Fourth, the moral Law has not been antiquated.
Fourth, the moral Law has not been antiquated.
§ 126. (IV) “The old testament has been antiquated [Heb. 8:13]. The moral Law has not been antiquated but must still be taught in the new testament. Therefore it does not pertain to the old testament.”
We respond. The moral Law is considered in two ways: first, in and of itself; and, second, with regard to its solemn promulgation and obligation. In the first respect the moral Law does not pertain to the old testament because the old testament was first promulgated on Mount Sinai and was made with the children of Israel. But the moral Law was handed down before Moses. Indeed, it was given to our first parents in Paradise and was engraved upon their hearts. Therefore in the latter sense—namely, with regard to its solemn promulgation and obligation—it properly pertains to the old testament. Indeed, God established the solemn promulgation of the Law on Mount Sinai to this end: that it would bring the Israelites, who were bound to this Law, to the perfect fulfillment of it. Under the condition of that perfect fulfillment, He made to them His promises of temporal and eternal rewards. Because their fathers broke that pact and made it void (Jer. 31:32) and because the Law was weakened by the flesh (Rom. 8:3), therefore “there was a rejection of the former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness” (Heb. 7:18). Therefore another one was promulgated—namely, the new testament—the place of which would not have been sought had the first been faultless (Heb. 8:7).
These are the chief points of the new covenant: (1) “I will remember their sins no more.” (2) “I will write My Law in their heart that they all may know Me” (Jer. 31:33[–34]). Therefore the new testament includes these two points: the remission of sins and renewal. Through the first benefit we are freed from the accusation and condemnation of the Law; through the second benefit the obedience due to the Law is begun in us, for “we are new creatures in Christ” (2 Cor. 5:17), “created for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). Whether and to what extent the moral Law has been abrogated in the new testament is easily understood from this fact. Dr. Chemnitz speaks in this way: To the extent that the Decalogue condemns, it belongs to the ministry of Moses and to the old testament. But to the extent that it is the rule of righteousness in God, after whose image we were originally fashioned and which is being renewed in us, to that extent it becomes part of the new testament.4
Those are the principal arguments of our adversaries, from which the rest of their arguments can be easily refuted. The passage 1 Cor. 10:1ff. and the entire distinction between the sacraments of the old and new testaments will be discussed later in the treatise On the Sacraments [Commonplace XXI; cf. On Circumcision and the Paschal Lamb (Commonplace XXII), §§ 1–6].
1 Chemnitz’s Works 8:1243–44.
2 Chemnitz’s Works 8:1249–51.
3 Chemnitz’s Works 8:1251–52.
4 Cf. Chemnitz’s Works 8:1252.