The Upper Register

Gospel as New Law: The Error that Refuses to Die

Pelagius (early 5th century)

“The Lord of Justice wished man to be free to act and not under compulsion; it was for this reason that ‘he left him free to make his own decisions’ (Sirach 15:14) and set before him life and death, good and evil, and he shall be given whatever pleases him. Hence we read in the Book Deuteronomy also: ‘I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you may live’ (Deut 30:19)” (Letter to Demetrias [413] https://epistolae.ctl.columbia.edu/letter/1296.html).

“It is on this choice between two ways, on this freedom to choose either alternative, that the glory of the rational mind is based, it is in this that the whole honour of our nature consists, it is from this that its dignity is derived and all good men win others’ praise and their own reward.”

“When [human nature] had now become buried beneath an excess of vices and as if tainted with the rust of ignorance, the Lord applied the file of the law to it, and so, thoroughly polished by its frequent admonishments, it was enabled to recover its former brilliance.”

Aquinas:

“The Law of the Gospel which is called the New Law” (Summa Theologica I-II, Q106)

Justification is a movement or change from the state of ungodliness to the state of justice (Rom 4:5), which is a certain rectitude or order in the interior disposition of man (I-II, Q113, A1).

“This movement of faith is not perfect unless it is quickened by charity” (I-II, Q113, A4). “Faith formed by charity” (II-II, Q4, A3) “The merit of eternal life rests chiefly with charity” (I-II, Q114, A4).

The Council of Trent, Sixth Session (1547)

Justification is not the imputation of righteousness but an infusion of righteousness (a new habit of virtue) by the Spirit. As a result of this infusion of a new habit of virtue, we do good works. These works are so pleasing to God that we can be said “to have truly merited eternal life” (Article 16).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992)

Par. 1965: “The New Law or the Law of the Gospel is the perfection here on earth of the divine law.”

Par. 1966: “The New Law is the grace of the Holy Spirit given to the faithful through faith in Christ. It works through charity; it uses the Sermon on the Mount to teach us what must be done and makes use of the sacraments to give us the grace to do it.”

Par. 1970: “The entire Law of the Gospel is contained in the ‘new commandment’ of Jesus, to love one another as he has loved us.”

The Remonstrants (1610)

“That God, by an eternal and unchangeable purpose in Jesus Christ his Son, before the foundation of the world, has determined, out of the fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ’s sake, and through Christ, those who, through the grace of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end.”

Richard Baxter

Aphorisms of Justification (1649) https://heidelblog.net/2018/02/richard-baxter-on-initial-and-final-justification-through-faith-and-works/

Thesis 70: “Faith in the largest sense, as it comprehends all the condition of the new covenant,” which includes faith, repentance, and obedience.

Thesis 71: “The sincere performance of the summary, great command of the Law is still naturally implied in the conditions of the Gospel, as of absolute indispensible necessity … But it is not commanded in the sense, and upon the terms, as under the first Covenant.”

Thesis 72: “As the Accepting of Christ for Lord, (which is the hearts subjection) is as essential a part of justifying faith, as the accepting of him for our Saviour: So consequently, sincere obedience, (which is the effect of the former,) has as much to do in justifying us before God, as affiance, (which is the fruit of the later.)”

Thesis 73: “Faith only justifies as it implies and includes all other parts of the condition of the new covenant … Those works [of the Gospel] do also justify as the secondary, less principal parts of the condition of the Covenant.”

Thesis 78: “Sincere obedience is without all doubt, a condition of our salvation: therefore also of our justification.”

“The Day of Judgement is not to try and judge Jesus Christ and his merits, but us: He will judge us himself by his new Law or Covenant” (Dictionary of Scottish Church History, pp. 449f).

Norman Shepherd

34 Theses on Justification (1978) http://hornes.org/theologia/norman-shepherd/the-34-theses

Thesis 11: “Justifying faith is obedient faith, that is, ‘faith working through love’ (Gal. 5:6), and therefore faith that yields obedience to the commands of Scripture.”

Thesis 18: “Faith, repentance, and new obedience are not the cause or ground of salvation or justification, but are as covenantal response to the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, the way (Acts 24:14; 2 Peter 2:2, 21) in which the Lord of the Covenant brings his people into the full possession of eternal life.”

Thesis 19: “Those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and are his disciples, who walk in the Spirit and keep covenant with God, are in a state of justification and will be justified on the day of judgment.”

Thesis 20: “The Pauline affirmation in Romans 2:13, ‘the doers of the Law will be justified,’ is not to be understood hypothetically in the sense that there are no persons who fall into that class, but in the sense that faithful disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ will be justified.”

Thesis 22: “The righteousness of Jesus Christ ever remains the exclusive ground of the believer’s justification, but the personal godliness of the believer is also necessary for his justification in the judgment of the last day.”

