Liberty under Law in the Life of the Christian

"I will keep Your law continually, forever and ever,
And I shall walk in a wide place, for I have sought Your precepts. 
I will also speak of Your testimonies before kings and shall not be put to shame, 
For I find my delight in Your commandments, which I love."
- Psalm 119:44-47

These four verses express an attitude which is strikingly different from that of most modern Christians toward the Law of God. Under the influence of dispensationalism, most professing evangelicals believe that the law is a taskmaster, an enemy to spiritual freedom, joy, and assurance. Yet, the anonymous author of this Psalm would clearly disagree. To him, the Law is liberating and a spiritual blessing.

How can there be such a contrast between the one believer, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and so many others?

One thing that must be granted here is that the Psalmist is using the word "law" in a broad sense, to refer to all of the biblical teachings. However, it must be equally obvious that he is using the word in that sense because he includes the Law in the strict sense under that rubric.

A big part of the problem is the dispensationalist hermeneutic. In particular, it quotes Romans 6:14 ad nauseum, "You are not under law but under grace." However, the dispensationalist ignores one simple consideration: in the sense of justification, no one has ever been under the Law! Notice what Paul does not say in the verse: "You are no longer under law." Yet that is exactly how the dispensationalist reads it!

If any person is looking to the Law for justification, then he is truly under bondage, because it can provide none. Justification comes by grace through faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9). However, if a justified person then uses the Law for its proper purpose, then it will serve as a bulwark against the sin that so easily besets us (I Timothy 1:8-11, Hebrews 12:1). Thus applied and empowered by the Holy Spirit, the Law is the Law of Liberty, indeed (James 1:25).

Hope and the Great Commission

At the end of His earthly ministry, Jesus gave this assignment to His church: "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:18-20). This is not a project He gives us to do on our own power. In fact, He was at such pains to say otherwise that He placed both at the beginning and the end of the command that our work is built on His authority and presence.

But notice, too, what the command is. Dispensationalists claim that Christians proclaim the Gospel as a witness to a world that is headed for Hell. To expect success in that program would be contrary to the whole hermeneutic of dispensationalism. They quote the Great Commission from, for example, Acts 1:8: "You will be My witnesses." Then they add that the witness will be unsuccessful.

But that is certainly contrary to what Jesus says in the passage from Matthew. The Gospel isn't proclaimed merely as a witness against unchecked unbelief. Rather, He gives it with the expectation that, not merely individuals, but entire nations will become His disciples, and will, thus, need to be trained in His Word. We see the repetition of this promise in Revelation: "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever" (Revelation 11:15). The Great Commission in Matthew is the command to go, while Revelation records the result of that commission.

Though he wasn't addressing eschatology when he wrote it, this comment from Presbyterian Theologian James Henley Thornwell makes the point very well: "If the Church could be aroused to a deeper sense of the glory that awaits her, she would enter with a warmer spirit into the struggles that are before her. Hope would inspire ardor. She would, even now, rise from the dust, and, like an eagle, plume her pinions for loftier flights than she has yet taken. What she wants [lacks], and what every individual Christian wants, is faith - faith in her sublime vocation, in her divine resources, in the presence and efficacy of the Spirit that dwells in her - faith in the truth, faith in Jesus, and faith in God. With such a faith, there would be no need to speculate about her future. That would speedily reveal itself" ("Theology as a Life in Individuals and in the Church").

The unbiblical pessimism of dispensationalism has the opposite effect, to turn the eyes from Jesus to the inadequacy of her native resources, deflating her hope, and undermining her faith.

Christ on the Throne of the Church

The Westminster Confession tells, "There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God" (XXV:6). This assertion is based on, for example, Ephesians 4:15-16: "We are to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, [who] makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love." And in Colossians 1:18: "He is the head of the body, the church."

The reason the Confession teaches that His headship precludes the Pope (as well as all of the papist offices, such as priest and bishop) is based on Ephesians 4:11-13, in which Christ, as Head of the Church, "gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, [and] to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ..." As the Head of His Church, Christ gave her the officers and government that would best lead her to develop as He desired.

One thing that the Confession does not say, because it was taken as self-evident, is that the headship of Christ is an absolute monarchy. He decrees, and the church obeys. She is never left to decide her government, mission, or worship for herself. As Presbyterian theologian James Henley Thornwell wrote, "Existing in Christ, by Christ, and for Christ, she has no other law but His will. She can only speak the words which He puts in her mouth. Founded upon divine revelation and not in human nature, she has a divine faith, but no human opinion, and the only argument by which she authenticates either her doctrines or her precepts is, 'Thus saith the Lord.' Her province is not to reason, but to testify" ("Theology as a Life in Individuals and in the Church").

Antinomian "Love" versus the Word of God

I run into a lot of Christians who proclaim, "Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law" (Romans 13:10). They claim that having Christian love abrogates the biblical Law, because we now have an ability to love, which is higher than the requirements of the Law.

However, as such prooftexting often does, this claim ignores the context of that verse. Notice the immediately-preceding verse: "For the commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,' and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself'" (Romans 13:9). Paul actually cites four of the Commandments, then refers to the others, and tells us that they are summarized in the commandment to love. Summarized, not abrogated. Loving others means obeying the Law in regard to our relations to them. It is not a get-out-of-jail-free card that leaves us free to disregard the Law. 

It is this same author, the Apostle Paul, who leaves this instruction: "Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity" (II Timothy 2:19; see John 10:14). In order to depart from iniquity, the Christian must be able to identify it. But how? The antinomian simply claims that it is whatever is contrary to love. But love according to whom? The child molester has a very different understanding of love from that of his victims. How do we determine which one is right? That question takes us right back to Romans 13:9. We determine true love by comparing it to the standards of God, which are found in the biblical Law.

