does 
he do that? He does it in light of the moral 
law that has been written on the heart of man. You've got, 
you know, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 
chapter 19. Well, what law was operative 
at that particular time? It is that law that paragraph 
1 has spoken of, that God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience 
written in his heart. He knows that it's wrong to engage 
in these particular sins. And again, you see that in Romans 
1, 32, Romans 2, 14, and 15. So you've got the requirement 
to obey the law prior to Sinai. You see that with the sons of 
Adam. They come to offer up sacrifice. 
They do so at the end of the days of the week, the Sabbath 
day. They obey the things that God had given to Adam, and then 
he had passed that down to them. And then this threat, or rather, 
this punishment of sin against the law prior to Sinai. Death, 
for instance. Romans 5, the apostle tells us 
that there was death prior to the actual giving of the law 
at Sinai. And then, of course, that statement 
of Paul in Romans 2, 14, and 15, a text that is referenced 
here by the Confesset. So the same law that was first 
written in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness 
after the fall. Now notice here comes Sinai, 
and was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in Ten Commandments, 
and written in two tables, the four first containing our duty 
towards God, and the other six our duty to man. So it's a good 
statement. So we come to Genesis, we get 
to Exodus chapter 20. So the giving of the law at Sinai 
is not something absolutely positively new. It's a codification of, 
or it's a putting into written format, what God had done with 
Adam in the garden, what God had done with man as created 
in the image of God. So the law was delivered by God 
at Sinai. The law is summarized in these 
two tables, the Ten Commandments, and it specifies the four first, 
containing our duty towards God, and the other six, our duty to 
man. There's a bit of difference about that in terms of Lutherans 
and the Papists have a different sort of numbering system, so 
this is a good Protestant statement or a good Reformed emphasis on 
how we break down the two tables of the law. So the four first 
containing our duty towards God, and the other six are duty to 
man. So that's the subsequent function 
from Adam to Moses, and then you have the revelation of the 
law at Sinai. And now the confession highlights 
the other sorts of divisions of the law. So when you get to 
Sinai, and we're there now in our Wednesday night Bible study, 
Exodus chapter 21, you've got the giving of the 10 commandments 
in Exodus chapter 20, And then you've got the giving of the 
judicial law in Exodus 21 to 23. You see it again throughout 
the book of Deuteronomy. And then you see the giving of 
ceremonial law, certain things that affected worship and sacrifice 
and things prefiguring Christ. So when it comes to the Jews 
or to Israel in that old covenant setting, they not only had the 
moral law of God, but as the confession goes on, it says they 
had the ceremonial law and they also had the judicial law. So 
paragraph 3 deals with ceremonial law. Turretin describes it this 
way, the ceremonial law is the system of God's positive precepts. Remember? A bit of a distinction 
between the moral law and positive precepts. For instance, when 
God forbids the children of Israel from eating shellfish, the primary 
emphasis is not health. The primary emphasis is holiness. And I'm not suggesting that you're 
holy if you don't eat shellfish. The primary emphasis with holiness 
is separation, sanctification, being set apart. And so that 
holiness code or that ceremonial law that comes to Israel is to 
set them off from the nations around Israel. It is to make 
a distinction between the Hivites and the Hittites and the Amorites 
and the Girgashites and the Jebusites, all of them, with reference to 
the people of God. So it was to set them apart. 
So he refers to positive precepts concerning the external worship 
and sacred things prescribed to the ancient church either 
for the sake of order or signification. So order, set them apart, make 
sure they don't mix with the heathen, but as well for signification. When they went on a Saturday 
morning to their backyard or to their barn, and they found 
the best animal, and they took it over to the tabernacle or 
then temple, and they cut its throat and handed it over to 
the priest, there was signification going on. There was symbolism 
involved. That's why in John 129, when 
John the Baptist says, behold the Lamb of God who takes away 
the sin of the world, he is making a big statement there. He is 
ascribing to that old covenant ceremonial sacrificial system 
that it's been fulfilled, it's been realized now in the coming 
of the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. So 
if you look at paragraph 3, it tells us the function of ceremonial 
law. Besides this law, the moral law, 
commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people 
of Israel ceremonial laws containing several typical ordinances, partly 
of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, 
and benefits. and partly holding forth divers 
instructions of moral duties, all which ceremonial laws being 
appointed only to the time of reformation are by Jesus Christ, 
the true Messiah and only lawgiver, who was furnished with power 
from the Father for that end, abrogated and taken away. You 
can turn to the book of Hebrews, excuse me, Hebrews chapter nine. 