Thesis 23: “Because faith which is not obedient faith is dead faith, and because repentance is necessary for the pardon of sin included in justification, and because abiding in Christ by keeping his commandments (John 15:5; 10; 1 John 3:13; 24) are all necessary for continuing in the state of justification, good works, works done from true faith, according to the law of God, and for his glory, being the new obedience wrought by the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer united to Christ, though not the ground of his justification, are nevertheless necessary for salvation from eternal condemnation and therefore for justification (Rom. 6:16, 22; Gal. 6:7-9).”

Shepherd, The Call of Grace: How the Covenant Illuminates Salvation and Evangelism (P&R, 2000)

“The obedience that leads to the fulfillment of the promise … is the expression of faith and trust in the Lord, not the expression of confidence in human effort” (p. 21).

The Mosaic covenant has been viewed by some theologians, like Charles Hodge, as a republication of the covenant of works (p. 25). But that is not correct according to Shepherd. The Mosaic covenant was not a covenant of works but an administration of the covenant of grace (p. 27).

“Israel had to persevere in faith in order to inherit what was promised” (p. 33).

“The Mosaic covenant is not a covenant of works, but a ‘covenant of love’” (p. 39).

“Like the Abrahamic covenant, the Mosaic covenant has two parts, promise and obligation” (p. 39).

“The obedience required of Israel is not the obedience of merit, but the obedience of faith” (p. 39).

“Eternal life is an undeserved gift of grace; we enter into it by way of a living, active, and obedient faith ... The covenantal demand for faith, repentance, and obedience is simply the way in which the Lord leads us into the possession of these blessings” (pp. 51, 63).

Shepherd, “Justification by Faith in Pauline Theology,” in Backbone of the Bible, edited by P. Andrew Sandlin (Covenant Media Press, 2004)

“Justifying faith is not only a penitent faith but also an obedient faith. As faith and repentance are inseparably joined, so also repentance and obedience are inseparably joined” (p. 91).

“Justification comes by a penitent and obedient faith … Gospel proclamation calls us to living faith, that is, to a penitent and obedient faith …. Those who by God’s electing grace respond to the gospel call with penitent and obedient faith are the righteous who will enter into eternal life” (pp. 100-1).

“Those who are forgiven and who are transformed into covenant keepers are the righteous who will inherit eternal life” (p. 110).

John F. MacArthur Jr.

The Gospel According to Jesus (Zondervan, 1988):

“A believing heart surrenders to the Master with great joy … He is glad to give it all up for the kingdom. That is the nature of saving faith … Saving faith retains no privileges. It clings to no cherished sins, no treasured possessions, no secret self-indulgences. It is an unconditional surrender, a willingness to do anything the Lord demands … It denotes implicit obedience, full surrender to the lordship of Christ. Nothing less can qualify as saving faith … True faith is humble, submissive obedience” (pp. 139f).

“The biblical concept of faith is inseparable from obedience. ‘Believe’ is synonymous with ‘obey’ … ‘To believe’ is ‘to obey’” (pp. 174-75).

“Grace is the power of God to fulfill our New Covenant duties” (p. 31).

The Federal Vision

The Auburn Avenue Pastors’ Conference titled “The Federal Vision” held at Auburn Avenue PCA in Monroe, Louisiana (2002): Douglas Wilson; John Barach; Steve Wilkins; Rich Lusk; Steve Schlissel

James Jordan: “Nothing in the Bible says that Adam was supposed to earn glory. He was, rather, called to remain faithful and mature ... My thesis is that what Adam was supposed to provide, and what Jesus has provided for us, is maturity. That is to say, the new status that Jesus provides for us does not come about because He earned something Adam failed to earn, but because He persevered in faith toward the Father until he was mature ... Far from earning His exaltation, Jesus received it as a free grace or gift from the Father ... There is no ‘merit’ theology in the Bible. There is no covenant of works”  (“Merit Versus Maturity,” in The Federal Vision, ed. Steve Wilkins [Athanasius Press, 2004], pp. 153, 155, 193, 195).

Rich Lusk: “In the covenant construction advocated by Dr. Smith ... [t]he covenant of grace is simply the covenant of works fulfilled by a sinless substitute provided by God himself. While there is much to appreciate about the symmetry of such a covenantal scheme, it seems fraught with biblical difficulties ... It ends up looking something like this:  In Genesis 1-2, God constructed Pelagian machinery for man to earn his way to blessing ... Jesus is the successful Pelagian, the One Guy in the history of the world who succeeded in pulling off the works righteousness plan” (The Auburn Avenue Theology, Pros and Cons: Debating the Federal Vision, ed. E. Calvin Beisner [Knox Theological Seminary, 2004], pp. 136-37).

