“See, I have taught you statutes and judgments just as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do thus in the land where you are entering to possess it. So keep and do them, for that is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes and say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as is the Lord our God whenever we call on Him? Or what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments as this whole law which I am setting before you today?” (Deut. 4:5-8; NASB).1
“Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people. The king’s favor is toward a servant who acts wisely, but his anger is toward him who acts shamefully” (Prov. 14:34-35).
INTRODUCTION:
In what way are people to live? Perhaps, we don’t struggle with this question when thinking in terms of individuals, but if we speak of a society as a whole then difficulties of thought arise. It is one thing to say how this person or that person should act, but not the entirety of all men everywhere without distinction. That strikes us as wrong. Is it a Western thing to find it offensive to say how people in a group ought to live, rather than pinpointing this specific person or that? All I know and can say for sure is that there is a right way and a wrong way in which men ought to live their lives; individually and corporately.
One of the temptations we have is in thinking that we can figure things out on our own, without any outside help. Normally, this is not how a Christian will talk about their life. Rather, it will be said, a bit piously in fact, that we need God’s guidance, His grace and leading in order to live our lives well. Until a choice comes along that we think beneath His station.
Like little babes who have begun to learn to eat will say to their parents when being fed, “I’ll do it, daddy’; or, ‘I’ll do it, mommy.’” Once a child has reached a certain age they don’t “NEED” your help to hold a bottle, lift a spoon of food to their mouth, brush their teeth, etc. Our mindsets are very similar when it comes to other “adult” decisions. We know what God has said. We say that we value all that He has said. But, then we attempt to marginalize this category or that category of thought as manageable by our own reasoning ability. But this leaves us in a bit of a predicament.
Sufficient and Necessary…
Either, the Word of God is sufficient for all things pertaining to this life, or it isn’t. There really is no halfway about it. I think when we lose perspective we wrongly assume that there are some aspects of life that we are free to figure out on our own. Say for instance, politics or in civil law and just judgments.
But as I noted in my last post, God gave instruction to Adam before he fell. A significant point highlighted by the late Cornelius Van Til. Even though Adam’s intellect and reasoning ability were unmarred by sin, divine instruction was needed to think and act correctly in this world. There is a way that seems right to nature, natural even, but that which is natural (earthly) still needs divine (heavenly) light to comprehend it properly.
“Scripture tells us that [man] appeared upon the earth as a perfect though finite replica of this Godhead …even in its original perfect condition the moral consciousness of man was derivative and not the ultimate source of information as to what is good. Man was in the nature of the case finite, and as such had to live by revelation. Man’s moral thought as well as the other aspects of his thought had to be receptively reconstructive. God therefore spoke to man in paradise, telling him what to do and what not to do with the facts of nature.”2
The message given to the children of Israel by Moses. That 2nd generation of those who were brought out of Egypt by God’s mighty hand. At a time when they are having children of their own as they are about to enter the land promised to their fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel), illustrates the truth noted above.
Moses is telling this new generation of men (women and children included) that the Law-Word of God is what will set them apart from the rest of the nations. The light provided to them will also be a light that will be witnessed by the surrounding nations. This light offers a corrective lens in how one should interpret and live out life from a divinely inspired point of view (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16-17).
The sanctifying agent…
In Christian circles we often speak of sanctification, or being set apart, or being identified as a holy people, but what is it that sanctifies us? How are we set apart? Why are we identified as holy, what makes us such? Some will quickly retort, “The Holy Spirit! He sets us apart, He sanctifies us, He makes us holy!”; as if that settles the matter. In one sense it does, but in another it is lacking in clarity.
How does the Holy Spirit sanctify the children of God? What is the means by which men are set apart from the rest? How are the people of God truly a holy people? Yes, it is true that God the Holy Spirit has sanctified, set apart, and made holy those called by His name, but what is the means that He uses to do so?3 Is it not the Law-Word of God? Is that not what establishes a distinction between one individual or group from another? It is.
