Predestination destroys legalism

[Rufus]

Why do you quote my post #31 and not respond to it? @Rufus

Something went wonkers. See my #38.

 

[Arial]

Well the first bolded statement is a huge problem that apparently you don't perceive at all. How did the Mosiac Law Covenant work out for Israel!? How many times did Israel come into severe judgment because they broke God's law covenant?

How it worked out has nothing to do with the purpose it served. Why did God give the Law in the first place? And if you answer that question correctly---which you can do simply be reading with understanding what Calvin said, or you can discern it as Calvin did, by reading and studying the Law and the OT---then you will see that its purpose did exactly what it was intended to do. But here is a clue. If there had been now Law for the Israelites, there would have been no judgment against them. Why? Nothing to judge against, no consequences given that were outlined in the Law.

But the second bolded statement is now getting very close to the crux of the problem with Covenant Theology! The "two testaments" are all but divorced!

The NT is a continuation of the OT. It is the same God in both and it is the same plan/covenant of redemption working through time. The old covenant with its Law,, (which by the way had the new covenant already made with Abraham's Seed, still in place within the Mosaic covenant as it was with Eve before it was made with Abraham)was preparing for, shadowing, and leading to the New Covenant in Christ. It is all part of the same story.

When I say you are divorcing the two testaments, I mean you in effect say they are not connected, that one has no bearing on the other.

The Old and New Covenants are very different! So different that they differ in kind! It's no wonder at all that this warning from Jesus appears in all the Synoptic Gospels. Pouring new wine into old wineskins can only produce disastrous results.

I never said they weren't different. What I said could be said as without the old covenant, we would never have the new covenant, and the old covenant is still relevant to us in that it is the word of God, and shows us a wealth of information about our Creator, and in the Law He teaches and demonstrates His righteousness, His holiness. We still have to be obedient to God, to His moral law and code of conduct. Not in order to be saved but because we are His children. And that moral code exists in the Law, and if you cannot see that, then it is the same blindness of the Pharisees concerning the Law.

I'll tell ya what: If you believe there is far more continuity between the OC and NC than there is discontinuity, why don't make a list of all those positive comparisons for us and post it here? Then afterwards, I'll post my long list of contrasts.

!!!! I did not say continuity between the OC and the NC. People really should read more carefully. I said continuity between the Old Testament (book) and the New Testament (book.)

I'm having a really tough time following your logic in the above paragraph. What in the world does having the knowledge of God's righteousness have to do with curbing the actions of the recipients of his law?

What does it mean that we are created in the image and likeness of God?
What does it mean that we are to be righteous? In the Law, God teaches through Law what His righteousness is, therefore what righteousness is. Ultimate righteousness on our part is to be perfectly righteous as He is righteous, which is to obey Him. And how are we to know what that is unless God HImself tells us? How are we to know what to obey unless He tells us in black and white through Law. "Do this and you will live and possess the land. If you don't do this but instead do this other thing, you will face death, punishment, and will lose the land." So the Law curbs our actions in that disobeying brings loss and judgment. Without the Law they would have been just like the pagans, who did what they did in ignorance. Many broke the Law, but that does not change the Law's purpose and it does not change the fact that it also curbed a lot.

But you know what? The law is powerless to change our character! Can the law change the spots on a leopard? Or change the color of the skin on an Ethiopian? Then neither can the letter of the law (that can only KILL) change our rebellious, God-hating hearts. And this is one of the huge differences between the two covenants:

Is that not what I said? Is it not the same thing that Calvin said? Read with understanding instead of presuming what someone believes and then stating it as though it is what they believe. You are actually agreeing with me and simply saying I believe differently or have said differently.

And this is precisely where your analogy breaks down, doesn't it? Yes, man's civil laws has restraining effects because men only look on the outside plus punishment is a lot swifter and surer. Yet, God looks primarily at our hearts. And when he does he sees far, far more "murderers" than civil authorities do! And if you still doubt me, read Paul universal indictment of all mankind in Rom 3:10-17. And if you do, take note of how many sins in that passage don't break man's civil laws! Yet, those laws are part of the universal indictiment against lawbreakers who break a much Higher Law numerous times a day -- lawbreakers whose consciences are so seared and hardened their conscience in many cases don't even accuse them.

You are conflating and producing a false dichotomy. I gave the analogy to show that law does curb evil actions but it does nothing to change the heart. So I have no idea why you said the above.