Hebrews chapter nine, where you see that language of the time 
of reformation. as Reformed believers, this doesn't 
mean the Protestant Reformation that Calvin and Zwingli and Luther 
and those fellows got going. It is rather Reformation is the 
coming of the new covenant. It's the coming of the Lord Jesus 
Christ. So if you look at Hebrews 9.6, now when these things had 
been thus prepared, he's talking about tabernacle, he's talking 
about the worship and the significance of it in its old covenant setting. 
The priests always went into the first part of the tabernacle, 
performing the services. But into the second part, the 
high priest went alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered 
for himself and for the people's sins committed in ignorance. 
The Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the holiest 
of all was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was 
still standing. It was symbolic for the present 
time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered, which 
cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard 
to the conscience, concerned only with foods and drinks, various 
washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of Reformation." 
Again, the time of Reformation is the coming of the Lord Jesus 
Christ to bring the New Covenant. The New Covenant does come in 
fulfillment of all that had been written in the Old Testament 
And then we learn in chapters 7 and 8 of the book of Hebrews, 
it's a better covenant founded on better promises that affords 
a better hope. And so the emphasis by the apostle 
in Hebrews is on the superiority of Christ over all things. So 
certainly the superiority of the new covenant over the old 
covenant. Not that the old covenant was 
bad. The old covenant did exactly what God designed for it to do. 
but rather it was typical in a lot of ways pointing forward 
to the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. And that's what the emphasis 
in paragraph 3 highlights. We have this ceremonial law partly 
holding for divers' instructions and moral duties. So again, those 
laws forbidding, say for instance, the ingestion of shellfish, other 
things that would distinguish the children of Israel from the 
nations around them, those were positive laws, it's not the case 
that somehow eating a shrimp is a moral offense against a 
holy God. So, any questions or comments? Yeah, go ahead. Okay, so going 
back to that preaching any other gospel, let it be a person. So, 
in our modern day, if we cut the moral law, if we cut it to 
make it more politically acceptable and loving, Well, yeah, we definitely... We certainly do not want to minimize 
the preaching of the law. I actually have a quote from 
J. Gresson Magen, and he made this 
observation. So yeah, if persons believe or 
have, like the confession's going to go on to say, it does here 
in paragraph three, for instance, who was furnished with power 
from the Father for that end, abrogated and taken away. So 
the abrogation of the ceremonial law means that it's not abiding 
for us now. We don't have to avoid bacon. 
We don't have to avoid shellfish. We are not under those stipulations 
in terms of the food laws that were ceremonial, that prefigured 
Christ, that did provide some moral duty to keep the people 
of God separated from the nations around them. We'll look at the 
judicial law in just a moment. And the confession says that 
it expired with the theocratic nation of Israel. Now with reference 
to the moral law, it is binding. And yes, if the church today 
does not preach the law, then she is not being faithful to 
her calling. We need to preach the law of 
God in its civil use, which means that it functions as a restraint 
over mankind. In a general way, it's also been 
called the political use of the law. The Ten Commandments function 
in a way that hopefully bring restraint to the creature. The 
second use of the law is a child tutor. So in other words, we 
preach the law so people see their sin and flee to Christ. 
And then we preach what's called the normative use of the law, 
which means that justified by faith believers who now have 
the Holy Spirit are supposed to live in light of the law or 
according to the law as a pattern for sanctification. It doesn't 
mean that's how they get saved. It's because they are saved that 
they now comply with the law. And the confession will go on 
to detail that in just a moment. But Machen said this about the 
preaching of the law. And he wrote in probably the 
1920s or 30s when he wrote this, he says, And this is a fundamental problem. 