“Righteousness and justice are the foundation of God’s throne” (Psa. 97:2b)
At the right hand of the Father, the Son of God sits ruling with all authority in heaven and on earth (cf. Acts 2:33-35). His decree is righteous at all times, and His judgments are never in error. His knowledge and wisdom in all matters is surpassed by none. When He speaks, He speaks true. How then are those who fall under His jurisdiction to think and act? Is the standard applied from heaven to be mimicked on earth? Is the same law meant to govern and judge the individual in terms of righteous, different than that which governs the society at large? According to Scripture it is righteousness that exalts a nation—that is a society made up of individuals—and unrighteousness (sin) that is a disgrace to people (Prov. 14:34).
Recipients of the Promise…
A promise would later come from the mouth of Moses before his passing. He testified to Israel,
“Now it shall be, if you diligently obey the Lord your God, being careful to do all His commandments which I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth” (Deut. 28:1).
By being faithful to His Law-Word the promise is given that the result will be a distinction of grandeur between the people who do this, versus the nations who don’t.
Now, I realize that some will claim that this promise was given to Israel, and therefore cannot meaningfully apply to other nations in history, let alone a nation like the United States. Why? Because it will be pointed out that we are not Israel.
I find this argument naive and purposely obtuse. Not to mention a bit unfair. For how does one go from stating something that ought to be obvious to believers—that if Christ Jesus was willing to lay down His life in keeping God’s holy law, in order to ransom His people from the curse of violating that law, then should we not have the same disposition of heart?—to then argue that we are not Israel, thus, we cannot appeal to the Law of God in this way?
To argue the validity of the Law-Word of God for the believer of any era of history as an image bearer’s responsibility, both individually and as a society, is not to conflate the individual with an Israelite or the nation to whom such influence is evident as that ancient tribal state spoken of in the Bible. Thus, the United States of America pursuing Christian status as a nation (i.e., Christian Nationalism) does not equate with us trying to be Old Testament Israel. At worst it shows a national spirit that wants to apply the wisdom of God previously given to our ancestors of the faith in our own cultural context.
However, it should be noted that the Christian faith, which is a consummation of the Old Testament faith first revealed, is the recipient of the promise of God through Abraham via his seed, namely Jesus Christ.
It is written,
“Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called ‘Uncircumcision’ by the so-called ‘Circumcision’ which is performed in the flesh by human hands—remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall…” (Eph. 2:11-14; emphasis mine; cf. John 10:16).
Before Christ Jesus we were alienated from the covenants of promise and the commonwealth of Israel. But now we are partakers of those very things having been brought near. Thus, we who are grafted into God’s olive tree (cf. Rom. 11:17; John 15:1-10) are considered the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16), because the exclusion has been eliminated (cf. Eph. 2:12; Rom. 9:6-7). This being true, I see little weight in the argument against believer’s (individually or corporately as a society—i.e., Christian nationalism, regardless of the particular nation) appealing to, and ordering their lives after the revealed oracles of God; His inscripturated Law-Word.
Standard Bearer…
Moreover, I see everything wrong with refusing to make this appeal to the Law of the King. If we refuse, I fail to see how we have not stepped into the same autonomous error (antinomian in spirit) that we read about in Israel as revealed in the book of Judges (cf. Jdg. 17:6), and in large part in the books of Kings and Chronicles. It is why I also have trouble with the notion that we can make an appeal to “natural law” without the prescriptive measures given in the divine law, as a more suitable approach when speaking of governing in the civil sphere.
The magistrate is called “God’s deacon and minister” (Rom. 10:4, 6). As Stephen Wolfe admits they serve in this function in the civil sphere on behalf of God.4 If they are acting as God’s representative, then what right do they have to appeal to any other standard than that which is clearly laid out in the Biblical record? Of course, as I noted in my last post there are differences in how the Law of God might be applied in different times and space (i.e., culturally), but even so, the principle of the Law remains unbroken (John 10:35).
