The Law Of God
"The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." "Neither is there salvation in any other." (Eph. 1:7; 2:8, 9. 1 John 1:7. Acts 4:12.)
Obj. Reward presupposes merit. God also calls those good things which he promises, and grants unto them that perform good works, rewards
Therefore good works presuppose merit, and are meritorious in the sight of God. Ans. The major proposition, sometimes, holds true among men, but never with God; because no creature can merit any thing at the hands of God, seeing that he is indebted to no one. Yet they are, nevertheless, called the rewards of our good works in respect to God, because he, out of his mere grace, recompenses them. This recompense, however, is not due; for we can add nothing to God, neither does he stand in need of our works. Yea, something is rather added unto us by our good works; because they are a conformity of ourselves with God, and his benefits, by which we are bound to render gratitude to God, and not God to us. It is, therefore, not less absurd to say that we merit salvation at the hands of God, than if a certain one should say, Thou hast given me one hundred florins. Therefore thou oughtest to give me a thousand florins. Yet God commands us to perform good works, and promises a gracious reward to those who do them, as a father promises rewards to his children.
THIRTY-FOURTH LORD'S DAY
OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
Question 92. What is the law of God?
Answer. God spake all these words, Exod. 20, Deut. 5, saying: I am the Lord thy God, which hath brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
FIRST COMMANDMENT
Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
SECOND COMMANDMENT
Thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven image, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them; for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.
THIRD COMMANDMENT
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
FOURTH COMMANDMENT
Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy: six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy
God: in it thou shalt do no manner of work, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man servant nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, nor the stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
FIFTH COMMANDMENT
Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
SIXTH COMMANDMENT
Thou shalt not kill.
SEVENTH COMMANDMENT
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
EIGHTH COMMANDMENT
Thou shalt not steal.
NINTH COMMANDMENT
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
TENTH COMMANDMENt
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man servant, nor his maid servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
EXPOSITION
The doctrine concerning the Law, which is the rule of good works, next claims our attention, in relation to which we shall enquire:
I. What is the law in general?
II. What are the several parts of the divine law?
III. To what extent has Christ abrogated the law, and to what extent is it still in force?
IV. In what does the moral law differ from the gospel?
V. How is the Decalogue divided?
VI. What is the true meaning of the Decalogue, and of every commandment separately considered?
VII. To what extent can those who are regenerated keep the law?
VIII. What is the use of the law?
We shall now proceed to the consideration of the first four questions here proposed. The fifth belongs to the 93d Question of the Catechism; the sixth, to the 94th, and those which follow, down to the 114th; the seventh, to the 114th, and the eighth to the 115th Question.
I. WHAT IS THE LAW IN GENERAL?
The term law (lex) is derived from lego, which means to read, to publish; or, from lego, which means to choose. The Hebrew Thorah, which means doctrine, agrees with the former derivation of the term; because laws are published in order that every one may read and learn them. It is for this reason that ignorance of the law does not excuse any one. Yea, those who are ignorant of the laws which have respect to them, sin in that they are ignorant. The Greek νομας, which comes from a word that means to distribute, to divide, agrees with the latter derivation of the term law; because the law imposes particular duties upon every one.
Law now, in general, is a rule, or precept, commanding things honest and just, requiring obedience from creatures endowed with reason, with a promise of reward in case of obedience, and with a threatening of punishment in case of disobedience. It is a rule, or precept, commanding things honest and just, otherwise it is no law. Requiring obedience from creatures endowed with reason: the law was not made for those who are not bound to obedience. With a promise of reward in case of obedience; the law graciously promises blessings to those who perform acceptable obedience; because no obedience can be meritorious in the sight of God.
Obj But the gospel also promises blessings freely. Therefore the law does not differ from the gospel. Ans. The law promises freely in one respect, and the gospel in another. The law promises freely upon the condition of obedience on our part; the gospel, on the other hand, promises freely without the works of the law. The gospel does not, indeed, promise blessings freely, independent of any condition whatever; but only without such a condition as that which the law lays down. And with a threatening of punishment in case of disobedience; otherwise the law would be an empty sound, and of no effect. Plato says: "The law is a right form of government, which is directed to the best end, by means that are adapted thereto, threatening punishment upon transgressors, and promising rewards to the obedient. The term law is also frequently improperly used to designate the course, and order which God has established in nature.
In this sense the law, meaning the order of nature, requires that fruit be produced by a tree. And Paul still more improperly calls original sin, the law of sin, because as a law it leads us to the commission of sin.
II. WHAT ARE THE PARTS OF THE LAW, AND WHAT THEIR
DIFFERENCES?
Laws are divine and human. Human laws are such as are instituted by men, and which bind certain persons to certain external duties concerning which there is no express divine precept or prohibition with a promise of reward and threatening of punishment, corporal and temporal. Human laws are either civil or ecclesiastical. Civil are such positive laws as are instituted by magistrates, or by some corporation, or state, in reference to a certain order or class of actions to be observed in the state in contracts, trials, punishments, &c. Ecclesiastical, or ceremonial laws, are those which the church institutes in reference to the order which is to be observed in the ministry of the church, and which lay down certain prescriptions in reference to those things which contribute to the divine law.
Divine laws are those which God has instituted, which belong partly to angels, partly to men, and partly to certain classes of men. These do not only require external actions or obedience, but they also require internal qualities, actions and motives: nor do they merely propose temporal rewards and punishments; but also such as are spiritual and eternal. They are also the ends for which human laws are instituted. Of divine lawz there are some that are eternal and unchangeable; whilst there are others that are changeable; yet only by God himself, who has instituted them.
