There Are 3 Legitimate Uses
For the Law of God
Found In The Books Of The Bible

Will it be the law of liberty found in the books of the Bible or the tyranny of the law of man? The foundation of our legal system really boils down to those two choices.

There is no third way. Our refusal to submit to the law of God always leads to tyranny, no matter how pleasant things may seem in the early going.

Lofty pronouncements of “we the people”, the “rights of man”, “consent of the governed”, etc. always end as hollow promises when the books of the Bible are ignored.

There is no liberty apart from Christ. “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free,” He declared John 8:32.

Pilate the cynic asked, “What is truth?” Jesus said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no man comes unto the Father but by Me.”

As the children of Israel renewed the national covenant in Nehemiah 10, “they separated themselves form the peoples of the lands to the law of God” (Neh. 10:28). Earlier they had requested “a king like the nations” (I Sam. 8), now they returned from that false hope to government under God. Is such a thing possible today?

Three Uses Of The Law

The sixteenth century reformers taught that the books of the Bible present three lawful uses of God’s law during the New Testament era. The first was to convict of sin and prepare the way for the gospel as in Romans 3:20: “by the law is the knowledge of sin.” This did not mean that salvation was to be earned by works of the law, because the same verse warns that, “. . . by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight.”

According to the reformers, another legitimate use of God’s law in the New Testament era is to provide a standard of personal righteousness for the believer. This is seen in James 1:25: “But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein . . . this man shall be blessed in his deed.”

In addition to these familiar uses, the reformers also spoke of the political use of the law of God found in the books of the Bible. The commands of Scripture were to guide the civil ruler in the administration of justice within his realm. Calvin referred to this as the second function of the law:

Political Use of the Law

"The second function of the law is this: at least by fear of punishment to restrain certain men who are untouched by any care for what is just and right unless compelled by hearing the dire threats in the law. But they are restrained, not because their inner mind is stirred or affected, but because, being bridled, so to speak, they keep their hands from outward activity, and hold inside the depravity . . . . The apostle seems specially to have alluded to this function of the law when he teaches “that the law is not laid down for the just but for the unjust . . . . ”(7.2)

It was on this groundwork laid by the reformers in the books of the Bible that the edifice of Western liberty was erected. They taught that true liberty was impossible apart from law. Law and grace work hand in hand. Gradually the recovery of the gospel of salvation through faith worked like leaven, permeating every facet of Western culture, causing it to rise and flourish.

Conversely, Israel learned from bitter experience what it was like to live for four centuries in bondage to a nation that rejected the rule of law under God. The tyranny of Egypt was unbearable. Consequently, the case laws immediately following the Ten Commandments, given by God on Sinai, spelled out the guidelines for biblical servitude under God (see Ex. 21:1–17). Thus, wherever the books of the Bible have gone true liberty—liberty under law—has followed.

In view of all of this, Jesus cautioned His followers not to think that He had somehow come to do away with the Old Testament. “Think not that I have come to destroy the law and the prophets,” He warned, “I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil . . . . Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:17–19, RSV).

When the New Testament declares that the believer is “not under law” (Rom. 6:14), it means that he is not under the condemnation of the law. It does not mean that he is released from any obligation to obey the law (see Rom. 3:31; 7:12).

This is not to say that there is always a one-to-one correspondence between the way the Jewish nation of priests applied the law and the way we as converted Gentiles are to apply it. For example, what are we to do with the laws that forbid the yoking of an ox and an ass or the wearing of a mixed garment?

In such instances, interpretative wisdom must first be applied to discover the appropriate meaning and application for today. In most cases, the application is unambiguous. In any event, the lack of direct correspondence at every point does not invalidate our obligation to hearken, interpret, and obey.

For example, theologian Vern Poythress assumes the abiding applicability of the law, but he warns against the risk of adopting a wooden theonomy:

"... the theonomists [advocates of God’s law] run the danger of using the appeal to unchanging norms in order to prejudice the question of whether the great bulk of Mosaic legislation is adapted to the unique situation of Israel . . . . This move may make them underestimate the difficulty and complexity of disentangling the abiding principle from the particularity of its application to Israel."(7.3)

Conclusion

We have learned that the books of the Bible reject salvation by works of the law, Old Testament ceremonial observances, and manmade traditions added to the law of God. However, it upholds the lawful use of God’s law as a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ and as a standard of personal and political righteousness.

Usually the application of the books of the Bible is clear and direct. However, honest men may disagree concerning the application of the law at specific points. Often this disagreement springs from the difficulty converted Gentiles face in interpreting and applying the equity of laws given originally to the Jews. However, we must not allow any lack of unanimity to dissuade us from the abiding authority of the law of God as the only acceptable standard for political righteousness.