Yes, sanctification is by the Spirit and the Word (a/k/a TRUTH). It is TRUTH (not to be confused with Law) that sets us FREE (Jn 8:32) -- something the Law of Moses could never do. In fact, the Law can only enslave us to sin! So, here's one contrast in Jn 1:17: Truth v. Law. Just as Christ is greater than Moses, so, too, is Truth greater than God's Law. Just as there is a qualitiative difference between the Two Greatest Commandments and all God's other commandments put together, so too there is a qualitative difference between Truth and Law.

Are you saying truth is not contained in the Law? God's Law is truth, it just is not the Law that sets us free. It is Christ who sets us free from the Law---which He had to keep perfectly before He could do that, because keeping it perfectly is perfect righteousness, and only One without sin could take the place of those who do sin.

As to the commandments. If you keep the first one perfectly, which no one does, not even the believer all of the time, everytime we sin we are not loving God; if you keep the first commandment perfectly, you will automatically be keeping all the rest.

 

[Arial]

The Jews, too, thought that the Law was the end all and be all of divine revelation. But again, I have to ask: How did that belief work out for them? According to my count, they struck out three times! First Assyria, then Babylon, then Rome.

Are you suggesting that is Calvin's belief in his comments of the function of the Law? Or that it is mine? Or it is that of Reformed theology? Surely not. So what is your point?

 

[gdl]

Predestination destroys legalism.

Both left undefined so no comment for now.

If the whole of salvation, in all its parts, is understood to be by Christ alone, it leaves no room for boasting or trusting in ourselves, even partly. It strips us bare and forces us to abandon all hope in self-effort or rules to attain a right standing before God ... It shatters our self-complacency and causes us to renounce our self-righteousness. It makes us cover our lips and utter God is God and I am not (Rom 9:15, 16).

Rules for Justification and/or for Progressive Sanctification and/or for Glorification?

 

[gdl]

THE THIRD FUNCTION OF THE LAW

For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow, and to conform them in this knowledge, and to conform them in this knowledge; just as a servant who desire with all his soul to approve himself to his master.

I'm selecting this use of the Law for entrance into the discussion you are having. Here's the entire section 2.7.12 from Calvin (Institutes) from which you've excerpted. I've underlined your brief excerpt:

12. The third use of the Law (being also the principal use, and more closely connected with its proper end) has respect to believers in whose hearts the Spirit of God already flourishes and reigns. For although the Law is written and engraven on their hearts by the finger of God, that is, although they are so influenced and actuated by the Spirit, that they desire to obey God, there are two ways in which they still profit in the Law. For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow, and to confirm them in this knowledge; just as a servant who desires with all his soul to approve himself to his master, must still observe, and be careful to ascertain his master’s dispositions, that he may comport himself in accommodation to them. Let none of us deem ourselves exempt from this necessity, for none have as yet attained to such a degree of wisdom, as that they may not, by the daily instruction of the Law, advance to a purer knowledge of the Divine will. Then, because we need not doctrine merely, but exhortation also, the servant of God will derive this further advantage from the Law: by frequently meditating upon it, he will be excited to obedience, and confirmed in it, and so drawn away from the slippery paths of sin. In this way must the saints press onward, since, however great the alacrity with which, under the Spirit, they hasten toward righteousness, they are retarded by the sluggishness of the flesh, and make less progress than they ought. The Law acts like a whip to the flesh, urging it on as men do a lazy sluggish ass. Even in the case of a spiritual man, inasmuch as he is still burdened with the weight of the flesh, the Law is a constant stimulus, pricking him forward when he would indulge in sloth. David had this use in view when he pronounced this high eulogium on the Law, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes,” (Ps. 19:7, 8). Again, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path,” (Ps. 119:105). The whole psalm abounds in passages to the same effect. Such passages are not inconsistent with those of Paul, which show not the utility of the law to the regenerate, but what it is able of itself to bestow. The object of the Psalmist is to celebrate the advantages which the Lord, by means of his law, bestows on those whom he inwardly inspires with a love of obedience. And he adverts not to the mere precepts, but also to the promise annexed to them, which alone makes that sweet which in itself is bitter. For what is less attractive than the law, when, by its demands and threatening, it overawes the soul, and 310fills it with terror? David specially shows that in the law he saw the Mediator, without whom it gives no pleasure or delight.

Question: Do you agree with this (entire section) you've identified as "THE THIRD FUNCTION OF THE LAW"?