The divine law is ordinarily divided, or considered as consisting of three parts; the moral, the ceremonial and the judicial.
The moral law is a doctrine harmonising with the eternal and unchange able wisdom and justice of God, distinguishing right from wrong, known by nature, engraven upon the hearts of creatures endowed with reason in their creation, and afterwards often repeated and declared by the voice of God through his servants, the prophets; teaching what God is and what he requires, binding all intelligent creatures to perfect obedience and conformity to the law, internal and external, promising the favor of God and eternal life to all those who render perfect obedience, and at the same time denouncing the wrath of God and everlasting punishment upon all
those who do not render this obedience, unless remission of sins and reconciliation with God be secured for the sake of Christ the mediator.
Harmonising with the eternal and unchangeable wisdom of God: That the law is eternal is evident from this, that it remains one and the same from the beginning to the end of the world. We were also created, and have been redeemed by Christ and regenerated by the Holy Spirit, that we might keep this law, or love God and our neighbor as it requires, both in this and in the life to come. "I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning." (John 2:7.)
Afterwards often repeated: God repeated the law of nature which was engraven upon the mind of man: 1. Because it was obscured and weakened by the fall. 2. Because many things were entirely obliterated and lost. 3. That what was still left in the mind of man might not be regarded as a mere opinion or notion, and so at length be lost.
Ceremonial laws were those which God gave through Moses in reference to ceremonies, or the external solemn ordinances which were to be observed in the public worship of God, with a proper attention to the circumstances which had been prescribed; binding the Jewish nation to the coming of the Messiah, and at the same time distinguishing them from all other nations; and that they might also be signs, symbols, types and shadows of spiritual things to be fulfilled in the New Testament by Christ. Ceremonies are external solemn actions which are often to be repeated in the same manner and with the same circumstance, and which have been instituted by God, or by men to be observed in the external worship of God, for the sake of order, propriety and signification. The ceremonies which have been instituted by God, constitute divine worship absolutely; whilst those which have been instituted by men, if they are good, merely contribute to divine worship.
The judicial laws were those which had respect to the civil order or government, and the maintenance of external propriety among the Jewish people according to both tables of the Decalogue; or it may be said that they had respect to the order and duties of magistrates, the courts of justice, contracts, punishments, fixing the limits of kingdoms, &c. These laws God delivered through Moses for the establishment and
preservation of the Jewish commonwealth, binding all the posterity of Abraham, and distinguishing them from the rest of mankind until the coming of the Messiah; and that they might also serve as a bond for the preservation and government of the Mosaic polity, until the manifestation of the Son of God in the flesh, that they might be certain marks by which the nation which was bound by them, might be distinguished from all other nations, and might at the same time be the means of preserving proper discipline and order, that so they might be types of the order which should be established in the kingdom of Christ.
All good laws, which alone deserve the name of laws, are to be traced to the moral law as their source, which agrees in every respect with the Decalogue, and may also, by necessary consequence, be deduced from it, so that he who violates the one, violates the other likewise. As it respects ceremonial and judicial laws, however, whether they be divine or human, if they are only good, they do, indeed, agree with the Decalogue, but cannot be deduced from it by necessary consequence, as the moral law, but are subservient to it, as certain specifications of circumstances. From this we may easily perceive the difference which exists between these laws: for it is one thing to flow out of the Decalogue necessarily, and another thing to agree with it, and contribute to its observance. Yet this difference varies, because the government of the church and the state is not the same; nor do these have the same end, nor are they abrogated in the same way.
But the chief difference between these laws lies in their obligation, manifestation, duration and use. The moral law is known naturally, binds all men, and that perpetually; it is different, however, with the ceremonial and judicial law. The moral law requires obedience which is both internal and external; the others merely require that which is external. The precepts of the moral law are general, having respect to all men whoever they may be; the others are special, and do not thus apply to all men. The precepts of the moral law are the ends of the others; whilst they again are subservient to those which are moral. The ceremonial and civil laws were also types and figures of other things for which they were instituted; it is different, however, with the moral law. The moral law does not give place to the ceremonial; it, on the other hand, gives place to the moral.
We must also observe, in passing along, the difference which exists between the moral law, the natural law, and the Decalogue. The Decalogue contains the sum of the moral laws which are scattered throughout the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. The natural, and moral law were the same in man before the fall, when his nature was pure and holy. Since the fall, however, which resulted in the corruption and depravity of our nature, a considerable part of the natural law has become obscured and lost by reason of sin, so that there is only a small portion concerning the obedience which we owe to God still left in the human mind. It is for this reason that God repeated, and declared to the church the entire doctrine and true sense of his law, as contained in the Decalogue. The Decalogue is, therefore, the renewal and re-enforcing of the natural law, which is only a part of the Decalogue. This distinction, therefore, which we have made between the several parts of the divine law must be retained, both on account of the difference itself, that so the force and true sense of these laws may be understood, and that we may also have a correct knowledge and understanding of the abrogation and use of the law.
III. TO WHAT EXTENT HAS CHRIST ABROGATED THE LAW,
AND TO WHAT EXTENT IS IT STILL IN FORCE?
The ordinary and correct answer to this question is, that the ceremonial and judicial law, as given by Moses, has been abrogated in as far as it relates to obedience; and that the moral law has also been abrogated as it respects the curse, but not as it respects obedience. That the ceremonial and judicial laws have been so abrogated by the coming of Christ, that they no longer bind any to obedience, and that they have not the appearance and force of laws in respect to the present time, is proven, 1.