The reasoning ability of mankind is a wonderful tool, but one that must be re-calibrated in light of God’s revelation. If we pretend that our reason is unmarred by sin, and may be applied by all in the same fashion by all men, then we commit the fallacy of neutrality ignoring the a priori commitments of all men.
Did having the Divine Law (Revealed Law) help Israel?
Now the reader who is attentive at this point, may in fact argue, “Yes, suppose what you have noted is true, but how do you account of Israel’s behavior in the past? They had both the natural and divinely revealed law, and yet, did they not also prove to be fruitless in their endeavors in terms of governance; including, the civil sphere?” This is true. Without question. But, on what grounds were their failures rooted?
Rejection of the Divine Law…
It was when they preferred to lean on the natural rather than the divine understanding of things that they were corrupted. When they preferred the rationale of the nations surround them—the reasoning of men—instead of the rationale provided by the Lord through His servant Moses. The testimony we find echoed in the book of Judges stands against those who should have governed themselves better,
“In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in their own eyes” (Jdg. 17:6).5
This statement of fact recorded in Scripture reveals a desire for one to establish their own system of laws based off human reason, rather than deriving their system of laws from the divine source. To be antinomian means to be in search of a replacement; since law is an inescapable concept in the hearts of men.6 In terms of biblical faith it is the desire to throw off God’s Law in order to adopt the law(s) of another. It does not infer an absolute antithesis to the law as a general concept. Instead, the antinomian has within their crosshair the revealed law of God; a specific concept. The antinomian embraces all other laws except that which is given in the Bible.7
Thus, even when a king did come, Israel struggled with this.8 The constant putting off what God had declared in order to adopt what they desired.9 Thus, the prophets spoke against them, testifying on God’s behalf to whom they were all covenanted. Even at the time of Christ Jesus, this truth is once again highlighted in the statement of the Jewish leadership that desired to crucify their King:
“Behold, your King!’ So they cried out, ‘Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him!’’ Pilate said to them, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but Caesar’” (John 19:14b-15).
Not liking the system of Law that Jesus demonstrated an unbreakable dedication to, the Israelites preferred the rule of the Emperor of Rome. They would rather live under Caesar’s rule than God’s. Antinomian towards God’s revealed Law-Word, but nomian in terms of their own, and thus they also fell along the spectrum of legalistic thought, but that’s a discussion for another day.
Limitations of Divine Law…
All Law is at war against the behavior of men that its dictates stand in opposition to. A person is told not to steal and immediately the internal desire is stoked as one might the flames of a brush fire to kick against that command given. That was not the original state of mankind, but it is surely the state in which all men find themselves on this side of the garden (cf. Gen. 2-3).
By itself the divine law, or the revealed Law of God, as disclosed in His holy word does nothing, unless a person has been redeemed. Is that statement true or false? Does it not argue too strongly in favor of one position over and above another? You’ve surely heard the claim, “You cannot legislate morality.” That claim is the basis for many Christians rejecting influencing the civil sphere of government via the Christian faith based upon biblical commandments and principles of life. Popular as it may be, it is nonetheless inaccurate.
The divine law of God does something to all people. The delimiting factor of salvation notwithstanding. Legislation has an outward and inward effect on the morality of the populace to whom such laws are given. Both types of arguments (the law does something, the law does nothing) are attempting to stress the limitations of law; specifically, divine law as recorded in Scripture. There is no question that God’s Law-Word has limitations or various senses in which it applies to people and societies. However, it is also true that the law applied is causative culturally both inwardly and externally.
On one hand, biblical law cannot directly save anyone. And, just because the divine law is codified in society, it does not make all people living in that society morally right. However, the law does save society by positively effecting the moral activity of the people under its influence.
“Hold on a minute… the law does not save, grace does that!” comes the rebuttal. This is true in an eternal sense, but there is a temporal sense where the law does save—in terms of deliverance—a people under its protective umbrella. Of course, this requires civil leadership that will stand firm in the publication and enforcement of said holy statutes.