In our generation, persons have preached the gospel as a way 
to happiness. Come to Jesus and you'll have 
a happier life. Come to Jesus, you'll have peace 
of mind. Come to Jesus and it'll settle 
all of your anxiety. Well, when we do that, we're 
not being consistent and faithful. We don't preach Jesus first and 
foremost for happiness. We preach Jesus first and foremost 
for righteousness. And so what Machen says holds. 
A new and more powerful proclamation of that law is perhaps the most 
pressing need of the hour. Men would have little difficulty 
with the gospel if they had only learned the lesson of the law. 
When we understand how bad we are in light of the Decalogue, 
then hopefully we'll see how much we need the Lord Jesus Christ. And then he makes this observation 
that I think is so perceptive. So it always is. A low view of 
law always brings, guess what he's gonna say? Antinomianism 
is what we'd think, right? A low view of law always brings 
in antinomianism. That's not what he says. A low 
view of law always brings legalism in religion. We look at the Pharisees 
and we think they were pro-law. No, they weren't. I mean, they 
were pro-law the way it was useful for them. They were pro-law insofar 
as it served their wretched ends. But the problem with legalism 
and antinomianism is the law of God. The antinomian typically 
gets picked on the most because antinomianism means anti-law-ism. He is against the law. So we say, oh, he has no regard 
for the law of God. But neither does the legalist. 
The legalist does not love the law of God. If he loved the law 
of God, he'd let the law of God alone. He wouldn't try to add 
to it, he wouldn't try to take it away, he wouldn't try to manipulate 
it, and he certainly wouldn't neglect it. So he says, a low 
view of law always brings legalism and religion. A high view of 
law makes a man a seeker after grace. Pray, God, that the high 
view may again prevail. And I think I mentioned on yesterday 
and Wednesday night, Luther has been accused of being an antinomian. 
Luther wasn't an antinomian doctrinally. Luther, however, emphasized the 
preaching of the law as the means by which sinners see their need 
for Jesus. So he focused on that second 
use of the law, and that's consistent with what Matron is talking about 
there. But does that answer your question, 
if the church is not faithfully preaching the law? Now there's 
reasons why some churches don't faithfully preach the law. Some 
of them have it built into their theology that that law, that 
Ten Commandments, is not for this church age. They think it 
applies only to the Jews, that it was given in Ten Commandments 
at Sinai, and therefore it's binding upon the Jews. And since 
the Jews are not God's sort of focus right now, once there's 
this millennial kingdom, then the Ten Commandments will be 
operative for the Jews in that kingdom. I disagree with that 
100%. I think that the Ten Commandments 
are operative now for all men everywhere, and they serve the 
purpose of God in hopefully bringing sinners to a knowledge of their 
sin so that they will seek after the grace of Christ. Yes, sir. Yeah, and I'd say Matthew 9, 
I did not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. And 
now, not every sinner is going to know every single sin they've 
ever committed or the gravity or the enormity of their sin, 
but that they've sinned is crucial. Nobody goes to the Savior Unless, 
again, they've been lied to by, you know, the modern evangelist 
that says, come to Jesus and you'll be happy. Come to Jesus, 
you'll be healthy. Come to Jesus, you'll be wise. 
You can come to Ben Franklin for that. You come to Jesus Christ 
for righteousness. You come to Jesus Christ for 
his blood. You come to Jesus Christ for forgiveness. You come 
to Jesus Christ for the things that the Bible emphasizes that 
man stands in need of. So if we reduce the gospel to 
simply being happy, to simply being healthy, then we have stripped 
it of any of its dimension, or any of its biblical dimension. 
We need to come to Jesus because we're guilty, vile, helpless 
sinners. So yeah, if we are not preaching 
the law, if we are not telling men their sin, they're never 
going to see the need for the Savior. And those things are 
connected. I think it was Bunyan. He says that a low view of the 
law will always promote a low view of sin, which will always 
result in a low view of the Savior. Those things are intertwined. 
They are inextricably connected. If you disregard the law, You're 
not going to have a true understanding of sin, and without a true understanding 
of sin, true I don't mean again the enormity and the gravity, 
I don't think any of us have that, but we'll never see the 
blessedness and the beauty of the Lord Jesus Christ as the 
law keeper and as the atoning sacrifice and as the resurrected 
Savior who does bring justification to his people. So it's very important 
that we understand the law and its relationship to the gospel. 