From the fact that the prophets even declared and foretold this abrogation in the Old Testament. "Christ shall confirm the covenant with many for one week, and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease." "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedek. (Dan. 9:27. Ps. 110:4.) 2. Christ and his Apostles, in different places in the New Testament, expressly assert this abrogation.
(See Acts 7:8. Heb. 7:11–18; 8:8–13.) Instead of adducing a number of testimonies in confirmation of this point, we shall merely cite the decree
passed by the Apostles when assembled in Jerusalem: "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burden, than these necessary things," &c. (Acts 15:28, 29.) 3. When certain causes are once changed, the laws which are based upon these causes are also changed. One cause now of the ceremonial and judicial law was that the form of worship and civil polity which existed among the Jews, from whom the Messiah was to be born, might distinguish them from all other nations until the Messiah would come. Another cause was that they might be types of the Messiah and of his benefits. These causes now since the coming of the Messiah, have been done away with: for the Apostle declares that the middle wall of partition between the Jews and other nations has been broken down: "He is our Peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us," "For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. (Eph. 2:14. Gal. 6:15.) It is also every where taught in the New Testament Scriptures that the rites and ceremonies of the old dispensation have been fulfilled in Christ. "The Holy Ghost, this signifying that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while the first tabernacle was yet standing." "The law and the prophets were until John." "Let no man judge you in meat or in drink," &c. (Heb. 9:8. Luke 10:16. Col. 2:16.)
The Jews are wont to bring forward the following objections against the abrogation of the law: 1. The Mosaic ritual and the Jewish kingdom were to last forever; the former according to the command, the latter according to the promise of God. Circumcision is an everlasting covenant. The Passover was to be observed for an ordinance forever. This is my rest forever. The sabbath is a perpetual covenant. Thy throne shall be established forever. (Gen. 17:13. Ex. 12:24. Ps. 132:14. Ex. 31:16. Sam.
7:16.) Therefore the form of religion and civil polity instituted by Moses, has not been abrogated by Christ. Ans. The chain of reasoning in this syllogism is incorrect, for it proceeds from that which is declared to be true in a certain respect, to that which is absolutely true. The major proposition speaks of an absolute perpetuity; whilst the minor speaks of a perpetuity that is limited, inasmuch as an unlimited continuance of the Jewish rites and kingdom is not promised in the above references, but one that was merely to continue until the coming of the Messiah who was
to be heard after Moses. For the particle Holam signifies, every where in the Scriptures, not eternity, but the continuance of along, though definite period of time. Thus it is said in Ex. 26:6, "And he shall serve him forever," meaning until the year of jubilee, as we may easily prove, by a comparison of this declaration with the law respecting the jubilee, as recorded in Lev. 25:40. Again: We may also grant what is affirmed in the minor proposition, that an absolute perpetuity is promised; but this is a continuance, not of the types and shadows, but only of the things signified thereby, which are spiritual, the truth of which will continue forever in the church, even though the types and signs themselves be abolished by Christ. In this respect the signification of circumcision remains in force even to this day: so there is also a perpetual sabbath in the church, and it shall be perpetual in everlasting life: so also the kingdom of David is established forever in the throne of Christ.
Obj. 2 The worship which Ezekiel describes, from the fortieth chapter to the end of his prophecy, has respect to the kingdom of the Messiah, and is to be retained in it. But that worship is merely typical and ceremonial.
Therefore a typical and ceremonial worship is to be retained in the kingdom of the Messiah; from which we may infer that the Jewish religion and polity was not to be done away with, but restored by the Messiah. Ans. The major of this syllogism, if understood absolutely, is not true; because whilst the prophet speaks of the kingdom of the Messiah, he does not prophesy concerning this alone: for he at the same time speaks of the restitution of the ceremonial worship in Judea, after their return from Babylon, and foretells that it would continue until the Messiah would come. We also deny the minor proposition; for the prophet, under the description of types, did not only promise the restoration of Jewish types, but he more particularly foretold and promised the spiritual condition and glory of the church under the reign of the Messiah, which should be commenced in this life, and perfected in the life to come; which may be proven by the following considerations: 1. The history of Ezra teaches that this restoration would not take place before the coming of Christ; neither will the other prophecies which are contained in the Old
Testament, respecting the coming and reign of the Messiah in this world, allow us to believe that there will ever, even after the manifestation of the Son of God in the flesh, be such a glorious state and condition of the
church on earth as the Jews dream of. Hence this restoration of Jerusalem, or the church, must be understood spiritually, or else we shall be compelled to admit, what is absurd, that this prophecy never has been, nor will be fulfilled. 2. The promise, in which the prophet declares that neither the house of Israel, nor their kings, would any more defile the holy name of God, must necessarily be understood in a spiritual sense, as referring to the perfection of the life to come. (Ex. 43:7.) And it is by no means uncommon for the prophets to connect the commencement of the reign of Christ with the perfect establishment of it. 3. The waters issuing out of the temple cannot be understood of elementary water, but shadow forth and signify the gifts of the Holy Spirit, which were to be poured out in large measures in the kingdom of Christ. (Eph. 5:26.) 4. Lastly, we have for our interpreter the Apostle John, who, in the twenty-first and second chapters of the book of Revelation, describes the spiritual and heavenly Jerusalem, by which is meant the glorified church of the New
Testament, in words taken, as it were, from the description given by the prophet Ezekiel. This prophecy, therefore, affords no proof whatever in favor of the observance of Jewish rites in the kingdom of Christ.
Obj. 3. The best and most wholesome form of government is always to be retained. The form of government established among the Jews was the best and most wholesome, for the reason that it was instituted by God.