Steve Schlissel: “‘For not the hearers of the Law [unbelieving Jews] are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the Law [believing Gentiles and Jews] will be justified.’ This statement is not a theoretical proposition concerning some meritorious method of being righteous before God. The presuppositions undergirding Paul’s statement include the facts that the Law is ‘obeyable,’ that truly responding to the Law (the Word) in faith does justify” (The Federal Vision, p. 260). “Obedience and faith are the same thing, biblically speaking” (The Auburn Avenue Theology, p. 26).

Joint Federal Vision Statement (2007):

“We affirm that Adam was in a covenant of life with the triune God in the Garden of Eden, in which arrangement Adam was required to obey God completely, from the heart. We hold further that all such obedience, had it occurred, would have been rendered from a heart of faith alone, in a spirit of loving trust. Adam was created to progress from immature glory to mature glory, but that glorification too would have been a gift of grace, received by faith alone.”

“We affirm that those in rebellion against God are condemned both by His law, which they disobey, and His gospel, which they also disobey … We deny that law and gospel should be considered as hermeneutics, or treated as such. We believe that any passage, whether indicative or imperative, can be heard by the faithful as good news, and that any passage, whether containing gospel promises or not, will be heard by the rebellious as intolerable demand. The fundamental division is not in the text, but rather in the human heart.”

“We deny that the faith which is the sole instrument of justification can be understood as anything other than the only kind of faith which God gives, which is to say, a living, active, and personally loyal faith.”

Doug Wilson, “Living Faith” (2008) https://dougwils.com/the-church/s16-theology/living-faith.html - “I am treating obedient faith and living faith as synonymous … it is obedient in its life, and in that living condition it is the instrument of our justification.”

Progressive Covenantalism

Ardel Caneday, “Covenantal Life with God from Eden to Holy City,” ch. 4 in Progressive Covenantalism: Charting a Course Between Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology, ed. Stephen Wellum and Brent Parker (B&H, 2016).

Caneday: “Gentry and Wellum affirm that the blending of God’s sovereign promise making and covenant keeping with the conditional stipulations of obedience is integral to the biblical story line beginning in Eden and reaching consummation in the Holy City” (p. 102).

“This chapter disavows the notion that all of Scripture consists of two isolatable messages: law, consisting of God’s demands, and gospel, composed of God’s gracious giving. Instead, it argues that the formulation of covenant stipulations remains the same across the covenants while the content of stipulations changes … True, God unconditionally establishes his various covenants with humans, but each covenant entails provisions with stipulations that both promise blessings to all who obey (remaining in saving covenant relationship with God) and announce curses upon the disobedient” (p. 103).

“Inheriting God’s promises is always conditional, for he grants his covenant blessing to those who, by his own grace, observe stipulations that require persevering, obedient belief. From Adam’s habitation of the Edenic garden with access to the tree of life to inheritance of our eternal habitation, God’s holy city, with free access to the tree of life, covenantal life with God always entails stipulations expressed as commands or conditionals” (p. 105).

“God’s word, entailing promise and threat, required Adam to believe, to trust the Lord, in order that he might obey God and receive his covenant blessing” (p. 108).

Caneday agrees with John Murray in setting aside the term “covenant of works,” in order to uphold the notion that the “covenant of creation” was gracious and did not entail merit (pp. 109-10).

He further rejects the notion that the Mosaic law was a republication of the covenant of works, again so as to uphold the notion that the old covenant was gracious. “The Mosaic covenant is not to be construed as entailing merit in any sense” (p. 109-10).

“Concerning their content, new covenant stipulations of repentance, faith, obedience, or doing good are distinctively different from old covenant stipulations. The new, with the law engraved on the heart, stipulates obeying Christ Jesus as Lord; the old, etched on stone tablets, stipulates obeying God’s covenant commandments that feature a panoply of heavenly shadows and copies. Though the content of stipulations differs, their form does not, for both new and old covenants employ variously formatted stipulations including imperatives and conditionals. ‘If you obey, then I will bless you’ or ‘Do this, and you will live.’ Thus, to claim that the stipulations of the new covenant are different formulations structurally—‘Do this because you are blessed’ versus ‘Do this in order to be blessed’—is not accurate” (p. 111).

“Grammatically, how the old and new covenants express stipulations as well as blessings or curses does not differ. Consider Leviticus 18:5: ‘Keep my decrees and laws [covenant stipulation], for the person who obeys them will live by them [covenant blessing]. I am the Lord.’ Now ponder Paul’s stipulation to Timothy: ‘Watch you life and doctrine closely [covenant stipulation]. Persevere in them, because if you do [covenant stipulation], you will save both yourself and your hearers [covenant blessing]’ (1 Tim 4:16)” (p. 116).