 

[Arial]

I'm selecting this use of the Law for entrance into the discussion you are having. Here's the entire section 2.7.12 from Calvin (Institutes) from which you've excerpted. I've underlined your brief excerpt:

12. The third use of the Law (being also the principal use, and more closely connected with its proper end) has respect to believers in whose hearts the Spirit of God already flourishes and reigns. For although the Law is written and engraven on their hearts by the finger of God, that is, although they are so influenced and actuated by the Spirit, that they desire to obey God, there are two ways in which they still profit in the Law. For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow, and to confirm them in this knowledge; just as a servant who desires with all his soul to approve himself to his master, must still observe, and be careful to ascertain his master’s dispositions, that he may comport himself in accommodation to them. Let none of us deem ourselves exempt from this necessity, for none have as yet attained to such a degree of wisdom, as that they may not, by the daily instruction of the Law, advance to a purer knowledge of the Divine will. Then, because we need not doctrine merely, but exhortation also, the servant of God will derive this further advantage from the Law: by frequently meditating upon it, he will be excited to obedience, and confirmed in it, and so drawn away from the slippery paths of sin. In this way must the saints press onward, since, however great the alacrity with which, under the Spirit, they hasten toward righteousness, they are retarded by the sluggishness of the flesh, and make less progress than they ought. The Law acts like a whip to the flesh, urging it on as men do a lazy sluggish ass. Even in the case of a spiritual man, inasmuch as he is still burdened with the weight of the flesh, the Law is a constant stimulus, pricking him forward when he would indulge in sloth. David had this use in view when he pronounced this high eulogium on the Law, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes,” (Ps. 19:7, 8). Again, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path,” (Ps. 119:105). The whole psalm abounds in passages to the same effect. Such passages are not inconsistent with those of Paul, which show not the utility of the law to the regenerate, but what it is able of itself to bestow. The object of the Psalmist is to celebrate the advantages which the Lord, by means of his law, bestows on those whom he inwardly inspires with a love of obedience. And he adverts not to the mere precepts, but also to the promise annexed to them, which alone makes that sweet which in itself is bitter. For what is less attractive than the law, when, by its demands and threatening, it overawes the soul, and 310fills it with terror? David specially shows that in the law he saw the Mediator, without whom it gives no pleasure or delight.

Question: Do you agree with this (entire section) you've identified as "THE THIRD FUNCTION OF THE LAW"?

Yes, but we must be careful to ascertain what he is saying when he refers to the Law, and not simply give it whatever definition we ourselves have, because they may not be the same thing. There is a difference in the Mosaic covenant written Law, and the law of God. Everything God says is law. He is the Lawgiver. He is the Law. The Law is good. But the Law written on tablets cannot save. It must be written in our hearts. All the instructions in righteousness given in the NT given as imperatives are also contained in the Mosaic Law. Jesus clarified this. So when we meditate on those, we are meditating on the law. And we love the law. It enlightens our eyes, is a lamp to our feet lighting the way in which we should walk. It is as Calvin says "which show not the utility of the law to the regenerate, but what it is able of itself to bestow."

 

[Rufus]

How it worked out has nothing to do with the purpose it served. Why did God give the Law in the first place? And if you answer that question correctly---which you can do simply be reading with understanding what Calvin said, or you can discern it as Calvin did, by reading and studying the Law and the OT---then you will see that its purpose did exactly what it was intended to do. But here is a clue. If there had been now Law for the Israelites, there would have been no judgment against them. Why? Nothing to judge against, no consequences given that were outlined in the Law.

I don't have to read Calvin to find out what the purpose of the Law is. Just like I never read him to come to understand the Five Doctrines of Grace. I have a book called the Bible that I read. And I know what the seven BIBLICAL purposes of the Law are. And guess what? They aren't what Calvin claims! So, again, if you think Calvin's three uses of the law is blbical, make your case by providing proof texts for each use.

The NT is a continuation of the OT. It is the same God in both and it is the same plan/covenant of redemption working through time. The old covenant with its Law,, (which by the way had the new covenant already made with Abraham's Seed, still in place within the Mosaic covenant as it was with Eve before it was made with Abraham)was preparing for, shadowing, and leading to the New Covenant in Christ. It is all part of the same story.

When I say you are divorcing the two testaments, I mean you in effect say they are not connected, that one has no bearing on the other.

No, now you're putting words in my mouth. I never said or even hinted at what you say. Yes, the same God made both covenants but those two covenant administrations are VERY DIFFERENT. Do you understand what "different in kind" means?

I never said they weren't different. What I said could be said as without the old covenant, we would never have the new covenant, and the old covenant is still relevant to us in that it is the word of God, and shows us a wealth of information about our Creator, and in the Law He teaches and demonstrates His righteousness, His holiness. We still have to be obedient to God, to His moral law and code of conduct. Not in order to be saved but because we are His children. And that moral code exists in the Law, and if you cannot see that, then it is the same blindness of the Pharisees concerning the Law.