Therefore it is to be retained. Ans. There is here a fallacy in taking that to be absolutely true, which is true only in a certain respect. The form of government established among the Jews was the best, not absolutely, but only for that time, that country and nation: for there were many things in it adapted to the state and condition of that nation, country, time, and ceremonial worship, the observance of which would now neither be proper nor profitable, because the causes on account of which those laws were given to the Jews are now changed or removed; as giving a writing or bill of divorcement, marrying the widow of one's kindred, &c. God did not, for this reason, institute this form of government that all nations and ages might be bound by it; but only that his own people might, by this discipline, be separated for a time from the surrounding nations.
If any one should object and say, that if Christians are permitted to observe and conform to the laws of other nations, such as the Greeks or
Romans, &c., much more ought we to observe those which were given by Moses, the servant of God; we readily grant the argument, if this observance is rendered without attaching to it the idea of necessity; or if these laws are observed, not because Moses commanded and enjoined them upon the Jewish nation, but because there are good reasons why we should now comply with them; and if these reasons should be changed, to retain the liberty of changing these enactments by public authority.
We have thus far spoken merely of the abrogation of the ceremonial and judicial law. We must now proceed to speak of the moral law.
The moral law has, as it respects one part, been abrogated by Christ; and as it respects another, it has not. It has been abrogated, as it respects the faithful, in two ways: 1. The curse of the law has been removed as it respects those who are justified by faith in Christ, in consequence of having his merits imputed unto them; or it may be said that the law has been abrogated as touching justification, because judgment is not pronounced in reference to us according to the law, but according to the gospel. The sentence of the law would condemn and give us over to destruction. Its dreadful language is, "In thy sight shall no man living be justified." (Ps. 143:2.) The sentence of the gospel is different: its language is, "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life." (John 3:36.) This abrogation of the law is the first and principal part of Christian liberty, of which it is said, "There is no condemnation to them which are in Christ
Jesus." "Ye are not under the law, but under grace." (Rom. 8:1; 6:14.) 2.
The law has been abrogated in reference to Christians, as it respects constraint. The law no longer forces and wrests obedience as a tyrant, or as a master compels a worthless servant to render obedience to his behests; because Christ commences in us by his Spirit a free and cheerful obedience, so that we willingly comply with whatever the law requires from us. The Apostle says, concerning this part of Christian liberty: "Sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace." (Rom. 6:14.) What this liberty is, the Apostle explains in the seventh chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. "The law is not made for a righteous man; but for the lawless and disobedient," &c. "Against such, there is no law." (1 Tim. 1:9. Gal. 5:23.)
Obj. The law and the prophets were until John. (Matt. 11:13.) Hence if the
law was then first abrogated, as it respects condemnation, when Christ appeared in the flesh, it follows that the faithful who lived before the coming of Christ must have been under condemnation. Ans. The law was abrogated, as touching condemnation, no less to the faithful under the Old Testament, than to those who live under the New Testament: to the former as to efficacy and power; to the latter as to fulfillment and manifestation.
But the moral law, or Decalogue, has not been abrogated in as far as obedience to it is concerned. God continually, no less now than formerly, requires both the regenerate and the unregenerate to render obedience to his law. This may be proven: 1. From the end for which Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law. This was that he might make us, who were delivered from sin and the curse of the law, the temples of God; and not that we should persist in sin, and hatred to God. 2. We are bound to render obedience and gratitude to God in proportion to the number and greatness of the benefits which he confers upon us. But those who are united to Christ by faith, receive from the hands of God more and greater benefits than all others: for they do not merely enjoy, in common with others, the benefit of creation and preservation, but enjoy in addition to this the grace of regeneration and justification. Therefore we are more strongly bound to render obedience to the divine law than others, and that more after our regeneration and justification than before. 3. From the testimony of Scripture: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." (Matt. 5:17.)
This is spoken, indeed, of the whole law, but with a special reference to the moral law, which Christ has fulfilled in four respects:
1. By his own righteousness and conformity with the law. It behooved him to be perfectly righteous in himself, and to be conformable to the law according to each nature, that he might make satisfaction for us, as it is said: "For such an High Priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners," &c. (Heb. 7:26.)
2. By enduring a punishment sufficient for our sins: "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." (Rom. 8:3.)
3. Christ fulfills the law in us by his Spirit, by whom he renews us in the image of God. "Our old man is crucified with Christ, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." "If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies, by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." (Rom. 6:6; 8:11.)
4. Christ fulfilled the law by teaching it and restoring its true meaning and sense, which he did by freeing it from the corruptions and glosses of the Pharisees, as appears from his sermon on the mount, and from other portions of his teachings. If Christ, therefore, teaches and restores in us obedience to the law, he does not abolish the law in respect to obedience.
Paul teaches the same thing when he asks: "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law." (Rom. 3:31.)
The law now is established by faith in three ways: 1. By confessing and approving the sentence which it passes in reference to ourselves, that we do not render the obedience which is due from us to the law, and are, therefore, deserving of eternal condemnation. We also confess the same thing by seeking righteousness without ourselves in Christ. 2. By satisfaction. By faith we apply unto ourselves the satisfaction of Christ, which is equivalent to everlasting punishment, which the law requires from us in case we do not render a full and perfect obedience to its claims. It is by means of this satisfaction now that we are justified, not indeed by the law, nor yet contrary to the law, but with the law, which Christ has fully satisfied by his perfect obedience in our room and stead.
3. By new obedience. This obedience is commenced in us in this life by the Spirit of Christ, and will be perfected in the life to come. The same thing may be expressed more briefly, thus: The law is established by faith, both because the doctrine concerning the righteousness which is by faith, teaches that we are righteous, not in ourselves, and that we cannot be justified unless the perfect satisfaction which the law requires intervene, and also because the restoration of obedience to the law in us is brought about by faith.