“The difference between the old and new covenants is not how the stipulations are grammatically structured or formed or that the former stipulates obedience and the new does not. Nor is the difference that the law covenant threatens divine curses and promises divine blessing with conditional stipulations but that the grace covenant in Christ issues no stipulations. Clearly the New Testament is filled with gospel threats and promises addressed to believers, which if heeded inviolably lead to eternal life but if ignored will end in condemnation” (p. 117).

“If we obey God’s stipulations proclaimed in and through his new covenant in Christ Jesus, God’s Word assures us that we shall have access to the tree of life in God’s Holy City. But if we do not heed God’s threatening stipulations, we will be cast outside, and our share in the tree of life and in the Holy City will be taken from us” (p. 126).

In sum, “Gospel as New Law” is the view that:

The grace of God is primary, even before the fall.

Even before the fall, God established his covenant with Adam as a gracious covenant relationship that involves promises but also involves certain conditions if we are to enjoy the fulfillment of those promises.

After the fall, God continues to the same pattern. The details of the specific requirements differ, but same covenant relationship is continued with Abraham and with Israel under the Law. 

The Old Law is summarized in the demand: “The one who does these things [Mosaic commandments] will live by them” (Lev 18:5). God did not require perfect obedience but loyalty and covenant faithfulness.

The Gospel is a New Law that, like the Old Law, demands obedient faith and threatens a curse for those who are unfaithful.

What makes the New Law “new” is that the burden of the ceremonies and shadows of the Old Law are no longer required.

The sentence “we are justified by faith” is affirmed, but faith is defined as living, active, and obedient, so in the end it actually means “we are justified by works.”

At each point, God raised up a theologian to answer the “Gospel as New Law” error:

Against the Judaizers – Paul

Against Pelagius – Augustine

Against Rome – Martin Luther

Against Baxter – John Owen

Against Shepherd – Meredith Kline

Is the Mosaic Covenant an Administration of the Covenant of Grace?

As my readers know, I hold to republication – the view that the works principle in the pre-fall covenant with Adam was republished at the typological level in the Mosaic economy. Because of this, many ask, “Can you affirm that the Mosaic covenant is an administration of the covenant of grace?” Sometimes the question comes with an attorney-like insistence, Yes or No! But this is not a question that can be answered Yes or No without qualifications. So here is my best attempt to answer that question.

I think it is valid to say that the Mosaic covenant was a “unique” administration of the covenant of grace. I borrow the term “unique” from Michael Horton who uses it to take account of Paul’s teaching that the law was a temporary guardian until Christ (Gal 3:19-24). As Dr. Horton wrote in a recent four-views book: “The Sinai covenant is a unique administration of the covenant of grace in that it offers a parenthetical-typological system for the church’s adolescence.”[1]

What makes it a unique administration of the covenant of grace is that it has a broad and a narrow aspect. The Mosaic covenant in the broad sense is the Mosaic economy as a whole, that is, the Mosaic economy as continuing the Abrahamic promise (Gal 3:17) and as including the sacrificial system which provided a means of atonement for sin. In that broad sense, the Mosaic covenant is an administration of the covenant of grace. But it also has a narrow aspect, and that is what makes it unique. The Mosaic covenant in the narrow sense is the same as Paul’s term “the law,” the commandments along with the offered blessings for obedience and curses threatened for disobedience (Lev 18:5; Deut 28). In this sense the law was a temporary guardian until the Seed should come. It was given to drive Israel to Christ and thus for an ultimately gracious purpose.

This language of the broad and narrow sense of “Mosaic covenant” is fairly standard. Dr. Horton says it derives from Calvin:

Calvin himself acknowledges these two senses: “The law has a twofold meaning; it sometimes includes the whole of what has been taught by Moses, and sometimes that part only which was peculiar to his ministration, which consisted of precepts, rewards, and punishments …. Whenever the word law is thus strictly taken, Moses is by implication opposed to Christ: and then we must consider what the law contains, as separate from the gospel.”[2]

In their helpful book on covenant theology, Michael Brown and Zach Keele explain it this way:

To understand the Mosaic covenant properly, we must view it in both its broad and narrow senses. In its broad sense, the Mosaic covenant is an administration of the covenant of grace …. In its narrow sense, however, the Mosaic covenant is a covenant of law …. We must first focus on the Mosaic covenant in its narrower sense (that is, law) to fit it properly into God’s overall purpose of the covenant of grace …. God gave the strict Mosaic covenant to show Israel and all humanity that no man can be justified by the works of the law (Rom 3:19-20).[3]

Complementary to the broad vs. narrow language, there is Meredith Kline’s language of the two layers or strata of the Mosaic economy.