Newsflash: I do not govern my life by the Mosaic Law because no born again believer is under that law -- no believer is under the authority of that law! I govern it by God's grace and my King's Royal Law (Jas 2:8), which is also known as the Law of Christ (1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2) which fulfills Isiah's prophecy about messianic law (Isa 42:4, 21).

!!!! I did not say continuity between the OC and the NC. People really should read more carefully. I said continuity between the Old Testament (book) and the New Testament (book.)

There's no difference! The archaic definition for "testament" is covenant! In fact, the bible itself supports this idea basically dividing the two ages by Old and New or First and Second covenants.

What does it mean that we are created in the image and likeness of God?
What does it mean that we are to be righteous? In the Law, God teaches through Law what His righteousness is, therefore what righteousness is. Ultimate righteousness on our part is to be perfectly righteous as He is righteous, which is to obey Him. And how are we to know what that is unless God HImself tells us? How are we to know what to obey unless He tells us in black and white through Law. "Do this and you will live and possess the land. If you don't do this but instead do this other thing, you will face death, punishment, and will lose the land." So the Law curbs our actions in that disobeying brings loss and judgment. Without the Law they would have been just like the pagans, who did what they did in ignorance. Many broke the Law, but that does not change the Law's purpose and it does not change the fact that it also curbed a lot.

We know what God's will is for our lives by the Gospel which embraces Messianic Law, i.e. Law of Christ. As stated earlier, Israel who had the Law became worse off than the pagans who didn't have it (2Ki 21:9; Ezek 5:6).

Is that not what I said? Is it not the same thing that Calvin said? Read with understanding instead of presuming what someone believes and then stating it as though it is what they believe. You are actually agreeing with me and simply saying I believe differently or have said differently.

You are conflating and producing a false dichotomy. I gave the analogy to show that law does curb evil actions but it does nothing to change the heart. So I have no idea why you said the above.

Civil laws curb actions; divine law puts no restraints on evil hearts. (And I'll add right here that the Law of Moses was never intended to curb evil actions or desires!) Apparently, you haven't gleaned very much from Israel's history who became more wicked than the pagan nations who surrounded them!

Are you saying truth is not contained in the Law? God's Law is truth, it just is not the Law that sets us free. It is Christ who sets us free from the Law---which He had to keep perfectly before He could do that, because keeping it perfectly is perfect righteousness, and only One without sin could take the place of those who do sin.

I explained this previously. See Jn 1:17. All law is truth; all truth is not law. And this irrefutable fact makes Truth greater than Law! Just like Gospel Truth is greater than law. Or like Grace is greater than Sin!

As to the commandments. If you keep the first one perfectly, which no one does, not even the believer all of the time, everytime we sin we are not loving God; if you keep the first commandment perfectly, you will automatically be keeping all the rest.

Are you sure? See Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8. Although, in fairness to you, I can see how you would deduce that.

By the way, if you want to know what the real purposes of God's Mosaic Law Covenant is, I'll be happy to beam those up to this thread. I can tell you, however, they are not Calvin's contrived purposes.

 

[Rufus]

Yes, but we must be careful to ascertain what he is saying when he refers to the Law, and not simply give it whatever definition we ourselves have, because they may not be the same thing. There is a difference in the Mosaic covenant written Law, and the law of God. Everything God says is law. He is the Lawgiver. He is the Law. The Law is good. But the Law written on tablets cannot save. It must be written in our hearts. All the instructions in righteousness given in the NT given as imperatives are also contained in the Mosaic Law. Jesus clarified this. So when we meditate on those, we are meditating on the law. And we love the law. It enlightens our eyes, is a lamp to our feet lighting the way in which we should walk. It is as Calvin says "which show not the utility of the law to the regenerate, but what it is able of itself to bestow."

Really? You have chapter and verse on that? I take it that by "law of God" you mean the "ten words"?

And nowhere in scripture does it say that God is Law! However, I do believe it says somewhere that God is love? If so, godly love can do no wrong, can it? So, love at its deepest roots must be moral in nature.

 

[gdl]

Yes, but we must be careful to ascertain what he is saying when he refers to the Law, and not simply give it whatever definition we ourselves have, because they may not be the same thing.

So, what is he (Calvin) saying when he refers to the Law?

When Calvin says, "For although the Law is written and engraven on their hearts by the finger of God", do you interpret this as a reference to the Ten Words/Commandments from the Mosaic Law Covenant?