The sum of what we have now said, touching the abrogation of the law is this: That the ceremonial and judicial laws instituted by Moses have been
entirely abolished and done away with by the coming of Christ, as far as it relates to obligation and obedience on our part. The moral law, however, has not been abolished as it respects obedience, but only as it respects the curse, justification and constraint.
The objections of the Antinomians, Libertines, and others of a similar cast, who contend that the moral law has no respect to Christians, and that it ought not to be taught in the church of Christ, will be noticed when we come to the exposition of the 115th Question of the Catechism where we shall speak of the use of the law.
IV. IN WHAT DOES THE LAW DIFFER FROM THE GOSPEL?
The exposition of this question is necessary for a variety of considerations, and especially that we may have a proper understanding of the law and the gospel, to which a knowledge of that in which they differ greatly contributes. According to the definition of the law, which says, that it promises rewards to those who render perfect obedience; and that it promises them freely, inasmuch as no obedience can be meritorious in the sight of God, it would seem that it does not differ from the gospel, which also promises eternal life freely. Yet notwithstanding this seeming agreement, there is a great difference between the law and the gospel. They differ, 1. As to the mode of revelation peculiar to each. The law is known naturally: the gospel was divinely revealed after the fall of man. 2. In matter or doctrine. The law declares the justice of God separately considered: the gospel declares it in connection with his mercy. The law teaches what we ought to be in order that we may be saved: the gospel teaches in addition to this, how we may become such as the law requires, viz: by faith in Christ. 3. In their conditions or promises. The law promises eternal life and all good things upon the condition of our own and perfect righteousness, and of obedience in us: the gospel promises the same blessings upon the condition that we exercise faith in Christ, by which we embrace the obedience which another, even Christ, has performed in our behalf; or the gospel teaches that we are justified freely by faith in Christ. With this faith is also connected, as by an indissoluble bond, the condition of new obedience. 4. In their effects. The law works
wrath, and is the ministration of death: the gospel is the ministration of life and of the Spirit. (Rom. 4:15. 2 Cor. 3:7.)
Question 93. How are these ten commandments divided?
Answer. Into two tables; the first of which teaches us how we must behave towards God; the second, what duties we owe to our neighbor.
EXPOSITION
This Question concerning the division of the Decalogue is necessary and. profitable; 1. Because God himself expressed a certain number of tables and commandments in the Decalogue. 2. Because Christ divided the sum of the whole law into two commandments, or into two kinds of commandments. 3. Because a correct division of the Decalogue contributes much to a proper understanding of the commandments. It teaches and admonishes us in reference to the degrees of obedience required by each table, and shows that the worship of the first table is the most important.
There is a three-fold division of the Decalogue.
I. It is divided into two tables by Moses and Christ. The first table comprehends the duties which we owe to God immediately; the second the duties which we owe to him mediately; or it may be said that the first table teaches us how we ought to behave towards God, whilst the second teaches what duties we owe towards our neighbor. This division is based upon the word of God clearly expressed, "Hew thee two tables of stone."
(Ex. 34:1, 4, 29. Deut. 4:13.) So Christ and Paul refer the whole law to the love of God and our neighbor. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind: This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." (Matt. 22:37, 38, 39.) This division is profitable; 1.
That we may the better understand the true sense and design of the whole law, and the perfect obedience which it required of us. 2. That we may observe the common rule, to yield the precepts of the second table to those of the first in the same kind of worship, or that we should prefer the love and glory of God to the love and salvation of all creatures, according
as it is written, "We ought to obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29.) II. The Decalogue is divided into ten commandments, of Which the first four belong to the first table; the rest belong to the second table. God enumerated or included ten commandments in the Decalogue, not because he was delighted more with this number than any other, but because the substance and reasons of these things were comprehended in this number; for all that we owe to God and our neighbor is contained in these ten precepts or laws, so that nothing is omitted, nor is there any thing superfluous. The four commandments of the first table comprise every thing which we owe to God immediately; whilst the remaining six, which make up the second table, contain every thing which has respect to the manner in which this life should be spent so as to result in happiness and peace.
There is, however, much diversity of sentiment and disagreement in relation to the enumeration of the commandments. Some enumerate only three, others five, and others four commandments in the first table. But that that division which attributes four commandments to the first table, in such a way that the first includes what is said in reference to having no other gods beside Jehovah; the second, what is said of not making graven images; the third, of not taking the name of God in vain; the fourth, of hallowing the Sabbath; thus referring the other six to the second table; that this division is the best and most correct, we prove by the following considerations.
1. According to this division, each commandment expresses something distinct and separate from the rest, so that it may easily be distinguished from all the others, according to its true sense and meaning. When God himself divided the Decalogue into ten commandments, he doubtless designed that these precepts should differ from each other, so that each one should contain and express something peculiar to itself. Hence, if these commandments have not a different signification, they are not different, but one and the same. The commandments, now, which forbid our having strange gods, and making graven images, are different in their meaning and signification. The former forbids any other god to be worshipped, besides him who alone is the true God; the other forbids that this true God should be worshipped in any other way, than that which he
has prescribed. So, on the other hand, the commandment concerning concupiscence, or lust, out of which some make the ninth and tenth commandments, is but one as to its meaning, as the very persons themselves who make this division, testify, whenever they, in their expositions, join together this, their ninth and tenth commandments. The apostle Paul also teaches the same thing when he speaks of lust as though it were but one commandment, saying, "I had not known lust (to be sin) except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." (Rom. 7:7.) Hence, the first and second commandments of which we have spoken, are two different commandments; whilst this last, which some divide into two, is but one commandment. Moreover, if the tenth commandment concerning lust is to be divided into two, because it distinctly forbids coveting, or lusting after our neighbor's house and wife, then it would also follow, according to this reasoning, that it would have to be divided into more; yea, into as many commandments as there are things specified, which we are not to covet.