At the same time, Paul affirmed that the Mosaic Covenant did not annul the promise arrangement given earlier to Abraham (Gal 3:17). The explanation for this is that the old covenant order was composed of two strata and the works principle enunciated in Leviticus 18:5, and elsewhere in the law, applied only to one of these, a secondary stratum. There was a foundational stratum having to do with the personal attainment of the eternal kingdom of salvation and this underlying stratum, continuous with all preceding and succeeding administrations of the Lord’s Covenant of Grace with the church, was informed by the principle of grace (cf., e.g., Rom 4:16). Because the Abrahamic covenant of promise found continuity in the Mosaic order at this underlying level, it was not abrogated by the latter. The works principle in the Mosaic order was confined to the typological sphere of the provisional earthly kingdom which was superimposed as a secondary overlay on the foundational stratum.[4]

Now perhaps another follow-up question may arise: “Is the entire Mosaic covenant, in both its narrow sense and in its broader sense, an administration of the covenant of grace?” I can affirm that, but I would want to clarify the two distinct ways in which “the narrow sense” and “the broader sense” are related to the covenant of grace.

I affirm that the Mosaic covenant in the broader sense (the entire Mosaic dispensation or economy) is an administration of the covenant of grace. There are a myriad of ways we see this. We see it in the prologue to the Decalogue, “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt.” We see it in the intercession of Moses who appealed to the Abrahamic promise (Exod 32:13; Deut 9:27). We see it in the fact that the two tablets of the law were placed inside the ark of the covenant under the mercy seat (Exod 25:16; 40:20; Deut 10:2, 5; Heb 9:4). But most clearly we see it in the Levitical sacrificial system (the Passover Lamb, the Day of Atonement, etc.), which was a sacramental means of grace by which the Israelites received ahead of time, by faith, the benefits of the work of the Messiah to come. As Kline notes, “Elements of redemptive grace were present in and around the transaction [of the Sinaitic  covenant],” and he goes on to cite the prologue of the Decalogue and the location of the tablets under the mercy seat as two chief examples.[5]

But what about the Mosaic covenant in the narrow sense? Can it also rightly be called an administration of the covenant of grace? I can see how it could, but I would want to clarify what that means. It is a foundational Reformed teaching that the law (“Do this and live”) is not, in and of itself, the covenant of grace. The Mosaic law is a republication of the principle of the covenant of works. The law says, “Do this and live” (Lev 18:5). The gospel (the covenant of grace) says, “Christ has done it; receive it and live.” But although the law is not the gospel, it was given to advance the covenant of grace. It does this by showing us that we cannot be justified by the works of the law and thus driving us to Christ. The law was a temporary guardian, the historical matrix for the incarnation, so that the Seed might be born under it, obey it, endure its curse, and thus fulfill it in our place (Gal 3:13; 4:4; Rom 10:4).

Horton quotes Geerhardus Vos:

As Vos states, “The covenant with Israel served in an emphatic manner to recall the strict demands of the covenant of works … It truly contained the content of the covenant of works. But—and one should certainly note this—it contains this content as made serviceable for a particular period of the covenant of grace.”[6]

Horton then adds his own comment fleshing this out:

Although the Sinaitic covenant is based on law, it is only such in the interests of holding out the promise of the covenant of grace. The ultimate promise of a worldwide family of Abraham in a renewed creation is unconditional in its basis, while the continuing existence of the national theocracy as a type of that everlasting covenant depended on Israel’s obedience. Therefore, the Sinai covenant was an administration of the covenant of grace in that it served to further the interests of that gracious promise.[7]

With that qualification—“in that it served to further the interests of that gracious promise”—the law can be called an administration of the covenant of grace, even though the law, in and of itself, is not the covenant of grace. Kline put it this way: “The Law covenant was a sub-administration of the Covenant of Grace, designed to further the purpose and program of the gospel.”[8]

 

[1] Michael S. Horton, “A Covenant Theology Response,” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies: Four Views on the Continuity of Scripture, ed. Brent E. Parker and Richard J. Lucas (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2022), 197.

[2] Horton, “Covenant Theology,” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies, 38; quoting Calvin’s commentary on Romans (at Rom 10:5).

[3] Michael G. Brown and Zach Keele, Sacred Bond: Covenant Theology Explored (Grandville, MI: Reformed Fellowship, 2012), 102-4.

[4] Meredith G. Kline, Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2006), 321.

[5] Meredith G. Kline, By Oath Consigned: A Reinterpretation of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and Baptism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968), 23-24.

[6] Geerhardus Vos, Reformed Dogmatics, Single-Volume Edition, trans. and ed. by Richard B. Gaffin, Jr. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), 348 (2.130 in the multi-volume edition).

[7] Horton, “Covenant Theology,” in Covenantal and Dispensational Theologies, 47.