There is a difference in the Mosaic covenant written Law, and the law of God.

How would you support this from Scripture?

Everything God says is law.

How would you support this from Scripture?

He is the Lawgiver. He is the Law.

James4:12 agrees. I don't see any Scripture that says God is the Law.

The Law is good.

I see Paul in Rom7:16 and context saying the law is good in the context of it revealing sin in the flesh to him by providing for sin to proliferate. I see Paul in 1Tim1:8 saying the law is good if we [believers] use it lawfully knowing it's not valid for a righteous person. I see Heb10:1 saying the law having a shadow of good things to come.

What else would you point out to me to prove the Law is good?

But the Law written on tablets cannot save. It must be written in our hearts.

So, the Law saves when written on hearts?

All the instructions in righteousness given in the NT given as imperatives are also contained in the Mosaic Law.

With respect, that's quite a lofty statement. I can tell you I have every imperative and every form of command language and Apostolic summons in the NC Writings assembled and it is quite different than the Mosaic Law.

Jesus clarified this.

How so?

So when we meditate on those, we are meditating on the law.

What Law? The Mosaic Law? The Law of Christ? The Law of God? If the Law of God, then what is the Law of God in the NC era?

And we love the law.

Who's we? Christians love the law that they died to?

It enlightens our eyes, is a lamp to our feet lighting the way in which we should walk.

What about the NC era where Christ gives us light (Eph5) and the Gospel of the glory of Christ is light 2Cor4?

It is as Calvin says "which show not the utility of the law to the regenerate, but what it is able of itself to bestow."

What do you think he means by this?

 

[Arial]

When Calvin says, "For although the Law is written and engraven on their hearts by the finger of God", do you interpret this as a reference to the Ten Words/Commandments from the Mosaic Law Covenant?

Yes in short. The moral law of God pertaining to righteousness. The spirit of the law, not the letter. Romans 7:10-14 Calvin is absolutely not saying we should obey the Mosaic law as to worship through animal sacrifices and the mediation of an earthly priest. That needs no explanation for Christ is the final sacrifice and the only High Priest and we can come boldly before His throne. But the dietary laws, feasts and festivals, punitive punishments for infractions of the law, have been abrogated in the new covenant as they were for the Israelites only.

How would you support this from Scripture?

Paul coves it in the book of Romans and in Gal. in depth. I am not going to quote all the scriptures.

How would you support this from Scripture?

You can answer that yourself, would not even have to ask such a question, if you know who God reveals Himself to be throughout the scriptures. When you ask these things, you are pretty much asking me to write a treatise on the entire Bible

James4:12 agrees. I don't see any Scripture that says God is the Law.

Ever hear the expression, "The sheriff is the law"? In that sense. He is Creator, we are creature. We are to do as He says.

What Law? The Mosaic Law? The Law of Christ? The Law of God? If the Law of God, then what is the Law of God in the NC era?

I told you in the very paragraph you are quoting the above from!

Who's we? Christians love the law that they died to?

???? They are not slaves to sin any longer as they were under the Mosaic covenant law. To love God is to obey God. Are you suggesting the Christian is free to sin as much as they want now that Christ has redeemed them? Sin will not separate them from Christ but anyone who thinks that is a license to sin is not in Christ. One joined to Him would desire to please God.

What about the NC era where Christ gives us light (Eph5) and the Gospel of the glory of Christ is light 2Cor4?

It is the Bible that tells us it is the Holy Spirit indwelling us who illuminates the word so we can understand it. Christ is light, the Father is light, the Holy Spirit is light. There is not darkness in them.

What do you think he means by this?

The Mosaic covenant Law, those same things that are given in the NT as moral imperatives---does not regenerate a person by the doing of them, but rather but what it does for us---it sanctifies us in righteousness.

 

[Arial]

I don't have to read Calvin to find out what the purpose of the Law is. Just like I never read him to come to understand the Five Doctrines of Grace. I have a book called the Bible that I read. And I know what the seven BIBLICAL purposes of the Law are. And guess what? They aren't what Calvin claims! So, again, if you think Calvin's three uses of the law is blbical, make your case by providing proof texts for each use.

How it worked out has nothing to do with the purpose it served. Why did God give the Law in the first place? And if you answer that question correctly---which you can do simply be reading with understanding what Calvin said, or you can discern it as Calvin did, by reading and studying the Law and the OT---then you will see that its purpose did exactly what it was intended to do. But here is a clue. If there had been now Law for the Israelites, there would have been no judgment against them. Why? Nothing to judge against, no consequences given that were outlined in the Law.