2. Those commandments are, without doubt, different and not the same which Moses has separated by different periods and verses; whilst those which he has expressed in one sentence, or verse, are not different, but constitute only one commandment. The Commandment, now, which forbids our having strange gods, and that which forbids our making graven images, are distinguished and separated by Moses into different verses, or sentences. They are, therefore, not the same, but different commandments It is different, however, as it respects the commandment which forbids the coveting of our neighbor's house, and wife; for this is not separated into distinct verses by Moses, as in the former case, but is comprehended in one sentence. Hence, it constitutes only one commandment, and not two, as some will have it.
3. Moses, without doubt, observed and retained the same order in rehearsing the commandments, both in Exodus and Deuteronomy. But the words of the tenth commandment, respecting the coveting of our neighbor's house and wife, are not in these places rehearsed in the same, but in a different order. In Exodus the words, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, precede those which declare, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife. But in Deuteronomy the order is different; for here the
words, Thou shalt not desire thy neighbor's wife, precede those which declare, Thou shalt not desire thy neighbor's house. Therefore, these sentences are parts of one and the same commandment, or else there will be no ninth commandment, and we will be driven to the necessity of maintaining that Moses in one place confounded the ninth commandment with the tenth, and substituted a part of the tenth in the place of the ninth, which absurdity we dare not charge upon him. This transposition of the words in the instances to which reference is here had, clearly proves that God designed that that portion of the Decalogue which is comprehended in one period, should constitute but one commandment, and that the tenth.
4. This division of the commandments of the Decalogue is supported and sustained by the best and most weighty authority. The ancient Jewish writers distinguish the first and second commandments and include in the tenth the same portion of the Decalogue, which we have, as may be seen by a reference to the Antiquities of Josephus, the third book, and to the exposition of the Decalogue by Philo. It is in the same way that the Grecian Fathers and writers divide the Decalogue; as Athanasius, Origen,
Gregory Narzianzen, Chysostom, Zonaras and Nicephorus. The same thing may be said of the Latin Fathers, Jerome, Ambrose, Severus and Augustin. This distinction of the Decalogue was, therefore, at a very early period regarded as the most correct, and was received in the Greek and Latin Churches.
That Josephus, Philo and some of the Grecian Writers make each table of the Decalogue consist of five commandments, does not prove any thing against what we have here said; for although they do this, they, nevertheless, all agree that the words respecting the worship of the one true God, and those which prohibit the making of graven images, constitute two distinct commandments, whilst that portion of the Decalogue which has respect to lust, or coveting, constitutes only one commandment, and not two.
There is also another division of the Decalogue in the writings of Augustin, (Epist. 119, ad Januar, cap. 11, & quest. super Exod. cap. 7,) according to which the first table consists of only three commandments, and the second of seven; but the allegory of the Trinity upon which
Augustin bases this division is too weak to give any countenance to it.
We may remark, however, in this connection, that if only the doctrine and true sense of the Decalogue concerning the true God, and his worship be retained, there ought to be no bitter, or angry contention about the division of the words, and sentences.
III. The Decalogue is divided according to its matter, or according to the things which are commanded or forbidden therein, into the worship of God as immediate, and mediate. The worship of God is commanded in the Decalogue generally; whilst that is forbidden which is contrary thereto. The worship of God, now, is either immediate, when moral works are performed to him immediately; or it is mediate, when moral works are performed towards our neighbor on God's account. The immediate worship of God is contained in the first table, and is either internal, or external. The internal consists in this, partly that we worship the true
God, and that we render unto him that which is required in the first commandment, and, partly, that we worship him in the manner prescribed in the second commandment, whether it be in respect to the worship which is internal, or external. The immediate external worship of God is either private, or public. That which is private, includes the private moral works of every one—the works which every man ought at all times to perform, as it respects acknowledging and confessing God, both in word and deed, which worship is taught in the third commandment. The public worship of God consists in the sanctification of the Sabbath, which is contained in the fourth commandment. The worship of God, which is mediate, and which consists in the duties we owe towards men, or our neighbor, is contained in the second table, and is likewise external and internal. That which is external consists, partly, in the duties of governors, parents, &c., to those under them, and contrariwise, which duties are comprehended in the fifth commandment; and, partly, in the duties which one man owes to another, which are taught and enforced in the other commandments. These are either the preservation of life and safety, whether of ourselves or of others, which is enjoined in the sixth commandment; or the preservation of chastity and marriage, which is taught in the seventh commandment; or the preservation of goods and possessions, which is comprised in the eighth commandment; or the
preservation of truth, which is enforced in the ninth commandment. The mediate worship of God, which is internal, or the internal duties of that worship which is mediate, consist in the proper moderation and regulation of all the affections which we are to cherish towards our neighbor, which worship must be included in all the preceding commandments, and is prescribed in the tenth.
We may now easily return an answer to the following objection: The duties which we owe towards our neighbor are not the worship of God.
The second table prescribes the duties which we owe towards our neighbor. Therefore, the obedience of the second table does not constitute the worship of God. Ans. The major proposition is true only of the immediate worship of God, in reference to which we admit the conclusion: for the obedience of the second table is not the immediate worship of God, as is the obedience of the first table; but it is that which is mediate, or which we perform towards God in our neighbor, or by our neighbor coming between God and us. For the duties of love to our neighbor ought to proceed from the love of God; and when they are performed in this way they please God, and have respect to him, no less than the obedience which is required by the first table of the Decalogue.