A brief illustration of the argument presented…
I want to illustrate this if I can so as not to confuse, or leave open for argument, that I am somehow proclaiming a system of salvation that is founded upon legalism, rather than God’s grace.
Suppose the 8th commandment is taken seriously: “You shall not steal” (Exod. 20:15). Suppose it has been faithfully taught throughout the land that it is wrong to steal from another. And let us also suppose, that if a theft occurs the justice system in place under the leadership of a God-fearing man carries out the sentence against the criminal speedily. What occurs in such a society?
The property owner is saved from theft, and suffering loss. Those dumb enough to break the law are quickly dealt with in terms of righteous retribution. Thus the property owner has what was taken returned to him (or her) either immediately, or over a period of time as the thief must pay off the debt they’ve incurred from robbing their neighbor. And so, society as a whole is saved from this form of wickedness. Moreover, those who may have been inclined to behave in such a fashion—having been incited in their evil hearts to kick against the law first declared—have counted the cost and determined that it is better to harbor such feelings in the heart, instead of exercising them in public. Overtime, the people as a whole are conditioned to have a negative opinion against theft—it is repugnant to them—and, as long as those former factors are held to, generation after generation shares this mindset.
Limitations will still exist…
Does this form of salvation lead to eternal salvation? For some it will. There is no question that the Law of God is a means by which God brings an awareness of wickedness in the hearts of men, as He drives them to His beloved Son where such hope is established. Does this mean that all will share a desire to do what is good internally, and not just externally? No. The Law of God—even though it is holy and good—cannot bring about such ends, beyond the external, outward observances, without the drawing of the Holy Spirit. Does this mean that it is really a pointless endeavor to seek to enact such laws and form a society around them? No. For they are the means provided by the Lord of Hosts, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, to structure the lives of men in a meaningful fashion. They are the means that highlight the sinfulness of man. They are the means that protect the good from the evil in society. They are the means that teach those in leadership positions the normative ways in which they can lead that mimics or images their Maker.
The Law still serves…
Without question there are limits to the divine law, but those limits do not nullify the usefulness of the law. The law serves as a safeguard to protect the good. It serves as a conditioning agent to teach the children of each generation what to do and what to avoid, if they are to live a good, peaceful, and enjoyable life. And, the law serves as the means by which fallen sinners are ushered into the presence of Almighty Christ in contriteness of spirit confessing their faults and seeking His graceful mercy.
From this point forward that particular individual embraces the such an individual and then, acts upon the Law of God as a part of the sanctifying process. Meaning, that the Law is of great benefit to those who had (have) ears to hear and eyes to see. The heart that is humble before God will be so moved by His Spirit to act in a manner that respects and honors the Law-Word of God. Such individuals will apply it not only personally, but also in every other area of life that the Law speaks, and in the specific fashion that the Lord God has equipped them in influencing the world at large.
Thus, Paul can say without any equivocation that the Jew benefited from the Law of God (revealed, inscripturated Word):
“Much [in] every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God” (Rom. 3:2; KJV).
The Only Means worth Applying…
The fact is that God’s Law-Word is the only means worth applying in this life. Did some fail in the application process? Yes. Men are by nature sinners. And, the saints of God, be they in ancient Israel or some other nation outside their borders as impacted by God’s grace, are still imperfect. Did Israel fail in the past to honor God’s Law-Word. Yes, without question. We have evidence after evidence that proves this point, the greatest of all being the crucifixion of their King in the flesh. However, when men of God were moved and equipped via His grace to apply this Law-Word in every day life, they were, as a nation, better off than any other nation on the earth. For wisdom was being exercised in their midst, in every aspect of their lives.
If the means of God provided by God blessed a people called by God’s name in the past, why not today? If the dispensing of the Law of God is a gift to a people in ordering life in a manner that helps mitigate against open sin at the individual and corporate level, protecting the home and the society at large, then why seek some other means to govern the disposition of people?