I don't use proof texts and I don't pay much attention to people who do. I would ask you what are the seven BIBLICAL purposes of the Law.since you say you know them but as usual, think that is all we need to know, but I see you are just another one who only wants to argue because they think they know everything, when in truth they know very little, and have no intention of changing their mind about anything, no matter what they are shown.

So I am not going to bother reading the rest of your post at this time. I am not in the frame of mind to continue with yet another incessant, fruitless, meaningless argument with someone who is unable to read with comprehension or listen to a darn thing.

 

[Rufus]

I don't use proof texts and I don't pay much attention to people who do. I would ask you what are the seven BIBLICAL purposes of the Law.since you say you know them but as usual, think that is all we need to know, but I see you are just another one who only wants to argue because they think they know everything, when in truth they know very little, and have no intention of changing their mind about anything, no matter what they are shown.

So I am not going to bother reading the rest of your post at this time. I am not in the frame of mind to continue with yet another incessant, fruitless, meaningless argument with someone who is unable to read with comprehension or listen to a darn thing.

Which is quite convenient for you, isn't it? You can make up things on the fly the way Calvin did with his three uses of the law.

And here I was all set to ask you what precisely are the terms of the Mosaic Law Covenant? But since you you don't rely on scripture to support your theology, I don't even want to know. Christendom is filled with misguided people who have their own theological bent that they can't support from the Word of God.

 

[Rufus]

Everything God says is law

Really? "Everything"? Is Gen 1:1 an injunction?

 

[Rufus]

I'm selecting this use of the Law for entrance into the discussion you are having. Here's the entire section 2.7.12 from Calvin (Institutes) from which you've excerpted. I've underlined your brief excerpt:

12. The third use of the Law (being also the principal use, and more closely connected with its proper end) has respect to believers in whose hearts the Spirit of God already flourishes and reigns. For although the Law is written and engraven on their hearts by the finger of God, that is, although they are so influenced and actuated by the Spirit, that they desire to obey God, there are two ways in which they still profit in the Law. For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow, and to confirm them in this knowledge; just as a servant who desires with all his soul to approve himself to his master, must still observe, and be careful to ascertain his master’s dispositions, that he may comport himself in accommodation to them. Let none of us deem ourselves exempt from this necessity, for none have as yet attained to such a degree of wisdom, as that they may not, by the daily instruction of the Law, advance to a purer knowledge of the Divine will. Then, because we need not doctrine merely, but exhortation also, the servant of God will derive this further advantage from the Law: by frequently meditating upon it, he will be excited to obedience, and confirmed in it, and so drawn away from the slippery paths of sin. In this way must the saints press onward, since, however great the alacrity with which, under the Spirit, they hasten toward righteousness, they are retarded by the sluggishness of the flesh, and make less progress than they ought. The Law acts like a whip to the flesh, urging it on as men do a lazy sluggish ass. Even in the case of a spiritual man, inasmuch as he is still burdened with the weight of the flesh, the Law is a constant stimulus, pricking him forward when he would indulge in sloth. David had this use in view when he pronounced this high eulogium on the Law, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes,” (Ps. 19:7, 8). Again, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path,” (Ps. 119:105). The whole psalm abounds in passages to the same effect. Such passages are not inconsistent with those of Paul, which show not the utility of the law to the regenerate, but what it is able of itself to bestow. The object of the Psalmist is to celebrate the advantages which the Lord, by means of his law, bestows on those whom he inwardly inspires with a love of obedience. And he adverts not to the mere precepts, but also to the promise annexed to them, which alone makes that sweet which in itself is bitter. For what is less attractive than the law, when, by its demands and threatening, it overawes the soul, and 310fills it with terror? David specially shows that in the law he saw the Mediator, without whom it gives no pleasure or delight.

Question: Do you agree with this (entire section) you've identified as "THE THIRD FUNCTION OF THE LAW"?

Thanks for posting this. Very informative. While Calvin was a great theologian in his own right, he surely missed the boat on his for the Law.

Calvin wrote:

For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow,

What an incredibly unbiblical statement! "The best instrument for enabling them to learn..."? Really? But Jesus said,

John 16:13-15
13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you.
NIV

It seems from this passage that the "best instrument" for the job is the Holy Spirit. Yet, Calvin attributes the work of the Spirit to the Law!

Furthermore, how can one learn what the will of the Lord is apart from being set free from his enslavement to sin. And only the [Gospel] Truth can set us free -- not the Law (Jn 8:32). And the Son can set us free (Jn 8:36). But I don't see any scriptures about the Law of Moses setting us free. And Grace can set us free!