If we mess that up, we mess up pretty much the entirety of the 
Bible. You don't do well when you mess up law or gospel. And, typically, it's usually 
by putting more law into gospel and gospel into law, and then 
basically changing the makeup of both law and gospel. So, we 
want to keep them in their proper categories, see them in their 
proper relationships, something that the Confession does in paragraph 
7, neither are the aforementioned uses of the law contrary to the 
grace of the gospel. So you might ask the question, 
well, does the law have a place in the life of the justified 
believer? Well, yeah, it does, paragraph 6, and then just as 
a summary statement, the confession wants us to know, the Reformed 
tradition wants us to know, that this does not mitigate or disregard 
the law. 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 requireth to be done. So you've got the 
law points us to Jesus for justification by faith alone. We by grace come 
to Jesus and we're justified by faith alone. Then what does 
Jesus do? He points us back to the law, 
not to supplement or to add to or to complete our salvation, 
but because we are justified freely by his grace, he now fills 
us with the Spirit, points us to that law, which is a pattern 
and a written revelation of what our sanctification should look 
like. As justified by grace through faith believers in Jesus, we're 
not supposed to engage in idolatry, or blasphemy, or Sabbath breaking, 
or insubordination, or murder, or adultery, or lies, or theft, 
or lies, or covetousness. We're supposed to, by God's grace, 
comply with those things. Now, we're not going to do it 
perfectly. and we have 1 John chapter 2 to tell us the blessing 
involved therein, not go ahead and go out and sin and do all 
that you want because there'll always be forgiveness. No, if 
anyone does sin, though, we do have an advocate with the Father, 
even Jesus Christ the righteous. So it's not the case that if 
we commit sin, or we have remaining corruption, we're cut off by 
God. No, the Apostle deals with remaining 
corruption in Romans 7, Galatians 5. For the people of God, there's 
still that proneness to wander, proneness to leave the God that 
we love, but that written revelation of God's law serves as the pattern 
for our sanctification. This is certainly what Jesus 
means in John 14. If you love me, what? You keep 
my commandments. Well, how do we get to the point 
where we love Jesus? We don't love Jesus by nature. 
We love Jesus by grace. We've been justified by his grace 
through faith in him. And as a result, we will seek 
by his grace to keep his commandments. But when it comes to our entrance 
into heaven, it's not what Jesus did and what we have done, but 
it's solely and alone what Jesus has done. That's the emphasis 
in chapter 11, that our entrance into heaven is based upon the 
active and the passive obedience of Jesus Christ. And it's in 
that that we find great joy and happiness and delight because 
God most high has dealt with our sin in and through the person 
and work of his blessed son. So we have ceremonial law, but 
it's not just moral and ceremonial that Israel got, they also got 
judicial law. So notice in paragraph 4. To 
them also he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired with the 
state of that people, not obliging any now by virtue of that institution, 
their general equity only being of moral use. Turretin describes 
judicial law this way, the forensic or judicial law concerned the 
civil government of the people of God under the Old Testament 
and contained a body of precepts concerning the form of that political 
rule. So, it's a civil application 
of the general principles of the law of God. Again, we're 
doing this on Wednesday night. If anybody's interested, if you 
can't make it, you can, I think, Zoom, or do they have Zoom on 
Wednesday? No, but it ends up on sermon 
audio. Oh, OK. OK. So we're going through those 
judicial laws in Exodus chapters 21 to 23. So we move from the 
general principle, do not murder, and then we get into Exodus 21. 
We see a distinction between murder and homicide. And then 
we see specific crimes indicated that are under that prohibition 
against murder. So the civil or judicial law 
basically shows how to apply these general principles in society. Now notice that the confession 
says that the judicial law expired together with the state of that 
people. So there was an interesting thing. Turn to 1 Chronicles chapter 
29. 1 Chronicles chapter 29 for just a moment. Something intriguing 
about King Solomon. First Chronicles chapter 29 at 
verse 21. And they made sacrifices to the 
Lord and offered burnt offerings to the Lord on the next day, 
a thousand bulls, a thousand rams, a thousand lambs with their 
drink offerings and sacrifices in abundance for all Israel. 