Abortion, The Church, and Her Holy Calling

I write this just after the State of New York expanded abortion to any point up to birth. Christians are horrified by this step backward in the effort to end legalized infanticide. I am especially appalled that the effort was pushed by professing Christian Governor Andrew Cuomo, a member of the Roman Catholic Church.

Where has been the voice of that church? She speaks often about the sanctity of human life. I have seen her priests at protests in front of abortion clinics. And no one can claim that Cuomo's pro-death views appeared suddenly out of the air. Could it be that Rome enjoys the prestige of being able to claim high public officials among her membership over real defense of the preborn? That is how this looks to me. 

It made me think of these words of God: "If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played? And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle?" (I Corinthians 14:7-8). One of the callings of the Church is to be salt and light in culture: "You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet. You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 5:13-16). However, I would suggest that Rome has put her light under a basket, lest she risk her social standing. 

Presbyterian Theologian James Henley Thornwell said this of the Church: "She is of God, and if she forgets that it is her divine prerogative to speak in the name and by the authority of God - if she relinquishes the dialect of Canaan, and stoops to babble in the dialects of earth - she must expect to be treated as a babbler. Her strength lies in comprehending her spiritual vocation. She is different from all other societies among men. Though, as a society, she has ethical and political relations in common with the permanent organizations of the Family and the State, yet, in her essence, her laws, and her ends, she is diverse from every other institute [sic]" [Theology as a Life in Individuals and in the Church].

Jesus and the Reprobation of the Wicked

"Though He had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in Him, so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: 'Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?' Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said, 'He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.'" 

- John 12:37-40 

I accept the Bible as the very word of God. Therefore, everything it says must be true. That does not mean, however, that it is easy to accept everything Scripture says. We see an example here. I accept it as truth, but an uncomfortable truth.

In this paragraph, the Apostle John describes a scene in which Jesus, even after showing His power in miracles, is rejected by a particular crowd of Jews. Yet John is not mystified by their rejection. He immediately ascribes it, under the infallible inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to the will of God, who had chosen to blind these people to the truth of what they had seen. God had intentionally and deliberately darkened their minds so that they would deny the evidence of their own eyes, and remain in unbelief.

Why these particular people, but not others, such as our author, John? We do not know. God does not deign to explain His sovereign choices to us (Romans 9:19-26). We are informed simply that it was His choice.

This is the doctrine of reprobation. Just as God chose in prehistory  to have mercy on certain sinners, He chose to condemn others. And, just as we cannot know the reason for the first, we also cannot know the reason for the second (Deuteronomy 29:29). 

Our Union with Christ and All His Benefits

Evangelicals don't talk about our union with Christ. I think that is because it sounds very Catholic. However, it is a completely biblical doctrine, and of great use to the believer. We deprive ourselves by avoiding the subject.

We find the principle described in Scripture in several places, but the best one is Galatians 2:20: "I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me." By faith, the believer is united with Jesus spiritually, so that all that He is and did becomes ours, and all that we are and did becomes His. This is the basis of the doctrine of double imputation. In the Bible, it is described mystically as becoming His members: "We are members of His body" (Ephesians 5:30; see also I Corinthians 6:15). We hear this and think of "members" in the sense of "members of an organization," such as the PTA. However, that is not at all the meaning of "members" here. Rather, it is an analogy to "members" in the sense of "body parts" (see Romans 12:4-5). We are incorporated mystically into the spiritual body of Christ!

Of what benefit is that union? We think quickly, of course, of the imputation of His righteousness (II Corinthians 5:21), as I mentioned above. That is the basis of our justification, so it is certainly a wondrous benefit! But we receive so much more, as is symbolized by communion. As the bread and wine sustain our physical bodies, we are sustained spiritually by means of our union with Him, receiving all of the grace and other benefits which He purchased for us on the cross. "United to Christ, we receive two classes of benefits - inward and outward; the inward all included under the generic name of 'repentance,' and appertaining to the entire destruction of sin and the complete restoration of the image of God; the outward having reference to all those benefits which affect our relations to God as a Ruler and Judge. Both classes of blessings are equally the promise of the covenant. Both are treasured up in the Lord Jesus Christ. We obtain both by being in Him, and as we are in Him only by faith, faith must be the exclusive condition of the covenant" (James Henley Thornwell, "Theology as a Life in Individuals and in the Church").

Perseverance, Apostates, and the Church

In arguing against the biblical doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, Arminians point to people who used to profess the Christian faith, but who have now fallen into gross sin, or who have even repudiated the faith they once professed. And there certainly are such people.

However, the Bible addresses that issue: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us" (I John 2:19). In the previous verse, John had warned his audience of antichrists, apostates who now denied the basic doctrines of Christ. He addresses the obvious hypothetical question, How could Christians become such enemies of the faith? And his answer is that such people were never true Christians in the first place.

This verse teaches the doctrine of the visible church. That is, the church as an organization of people who profess the Christian faith, without addressing the true condition of their hearts. This is contrasted with the invisible church, which is all of those throughout history who have truly been born again, without regard to their membership in any particular organization. The two overlap, but they are not identical, as John explains. 

Presbyterian Theologian James Henley Thornwell explained the distinction this way: "[I] restrict the 'church,' in its proper sense, to the congregation of the faithful. None can be truly members of it but those who are members of Christ. [I] accordingly maintain with Calvin, with Luther, [and] with Melancthon, that hypocrites and unbelievers, though in it, are not of it. They are insolent intruders, whom it is the office of discipline to expel" ("Theology as a Life in Individuals and in the Church"). The Westminster divines also addressed the subject in the Larger Catechism, questions 62 through 65.