Rom 6:14
14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.
NIV

And,

2 Cor 3:17-18
17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.
NIV

Looks like freedom from the power of sin doesn't come from the Law.

Thanks again, and welcome to the forum!

 

[gdl]

Yes in short. The moral law of God pertaining to righteousness. The spirit of the law, not the letter. Romans 7:10-14 Calvin is absolutely not saying we should obey the Mosaic law as to worship through animal sacrifices and the mediation of an earthly priest. That needs no explanation for Christ is the final sacrifice and the only High Priest and we can come boldly before His throne. But the dietary laws, feasts and festivals, punitive punishments for infractions of the law, have been abrogated in the new covenant as they were for the Israelites only.

Where do you see in Scripture the "moral law" and what does it include?

???? They are not slaves to sin any longer as they were under the Mosaic covenant law. To love God is to obey God. Are you suggesting the Christian is free to sin as much as they want now that Christ has redeemed them? Sin will not separate them from Christ but anyone who thinks that is a license to sin is not in Christ. One joined to Him would desire to please God.

I'm going to skip over your answers where you apparently cannot or will not supply any Scripture references to substantiate what you say. I'll just consider them to be unsubstantiated and ignore them.

So, in our day, we've been set free from being slaves under a Law that was not given to us and that the writers of the NC on behalf of the Lord God Jesus Christ said at the time of writing that believers had died to, been released from, was not valid for them, was the terms of the old covenant that was obsolete, becoming obsolete, and was near vanishing, was only to be used lawfully by believers [to identify sin and establish some principles for functioning in things like assembly and compensating ekklesia leaders], all this so we can be made to obey it in Christ in Spirit - it being something some call "moral law" that few if any even begin to attempt to identify in its entirety from Scripture?

You've referred me to large blocks of Scripture to answer simple questions and stated that it will take a treatise to answer another, so I'll refer you more cooperatively and succinctly to Rom6:15 and context to answer your questions re: antinomianism.

As for "to love God is to obey God" in part I agree with you, and we are best friends. I also see in the Text that to believe God is to obey God. I see obedience to God at the core of most of the important Biblical terminology in the Text. As you said earlier, He is our Creator. He is and will always be God and we will not be. Where we part is very likely what we are to obey, not whom so much as what.

The Mosaic covenant Law, those same things that are given in the NT as moral imperatives---does not regenerate a person by the doing of them, but rather but what it does for us---it sanctifies us in righteousness.

Can you provide any NT references that give us a command to obey Mosaic Law as a moral imperative today? Just 1 or 2 will suffice.

Can you also provide any NT Scripture that says the Mosaic Covenant Law sanctifies us in righteousness?

I'm going to post below, again, your statement and my question to your statement since you did not answer it. I'm asking again by doing so:

But the Law written on tablets cannot save. It must be written in our hearts.

So, the Law saves when written on hearts?

 

[gdl]

Thanks for posting this. Very informative. While Calvin was a great theologian in his own right, he surely missed the boat on his for the Law.

Calvin wrote:

For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow,

What an incredibly unbiblical statement! "The best instrument for enabling them to learn..."? Really? But Jesus said,

John 16:13-15
13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you.
NIV

It seems from this passage that the "best instrument" for the job is the Holy Spirit. Yet, Calvin attributes the work of the Spirit to the Law!

Furthermore, how can one learn what the will of the Lord is apart from being set free from his enslavement to sin. And only the [Gospel] Truth can set us free -- not the Law (Jn 8:32). And the Son can set us free (Jn 8:36). But I don't see any scriptures about the Law of Moses setting us free. And Grace can set us free!

Rom 6:14
14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.
NIV

And,

2 Cor 3:17-18
17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.
NIV

Looks like freedom from the power of sin doesn't come from the Law.

Thanks again, and welcome to the forum!

Thank you.

If I have read this part of Calvin before, it was long ago, and I cannot recall doing so. I noted this afternoon the instrumentality statements also and had thoughts similar to what you say.

From there the questions are many and I doubt seriously any of us are the first ones to ask them or find disagreement with Calvin that the principal use and reasonable end of the Mosaic Law or any portion of it is the instrumentality of the progressive sanctification of those in Christ in Spirit in Freedom.

I wonder how many of the 613 laws are being proposed as the ones written on hearts now. I think the Jews say about 244 of them are now unobservable. I wonder what the other ones are that are not applicable according to the church. Has anyone ever seen a list?