[8] Meredith G. Kline, God, Heaven and Har Magedon: A Covenantal Tale of Cosmos and Telos (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2006), 128.

Covenant Theology in BT Perspective: Abrahamic, Mosaic, New

Covenant Theology in biblical theological perspective observes the historical progression and interconnections between the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and New Covenants. Leviticus 26 is a critical passage, for here the outpouring of the vengeance of the Mosaic Covenant is predicted. But Israel’s restoration after the exile, in fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant (Lev 26:42), is also foretold, which gives rise to the hope of a New Covenant. This covenantal triangle is the engine that drives the narrative arc of redemptive history, with the great preaching prophets (e.g., Isaiah) standing at the intersection, looking back on the ruins of the Old Covenant and forward to the glory of the coming New Covenant in Christ.

Video:

 

Audio:

 

Thomas Worden on the Law in the Hands of Christ

I am finished with my blog series responding to Merit and Moses and am now working on compiling all of the posts into a single document, which will be made public soon.

As I was doing some research for that series, I came across an obscure book on typology whose author is listed as “Thomas Worden, Minister.” I had never heard of him. The Internet seems to have only the tiniest snippets of information on him. He appears to have been a 17th century Puritan pastor, possibly a non-conformist, judging by one obscure note that he “was cast into prison for the truth’s sake.” The book was originally published in London in 1664.

Worden sees special typological significance in the fact that the tablets of the law were placed within the ark of the covenant under the mercy seat. He sees it as a picture of the fact that the moral law does not come to us directly but from the hands of Christ. But it still comes to us. He says:

The moral law, as it is a law or rule of life to a Christian, is not ceased, as some would have. It was not thrown away, but only hid under the mercy-seat.

[Christ] takes up the matter of the old covenant, which is the ten commandments, and makes it the law of his kingdom, and so imposes it on his people as a rule to walk by for ever.

But as it is become, for the matter of it, the law of a Mediator, and a law in Christ’s hand, and so a law which comes forth to us from under the mercy-seat, it speaks otherwise than it did before, not for life, but from life.

The moral law remains the rule of life for believers. Worden seems to be following in the Marrow tradition of “the law in the hands of Christ.” This was the same position held by notable Reformed ministers like Samuel Bolton, Edward Fisher (author of The Marrow of Modern Divinity), Thomas Boston, John Colquhoun, and others.

Here is the extended passage from Worden, where he uses the typology of the tablets of the law being place within the ark of the covenant to support the Marrow view of the law in the hands of Christ:

The place appointed for the ark to stand while in the tabernacle was under the mercy-seat; for we read in Exodus, that when Moses had put the tables wherein the ten commandments were written into the ark, then did he take the ark, and carry it into the tabernacle, and put the mercy-seat above upon the ark (Exod 40:20). Then he took a veil, and spread over it for a covering, that it might not be seen.

Now, the great mystery of this type, or figure, I conceive to be this:—

By the ten commandments written in the tables of the ark, I understand is meant the covenant of works, which God made with all men in their representative Adam, in Paradise; which covenant we have all broken, and so are under the penalties of the breach of this covenant in ourselves for ever (John 3:36; Rom 5:12). Which covenant Jesus Christ came to fulfil in the greatest exaltation of it; for all that Christ did or suffered in the flesh was to give this covenant its full satisfaction in our behalf, if we prove to be true believers: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth” (Rom 10:4).

Now, by Moses putting the fiery law in the ark under the mercy-seat, I understand,

1. That the moral law, as it is a law or rule of life to a Christian, is not ceased, as some would have. It was not thrown away, but only hid under the mercy-seat.

2. It was to show us, that the condemning, accusing, and destroying power of the law, as it was the law of the old covenant, and so a law not satisfied for, was taken away by the satisfaction which was given by Christ; that as the law made the creature before to be subject to its terrors, now Christ has made the law to be subject to its merits, for you see the law is forced to lie under the mercy-seat. And besides, it shows us thus much, for the great comfort of all believers, that God cannot look upon any believers any more as in or under the old covenant, because the covenant lies hid under the mercy-seat.

Now, if it did stand upon the mercy-seat, then in deed, when at any time God had cast his eyes about the mercy-seat, it would have been the first thing that God would have had in his eyes. But to prevent that, it is a law hid out of sight; a law that must not appear before God; a law that must lie under the mercy-seat; a law veiled up in the mantle of rich and free grace, that if God will at any time cast his eyes about that way where the covenant lieth, God must look through a whole heap of satisfaction before he can espy this old covenant. Therefore saith St. Paul, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh” (Rom 8:1). So Jer 1:20: “In that time, saith the Lord, the iniquity of Israel shall be sought for, and there shall be none; and the sins of Judah, and they shall not be found: for I will pardon them whom I reserve.”