These duties are, therefore, in respect to God, on account of whom they are performed, called and are in fact the worship of God; but in respect to our neighbor, towards whom they are directly performed, they are called duties. Hence, the worship which each table enjoins, differs as to the object towards whom it is performed. The first table has only an immediate object, which is God: the second has an immediate object, which is our neighbor, and at the same time a mediate object, which is
God.
GENERAL RULES
Before we proceed to the exposition of each commandment singly, it is proper that we should lay down certain general rules necessary to the understanding of the Decalogue as a whole, and of each commandment in particular.
1. The Decalogue must be understood according to the interpretation of Scripture, or according to the explanation which the Prophets, Christ, and
his Apostles have incidentally given; and not merely according to human judgment or philosophy. We must unite, or bring together the explanations found in different portions of Scripture, and not adhere slavishly to the simple letter of the commandments expressed in such a brief form. Nor is moral philosophy sufficient for a full interpretation of the Decalogue, inasmuch as it contains only a small portion of the law.
This too is one great difference between philosophy and the doctrine delivered and taught in the church.
2. The Decalogue demands in every commandment internal and external obedience in the understanding, will, heart and actions of the life, perfect not only as to the parts, but also as to the degrees of this obedience; or what is the same thing, it requires that we obey God perfectly, not only in the duties enjoined, but also in the degrees of these duties; for "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." "The law is spiritual." "Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment," &c. (Gal.
3:10. Rom. 7:14. Matt. 5:22.) 3. The first commandment must be included in all the rest, or what is the same thing, the obedience which it requires, must be the constraining and final cause of obedience to all the other precepts of the Decalogue, or else that which we do, is not the worship of God, but hypocrisy; yea, all the duties which are enjoined in the other commandments must be performed from and on account of the love of God, or because we love him above every thing else, and desire to glorify and praise him.
4. That we may form a correct judgment, or come to a proper understanding of every commandment, it is above all things necessary that we consider the design, or end of each precept of the Decalogue; for the end of the law shows its meaning, and from the object which God intends, and wills to accomplish by each commandment, we may easily and correctly judge concerning the means which lead to the attainment of this end. This rule is also of great importance in the interpretation of human laws.
5. The same virtue, or the same work may, for different ends and in different respects, be enjoined in more than one commandment; because
the end for which any thing is done gives character to the action, and the same virtue may contribute to different objects; as fortitude is a virtue of the sixth commandment and of the fifth at the same time, because it is also required of the magistrate who is to undertake the defense of others.
The observance of this rule is important, therefore, that we may not give ourselves unnecessary trouble in distinguishing and comparing the different virtues.
6. Negative precepts are contained in those which are positive, or affirmative, and contrariwise: for when the law enjoins any thing, it at the same time forbids that which is contrary thereto; and when it prohibits any thing, it at the same time enjoins the opposite. In this way the law enjoins the practice of virtue, in forbidding vice, and contrariwise: for where any good is enjoined, there the evil which is particularly opposed to this good, is prohibited; for the reason that the good cannot be put into practice, without an omission of the evil at the same time. And by evil we do not mean, the doing of that which is evil, but also the omission of that which is good.
7. Care must be taken that we do not understand the commandments in too restricted a sense. Commandments which are particular must always be comprehended in the general; the general must be understood, in the particular; the cause, in the effect; and the correlative, in the relative.
Thus when murder or adultery is prohibited, every injury, and every lust which men may wickedly cherish is at the same time condemned: so when the law enjoins chastity, it at the same time enforces temperance, without which there can be no chastity; and when it requires subjection, it at the same time recognises its correlative, viz: the magistracy.
8. The commandments of the second table yield to those of the first; so the commandments respecting ceremonial worship give place to those respecting moral worship. Obj. But the second commandment is like unto the first. Ans. There is here in this argument a fallacy in understanding that simply and absolutely, which is declared to be similar only in certain respects. The second is like unto the first, not in every point of view, but as we have explained in the former part of this work, 1. In the kind of worship which it requires, which is moral, and always to be preferred to that which is ceremonial. Ceremonies should always give place to the
duties of charity prescribed in the second table. 2. It is like unto the first in the kind of punishment, which is eternal, and which is inflicted upon all those who violate either table. 3. It is like unto the first in respect to the connection which exists between the love of God and our neighbor, as between cause and effect, by which it comes to pass that obedience cannot be rendered to one table of the Decalogue, whilst the other is disregarded. God is not loved, except our neighbor be loved; neither is our neighbor truly loved, when God is not loved. "If a man say I love God, and hateth his neighbor, he is a liar; for he that loveth not his brother, whom he hath seen, how can he love God, whom he hath not seen." (1
John 4:20.) This was also the design of Christ's discourse in Matt. 22:38, 39; for the Pharisees placed divine ceremonies and their own superstitions upon an equality with the obedience of the second table. It was now for the correction of this error that Christ de clared, that the second table is like unto the first; that is, as the obedience of the first is moral, spiritual, and most important, so also is the obedience of the second; and as the ceremonial enactments give place to the duties of the first table, so do they in like manner unto the second.