That's actually not the interesting point that I wanted to point 
out, but that's an interesting point. Look at all those animals 
that were offered up. 1,000 bulls, 1,000 rams, 1,000 
lambs with their drink offerings and sacrifices in abundance for 
all Israel. So they ate and drank before 
the Lord with great gladness on that day. And they made Solomon 
the son of David king the second time and anointed him before 
the Lord to be the leader and Zadok to be priest. Now notice, 
then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king instead of 
David his father and prospered and all Israel obeyed him. Solomon 
sat on the throne of Yahweh. So what you had with the old 
covenant people was a theocracy. They were a monarchy to be sure. 
Solomon was a king and he had the role of government and administration 
and defense and protection and all those sorts of things, building 
roads and welfare programs. I'm kidding. Solomon sat on the 
throne of Yahweh. They were a theocratic nation. 
They were a unique people. They were different from all 
the nations around them. I mentioned that holiness code. 
It separated them from the pagans around them. There were a whole 
host of reasons for that, but that judicial law governed them 
for their tenure in the land. So the idea is, is once that 
theocracy is dissolved through the judgment of God, because 
of their unfaithfulness, their covenant breaking, when you see 
the Northern Kingdom fall to the Assyrians in the 700s, and 
you see the Southern Kingdom fall to the Babylonians in the 
500s, And then you see the nation as a whole fall to the Romans 
in AD 70. It's because of their unfaithfulness. 
This was specified. Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 
28 highlights blessings for obedience in the land and curses for disobedience 
in the land. So when they sinned against God, 
one of the promises of God in great detail in Deuteronomy 28, 
is exile. They'll be cast out of the land. 
They'll lose the land. You see that in the Old Testament. 
The land will vomit out its inhabitants. Why? Because they broke in covenant 
with God. And so the argument is, that 
the confession is highlighting here, is now that we have a dissolution 
of the theocratic nation of Israel, the old covenant people are no 
more, they're just like everybody else now, there is not a demand 
in the new covenant setting that those judicial laws be enacted 
for us on a one-to-one basis. That's the point in paragraph 
four. So it says, which expired the judicial laws together with 
the state of that people, not obliging any now by virtue of 
that institution. So we're not obliged to those 
particular laws by virtue of the theocratic nation of Israel 
in the Old Covenant. But now the Confession does what 
the Reformed faith does, is that it highlights the general equity 
of that. Notice the last clause in paragraph 
4. It says, "...their general equity 
only being of moral use." And again, I use the example pretty 
much all the time because I think it fits, is the general principle, 
you shall not murder. As you move through the judicial 
legislation in Exodus and Deuteronomy, one of the demands in the civil 
polity is that if you have a house that has a flat roof, ideally 
for sunbathing or entertaining, you put a fence around that so 
that persons don't fall off of that and die. So what's the general 
equity principle that we find in that? If you have a swimming 
pool today, it's a good idea to put a fence around it because 
you could be criminally liable for actually killing your neighbor's 
child if he falls into that water. So there are general equity uses 
that we can apply to with reference to Exodus 21 to 23. and to the 
judicial code of the book of Deuteronomy. So it's not like 
it's useless, it's not like it has no validity, and it has no 
merit. I think, as I said yesterday, 
those sections of Scripture best answer the question, what does 
God think with reference to civil society? Well, if we ask the 
question, Exodus and Deuteronomy sort of fleshes it out for us, 
and that general equity is of moral use for the people of God 
in all times. I mentioned Turretin. Turretin 
says, how do we do this? Well, it's tough to be sure, 
but he gives three rules. Three principles, that which 
prevails not only among the Jews but also among the Gentiles is 
of common right. What is found to be conformed 
to the precepts of the Decalogue and serves to explain and conform 
it. And then the things so repeated in the New Testament that their 
observance is commended to Christians. So he has, again, it doesn't 
figure out every issue and problem. that you will face in terms of 
going through the judicial laws, but I think it's a good help 
and a good step toward getting that general equity principle 
and seeking to put it into practice in our own generation. Well, 
any questions or comments in any of that? Go ahead. in those days, would there actually 
be him being over the temple, over the people, would there 
actually be some sort of social service then through Solomon, 
through the temple? For sure, yeah. And I think a 
lot of it's connected to the tithing laws and rules. Yeah, absolutely. I don't know 
if it looked like what we experience in modern day Canada in terms 
of the social assistance and that sort of thing. But yeah, 
they certainly stressed charity, kindness, and it was built into 
the law code, usury, different things you weren't supposed to 
do. to the people of your own nation. And there were gleaning 
laws, there were all kinds of things that were in place to 
make sure that the downtrodden and the poor were looked after 
in some respect. But yeah, were there food stamps 
with Solomon's picture on it? I doubt it, so. Oh yeah, yeah. I think it was 
very much, you know, I think when you come to the Bible and 
you ask the question about government, I think the first emphasis is 
upon individual self-government. I mean, if everybody kind of 
looked after themselves, that'd be a good thing. And then of 
course, then you've got family. Family is supposed to look after 
the needs of family. First Timothy chapter five, the 
apostle Paul sees that it's legit that widows be placed on the 
list, of the church so that the church can be charitable to those 
widows, but the first place is the home. That's the context 
of 1 Timothy 5. If anyone does not provide for 
his own, he's worse than an unbeliever. He's worse than an infidel. Well, 
I don't think his own is just his mom, his dad, and his kids. 