God’s Law does not save, but it does act as a damper on wickedness when faithfully applied by people of faith. This truth is unquestionable at the personal level and the community level. God’s Law is the only standard by which men ought to have their consciousness bound, since that Law is a reflection of God’s heart/mind.
I do not deny the descriptive function of natural law, but I do deny its ability to help structure a nation to function righteously, if the prescriptive function of divine law is not established as the necessary foundation by which men govern themselves personally or corporately at a national level. The magistrate holds an office ordained by God to serve in His behalf as His minister (cf. Rom. 13). Therefore, the magistrate is required to meditate on that which has been divinely given from God, so that he might lead in a fashion that does not deter from the right or the left of what God has ordained as good (cf. Deut. 17:18-20). Such leadership is needed if a nation hopes to reflect the Christian spirit.
ENDNOTES:
1All Scripture unless otherwise noted shall be of the New American Standard Bible (NASB).
2Cornelius Van Til, “Christian Theistic Ethics,” Vol 3 of In Defense of Biblical Christianity (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 1980 [1970] ), 20, PDF e-book.
3If this is a difficult concept to think through, might I turn you to one that exemplifies this reality for us? Jesus Christ is a living demonstration of what God’s Holy Law-Word does for us. He was led by the Holy Spirit, empowered by the Holy Spirit, working as One with the Holy Spirit as He lived out His Father’s will. Jesus is the Word made flesh (John 1:14), the one whom proceeds from the Father to make the Father known unto His creation in grace and truth. Jesus lived by and died by the Law-Word of God. His sanctification was via the same means given to us, by the same leading Spirit of God. It is not a difficult concept to comprehend if the heart is willing.
4Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2022), 286.
5Cf. Judges 18:1; 19:1; 21:25; see also: Deuteronomy 12:8 where it is written, “You shall not do what we are doing here today, every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes.” Proverbs 21:2, “Every way of a man is right in his own eyes; but Jehovah weigheth the hearts” (ASV).
6Greg L. Bahnsen notes four different types of antinomian categories within the Christian community: licentious, spiritual, dispensational, and latent antinomians. See: By This Standard: The Authority of God’s Law Today (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1985), 298-302.
7I think one would do well in entertaining Bahnsen’s treatment of this subject (see above endnote), but at base it needs to be noted that every spirit of antinomianism has to some degree a desire to seek to establish one’s own standard as the final standard of arbitration for how a person or a society is to live. Although legalism does not fall within this category of thought, there is a shared principle that by man’s ability (reasoning, intellect) one will reach the right conclusion delivering himself or herself from error; an aberrant form of salvation. The legalist seeks eternal salvation through their application of law, and the antinomian seeks salvation in the temporal sense from unwanted intrusions on their life.
8Now the reality of this whole endeavor is that a king already existed for Israel, but they denied Him this reality. Preferring to look and think like the world around them, they ignored the King who had delivered them from Egypt, was with them during the years of wandering in the wilderness, and led the forces under the oversight of Joshua, the chosen successor of Moses. It was God who was their King, who had given them the Law by which they were to honor the covenant they’d sworn to keep with Him: “The Lord was King in Jeshurun (Israel), when the heads of the people were gathered, the tribes of Israel together” (Deut. 33:5; AMP). It was His kingship that they denied in order to do what was right in their own eyes. This is the indictment levied against Israel during the period of judges and it was a reality that they struggled with during the period of kings.
9Being a created being imaged after God makes us dependent beings. As such structuring ones life laws at the most basic, foundational level is simply unavoidable. Israel committed idolatry because they refused to acknowledge God and His sovereign rule over their lives (individually and corporately). However in their rejection of what God had clearly stated through Moses, they did not do away with law but committed themselves to another system of laws in which to govern their own affairs (individually, and as a society) .
Kristafal's Musings 