There is, however, notwithstanding these points of similarity, a very great difference between the precepts of the first and second table. They differ,
1. In their objects. The object of the first table is God himself; the object of the second is our neighbor. By as much, therefore, as God is greater than our neighbor, by so much the greater and more important is the obedience of the first table, than the second; and by as much as our neighbor is inferior to God, by so much does the obedience of the second table fall under that of the first. 2. They differ in respect to order, or consequence. The obedience of the first table is chief, and supreme: the obedience of the second falls beneath that of the first, and is depending upon it. Nay it is only because we love God, that we love our neighbor.
Obedience to the first table is the cause of obedience to the second. Love to our neighbor grounds itself in love to God; but not contrariwise. So Christ says, "If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26.) It is now on account of these two chief points of difference that the precepts of the second table may correctly be said to give place to those of the first.
But some one may still further object, and say, the duties which love to our neighbor requires, do not yield to the ceremonies commanded by the first table, according as it is said, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice."
(Hos. 6:6. Matt. 12:7.) The duties of love to our neighbor constitute the obedience of the second table. Therefore this obedience does not yield to the obedience of the first table. We may reply to this objection by denying the conclusion, inasmuch as it contains more than follows legitimately from the premises. All that follows legitimately is: Therefore the duties of the second table do not yield to the ceremonies commanded by the first; which is true, and does not contradict the rule here laid down, which is to be understood of moral and ceremonial duties. If, therefore, the necessity and safety of our neighbor require the omission of any ceremony, this should rather be omitted, than that the safety of our neighbor should be disregarded. It is in this way that we are to understand the declaration, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice.
Theses concerning the Decalogue 1. The first table enjoins the duties which we owe to God; the second, the duties which we owe to our neighbor; yet in such a way that the former are referred immediately, the latter mediately, to God.
2. The first commandment, seeing that it commands us to have no other God beside the true God—the God revealed to us in the church, comprehends chiefly the internal worship of God, which has its seat in the mind, will and heart.
3. The principal parts of this worship are the true knowledge of God, faith, hope, the love of God, the fear of God, humility and patience.
4. God may be known by rational creatures in as far as he has been pleased to reveal himself to every one.
5. There is a knowledge of God which is simply and absolutely perfect, which is the knowledge that God has of himself. The eternal Father, Son and Holy Ghost, know themselves and each other, and understand wholly and perfectly their infinite essence, as well as the mode of existence peculiar to each person: for no one but a being of an infinite
understanding can have a perfect knowledge of that which is infinite.
There is also a knowledge of God which belongs to creatures, according to which angels and men have a knowledge of the whole and perfect nature and majesty of God, as being most simple; but they do not know it wholly, but merely in as far as God has revealed it unto them.
6. The knowledge of God which creatures possess, if it be compared with that which God has of himself, may be said to be imperfect. But if we consider the degrees of this knowledge, we may view it as perfect or imperfect, yet not absolutely, but comparatively: that is, in respect to the higher and lower degrees of this knowledge. That knowledge of God is perfect which the blessed angels and saints have in the heavenly world, by which they have a most clear perception of God, or at least as much as is necessary for the conformity of rational creatures with God. That knowledge of God is imperfect which men possess in this life.
7. The knowledge of God which is imperfect, or which we have in this life, is of two kinds: Christian or theological, and philosophical. The former is obtained from the writings of the Prophets and Apostles; the latter is known from the principles and general truths known by men naturally, and from a contemplation of the works of God.
8. The knowledge of God which is theological or Christian, consists of two kinds: the one spiritual or true, living, effectual and saving; the other is according to the letter. The former is that knowledge of God and of his will which the Holy Ghost kindles in our minds, according to and by the word, producing in the will and heart an inclination and desire more and more to know and do those things which God commands to be done. That knowledge of God which is according to the letter, is that which has been in the mind of man either from the creation, or has been kindled subsequently in the mind by the Holy Ghost, through the word, which is, however, accompanied with no desire of conformity with the requirements of the divine law.
9. The knowledge of God, which is spiritual and literal, is in one respect immediate, being produced by the influence of the Holy Ghost, without ordinary means; in another respect it is mediate, being produced by the Holy Ghost, through the doctrine which has been divinely revealed, as
heard, read, or meditated upon.
10. The way by which we ordinarily obtain a knowledge of God is that which God himself has prescribed unto us, which is by study and meditation upon his word. We should, therefore, in this way strive to obtain a knowledge of God, and not require or look for any extraordinary and immediate revelation, unless God of his own accord offer it unto us, and confirm it with certain and satisfactory evidences.
11. But although God has sufficiently declared unto us, in his word, as much as he would have us know concerning himself, yet the demonstrations which nature furnishes respecting God are not superfluous, seeing that they reprove the wickedness of ungodly men, whilst they establish the faithful in piety and godliness, and are, therefore, commended by God himself in various places in the Scriptures, and are to be considered by us.
12. Yet we must hold, respecting these demonstrations which nature furnishes of God, that they are indeed true and in harmony with his word; but that they are, nevertheless, not sufficient to a true knowledge of God.
13. Furthermore, although natural demonstrations teach nothing concerning God that is false, yet men, without the knowledge of God's word, obtain nothing from them except false notions and conceptions of God; both because these demonstrations do not contain as much as is delivered in his word, and also because even those things which may be understood naturally, men, nevertheless, on account of innate corruption and blindness, receive and interpret falsely, and so corrupt it in various ways.
14. Ignorance of those things which God will have known by us concerning himself, revealed to the church in his word and works both of creation and redemption, is, therefore, here condemned in the first commandment of the Decalogue. So, likewise, there is here a condemnation of the errors of those who imagine that there is no God, as the Epicureans, or that there are many gods, as do the heathen, the Manichœans, and those who offer prayers to the angels, the spirits of the departed, or other creatures. The same thing may be said of the vain