But the question will be, If the moral law is a law hid out of sight, and veiled up, then are believers to take any notice of it at all?

I answer, It is true indeed, as the moral law, for the matter of it, was the old covenant of works, so it is a covenant or law hid from believers; and in this a believer hath nothing to do with the law, nor the law with a believer. But, when Jesus Christ, on the believer’s part, had fulfilled and satisfied the law as it was formerly the old covenant, he takes up the matter of the old covenant, which is the ten commandments, and makes it the law of his kingdom, and so imposes it on his people as a rule to walk by for ever in their several generations; but with differing respects in comparison to what the law was to be subjected unto before, for when the ten commandments, as it was for matter of it the covenant of works, called for obedience from the creature, it was for life, saying, “Do this, and thou shalt live; if not, thou shalt die the death.” But as it is become, for the matter of it, the law of a Mediator, and a law in Christ’s hand, and so a law which comes forth to us from under the mercy-seat, it speaks otherwise than it did before, not for life, but from life; not that you might live, but because you do live; not that you might get heaven, but because heaven is freely given unto you, and bestowed upon you.

The law in Christ’s hand does not say, “You must repent and mourn for sin, and get it mortified, and be humbled and holy, that God might love you, and pardon sin in you, and that he might give you an inheritance amongst them which are sanctified,” but because all this is freely procured by Jesus Christ for you already, and is freely by the grace of God made over to the soul as his, through sound believing, “That we being delivered” (mark that it be not that we might be delivered) “of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life” (Luke 1:74-75).

So Heb 12:28: “Wherefore we, receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved” (mark that, a kingdom already received), “let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear.” So Titus 2:11-12: “The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men” (mark that, which hath already appeared) “teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world.” So that a believer is so far from being set free by Christ from the law, or ten commandments, as that he is the more obliged to the strict observation of it. Therefore saith St. Paul, Rom 3:31: “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good” (Rom 7:12).

The form of the old covenant is taken away by Christ from a believer; but the matter still remains. It ceaseth to be a law, commanding for life to a believer; but it still requires obedience in all manner of conversation at a believer’s hands, because he does live; and so it is a rule to walk by as binding as ever.

Thus you may see, if you will but consider, the place where the tables of the law were placed; they were placed in the ark, which ark typified Christ, as you have heard before; so that by Moses placing the tables of the moral law in the ark under the mercy-seat, both which places being types of Christ, it is very clear, that the moral law, or ten commandments, are become the law of Christ’s mediatorial kingdom.

Thomas Worden, The Types Unveiled, or The Gospel Picked out of the Legal Ceremonies (abridged and reprinted in London, 1840; originally, 1664), 96-100.

 

Colquhoun's "A Treatise on the Law and the Gospel"

John Colquhoun (1748-1827) was a Scottish minister deeply influenced by the writings of Thomas Boston and the other "Marrow men" who had defended Edward Fisher's Marrow of Modern Divinity (1645) in the 1720's when the moderates in power in the Church of Scotland condemned the book as antinomian. "In advising the many students of divinity who frequented [Colquhoun's] ministry, he declined to recommend The Marrow of Modern Divinity, as the General Assembly had condemned it. But Boston's notes to the Marrow were not so condemned, and these he warmly recommended" (!) (Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology, ed. Nigel M. de S. Cameron, [T&T Clark/IVP, 1993], 196).

Colquhoun's approach to the Law, as you would expect, is very similar to that of Fisher and Boston, but even clearer and more logically organized. The Marrow is somewhat irritating due to the dialogue format, as well as the lengthy annotations by Boston. Colquhoun is more straightforward, and very readable. 

Let me give you a sampling of this delightful work: 

"The violated covenant of works, as I observed above, was not, and could not be, made or renewed with the Israelites at Sinai; for it was a broken covenant, and besides, it was a covenant between God and man as friends, whereas now man has become the enemy of God. But though it was not renewed with them, yet it was, on that solemn occasion, repeated and displayed to them. It was not proposed to them in order that they might consent, by their own works, to fulfill the condition of it; but it was displayed before them in subservience to the covenant of grace that they might see how impossible it was for them as condemned sinners to perform that perfect obedience which is the immutable condition of life in it ... God therefore displayed on Mount Sinai the law of the Ten Commandments as a covenant of works in subservience to the covenant of grace ... that by means of it, finding themselves utterly destitute of perfect righteousness, they might be impelled to take hold of the covenant of grace in which the perfect righteousness of the second Adam is provided and exhibited for the justification of all who believe" (pp. 55-56). 