In the context, it would extend to his widowed mother. It would 
extend to his widower father. So the family, so you've got 
the individual, then you've got the family, and then of course 
you've got the state. And again, when you ask the Bible 
what's the primary emphasis in terms of the state's responsibility, 
it's the punishment of evildoers. I think that's the bottom line 
when you extrapolate everything down. I mean, obviously there's 
other things to be sure. But they weren't, or at least 
in the Old Covenant, you don't get this view that they were 
involved from cradle to grave in everybody's life at every 
step of the way. And just there was this dependence 
upon the big state. I don't think that at all. All 
right, well, we'll stop there, and then, God willing, I think 
we may come back to this next week so we can sort of stagger 
the theology and the confession study, but we'll stop here for 
now. Any other questions or comments 
on any of this? That's right. you know, trying to, you know, 
make himself right with God, and then you finally, you know, 
keep the understanding of justification by faith. What a revelation from 
God. Absolutely. That's the one the 
Catholic Church wants. Yeah, yeah. And we see the same 
thing in Pilgrim's Progress, when you see a Christian, you 
know, loses his burden. Loses his burden, that's right. 
It's just a wonderful thing when God sets him free. Absolutely. 
Have you ever heard Sproul's bit on Martin Luther? I remember 
this was years ago. He had a sort of little biography 
of Luther and he was talking about how Luther, you know, would 
go when he was in the monastery, he'd be in the confessionary 
or the confessional for like three, four hours. The priest 
that would hear his confession probably rolled their eyes. Oh, 
I get him, right? And then Sproul makes the quip, 
what kind of trouble do you get in in a monastery? Did he covet 
Brother Philip's role or bunt? But he just saw his sin. And 
that's where I think in at least historical theology, they may 
debunk it. But you've probably heard where 
he has said or he said, I love God. I hated God. The idea not, 
you know, because I'm just as hateful, but because of what 
God demands. For Luther, it all turned on 
the righteousness of God. And if the righteousness of God 
meant that standard by which he was going to judge Luther, 
no, I don't love him, I can't stand the thought. But then Luther 
finds out the righteousness of God is used by Paul in Romans 
1 and Philippians 3, is the righteousness that God demands and God supplies. And that's when he says heaven 
opens up like paradise, yeah. But before that, yeah, miserable, 
miserable person. So the law of God does function 
under the hand of the Spirit or in the hand of the Spirit 
to bring that conviction and to show us our need for the Savior. 
All right, let's pray. Father in heaven, thank you for 
this study. Thank you for our confession of faith and the reformed 
tradition and the good things that we have in terms of biblical 
interpretation. I ask that you would go with 
us now into public worship, help us to glorify you. I pray that 
we would be reverent and full of joy and gratitude and thanksgiving 
at the thought of the gospel of our salvation. May Christ 
be glorified in the preaching of the word all throughout the 
earth, and may that word run swiftly and be glorified. And 
we pray in Jesus' name, amen.