I wonder if anyone this side of Paul knows how to use the law lawfully...

 

[Arial]

Can you provide any NT references that give us a command to obey Mosaic Law as a moral imperative today? Just 1 or 2 will suffice.

No, because I never made such a claim.

Can you also provide any NT Scripture that says the Mosaic Covenant Law sanctifies us in righteousness?

No, because I never made such a claim.

God says in the new covenant He will write His laws on our heart. Do you think that means the Mosaic covenant law if it is a new covenant? I have tried to help you to see that when the word law is used it is not confined to the Mosaic covenant law. That in the covenant that Law was a teaching tool. (Gal 3:13-25) You do not seem to understand what the Mosaic Law is teaching about God and about our obligation to Him, or to understand that it is not just a set of arbitrary rules set by an angry God. But rather within it is the very character of God and the very character of God is what we are to be obedient to as His creatures and image bearers. And it is also as though you see man and God as equals in a cooperative relationship.

I am not responding to the first part of your post, as it seems designed only for button pushing and put downs, except to say, that you complain about me giving great blocks of scripture or saying something would take a thesis on the whole Bible, to answer your questions. As though you do not even understand this. And are another that supports what they say with "proof texts" isolated from their surrounding context as well as the full counsel of God (all the teaching within the Bible on the same subject, keeping the truth given consistent and never contradictory)and with no exegesis of the text, and expect others to do the same. The quick fix in other words, with no concern or interest in doing the work necessary to arrive at actual truth, and no interest in reading or listening to anyone else do such work, or with where that work arrives.

I don't proof text to support what I say. And I don't do someone else's work for them once I have figured out they just want to argue, not learn or investigate or converse, and will give no consideration to what I present. I began the conversation throwing light on what Calvin had said about the Law as that was what was being asked in your case, and what was being misunderstood by another. And I do not know if the obtuseness concerning what I have said is genuine or simply the way you and some others, argue---with the logical fallacy of misstating or misrepresenting what I say and arguing as though that is what I really said.

 

[Arial]

Really? "Everything"? Is Gen 1:1 an injunction?

Gen 1:1 is who God is and it should be the undergirding of every interpretation of everything that follows. I have come to the realization that such a concept is so far from what you do---operating out of proof texts as you do, and being unable to deal with anything more than proof texts given by the person you are arguing with-----that you will not be able to agree that whatever God says and whoever He is. is law for those He creates.

 

[Arial]

Which is quite convenient for you, isn't it? You can make up things on the fly the way Calvin did with his three uses of the law.

This is what a proof text is: a single text removed from its surrounding context and from the context of the whole counsel of God, used to support a belief or doctrine, with no exegesis given, and no consideration to whether or not it contradicts other truths given in the scriptures on the same subject.

And here I was all set to ask you what precisely are the terms of the Mosaic Law Covenant? But since you you don't rely on scripture to support your theology, I don't even want to know. Christendom is filled with misguided people who have their own theological bent that they can't support from the Word of God.

Not using "proof texts" is not the same thing as not using scripture. Using scripture does not rely on "proof texts" to establish beliefs.

And look at the question you asked here that you are all set to ridicule me for giving you the correct answer which is "Read it yourself. It is in the books of Leviticus and Deut. You are asking me to "proof text" something that takes two whole books of the Bible to cover.

 

[Arial]

Really? You have chapter and verse on that? I take it that by "law of God" you mean the "ten words"?

Chapter and verse? Really? It is found in theology----the study of God---who He is as self revealed in all of scripture. Not what God does for us. Not is isolated scriptures here and there. Read Job chapters 38-40. Read the Psalms and find what the psalters had to say about Him, those who knew Him and not just knew of Him. Find there too who mankind is in comparison. Learn what it means to be a creature, the one created, and what the relationship is between the Creator and His creature. If there is such a thing as law----and there is----it is established by God and we are to obey it. Therefore God is law.

And nowhere in scripture does it say that God is Law! However, I do believe it says somewhere that God is love? If so, godly love can do no wrong, can it? So, love at its deepest roots must be moral in nature.

And if it is from God and He commands it of us, it is law for us. Keeping the Mosaic covenant law will not save unto eternal life, unless it is kept perfectly as Jesus kept it, and was never intended to. Conversely faith will not cause one to keep it perfectly, and obedience still does not save, it is Christ's righteousness imputed to the believer through faith that saves. At the same time if there is no obedience, and no desire for obedience, and no repentance over sins committed, no fruit of faith, then there is no faith. Faith of necessity produces obedience from love, not Law.