Colquhoun's exegesis of Romans 3:31: "The law received a complete answer to all its high demands by the unsinning obedience and satisfactory death of the Lord Jesus, the Surety of elect sinners. We are thereby instructed that He came into the world 'not to destroy, but to fulfill the law' (Matthew 5:17), and that He 'is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes' (Romans 10:4). According to the doctrine of faith, the law as a covenant receives from our divine Surety all the obedience and satisfaction which it can demand. He, in the room, and as the representative of an elect world, fulfilled all the righteousness of it (Matthew 3:15). He yielded to it perfect holiness of human nature, perfect obedience of life, and complete satisfaction for sin; and from His divine nature, united to the human in His infinitely glorious person, His whole righteousness has derived such infinite value as to be strictly meritorious of eternal life for His spiritual seed. According to that doctrine, the law in its federal form is far more honored by the righteousness of the second Adam than it was dishonored by the disobedience of the first ... Now by this consummate, transcendently-glorious righteousness which is revealed in the gospel, the sovereign authority and high obligation of the law are most illustriously displayed and most firmly established" (pp. 179-80). 

"Thus it is plain that true believers are dead to the commanding, promising, condemning, and irritating power of the law as a covenant of works" (p. 215). 

"It is the inestimable privilege, as well as the indispensable duty, of all who have believed through grace to be 'dead to the law' as a covenant of works. To be dead to its relatively, or with respect to their state, is their exalted privilege; and to become dead to it really, in the disposition of their minds, is their bound duty" (p. 215). 

"As the believer's living unto God, according to the law as a rule of life in the hand of the Mediator, is the necessary consequence or fruit of his having become dead to the law as a covenant of works, so his being dead to the law is necessary to his living unto God; so absolutely necessary that were he not dead to the law as a covenant, it would be utterly impossible for him to live unto God in conformity to the law as a rule" (pp. 236-7). 

"This law issues to true Christians from Christ, the glorious Mediator of the New Covenant, and from God their Creator, Proprietor, Benefactor, and covenant God. It proceeds immediately from Jesus Christ, the blessed Mediator between God and men. It is taken in under the covenant of grace, and, in the hand of Christ, the Mediator of that covenant, it is given to all who believe in Him, and who are justified by faith, as the only rule of their obedience. The Apostle Paul accordingly calls it 'the law of Christ' (Galatians 6:2).... Were believers to keep the moral law only as the law of nature, and without any relation to the Mediator, their obedience would be but natural religion; were they to obey it merely as a covenant of works their obedience would be but legal righteousness; but when they obey it in its relation to Christ and the covenant of grace, their conformity of heart and life to it is true holiness, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:5)" (pp. 26-27, 30). 

"The Lord Jesus, therefore, instead of dissolving or in the smallest degree weakening the moral law, greatly strengthens the original obligation of it (Confession of Faith XIX:V). Indeed, it is only to God as in Christ, only according to the law as in the hand of Christ, and only by a real believer in Christ that the smallest acceptable obedience can be performed" (p. 134). 

To summarize: 

1. The ten commandments were given as a republication of the broken covenant of works to Israel, not as a means of justification, but in subservience to the covenant of grace as a disciplinarian to lead us to Christ. 

2. As such the law given to Israel could not produce sanctification but only stirred up sin and made it increase, resulting in even greater spiritual bondage. 

3. The believer has been delivered from the moral law as a covenant of works by union with Christ in his meritorious obedience and satisfactory death, by which he undertook and satisfied the claims of the broken covenant of works for us as the second Adam. 

4. The believer is dead to the law and is now bound to Christ, or married to another, in order to bring forth fruit unto God. 

5. The believer's ethical obligation is now to the law of Christ, which has the same content as the moral law, but taken up and renewed in Christ, and so the moral law comes to us in new covenant form grounded in union with Christ. 

John Colquhoun, A Treatise on the Law and the Gospel (Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1999, originally 1819).

The Way to Avoid Legalism

"The way to avoid legalism is to believe that, as the Law teaches, only the perfectly righteous may be admitted into heaven. This counterintuitive premise accomplishes two things in a single blow: it crushes legalism and clarifies the meaning of grace. First, it crushes legalism because legalism cannot get off the ground unless the standard has first been lowered. But if the Law requires perfect righteousness, clearly the half-baked, imperfect obedience promoted by legalism will not do.

"Second, it clarifies the meaning of grace. Grace is that God provides and accepts the imputed righteousness of Christ, in place of our own inherent righteousness demanded by the Law, as the righteousness by which the unrighteous can attain heaven. Now that’s grace! The true Gospel, then, presupposes the Law as its antithetical counterpart. Otherwise grace is no longer grace." 

 

From my paper Countering Ten Arguments Against the Law-Gospel Paradigm.

 

HT: Erol Bortucene (not that I wasn't aware of my own paper, of course, but I liked Erol's editorial selection of these two paragraphs).