Law v Grace
If this article does not display correctly on your device, click here to read on my website.
After the nation of Israel sinned by constructing an idol in the shape of a golden calf, God told Moses He was done with Israel. In a remarkable passage of scripture, Moses intercedes on behalf of Israel and God relents. Israel’s journey toward the Promised Land continues.
They come to Mount Sinai and make camp. At each encampment, Moses and God visit in a tent Moses calls, the tent of meeting. During one conversation, God tells Moses to meet Him on top of Mount Sinai. He also gives strict instructions that everyone else, including grazing animals, must stay away from the mountain or die.
To highlight His point, God engulfs Sinai in smoke and fire. There was thunder, lightning, loud sounds, flashes, and thick clouds. The mountain quaked, and Exodus reports the quaking was violent.
Moses tightens his belt and climbs Mount Sinai. He and God meet, and when the convocation is concluded, Moses descends with a duplicate of the Ten Commandments clutched in his arms (cf. Ex. 32-34).
Reflecting on this event in 2 Corinthians 3, Paul makes much of the fact that when Moses came down from the mountain, his face glowed from meeting with God. The glow was so astounding, in fact, that he covered his face so the Israelites could look at him.
He also covered his face so the people would not see the glow fading.
There was no mistaking that Moses met with God. No mistaking the profound statement and standards of the Ten Commandments. But it was also inescapable that the commandments couldn’t provide justification. The mountain where God dwelt was unapproachable and the way to communicate with God was veiled (cf. 2Cor. 3).
Years later, Jesus walked up a mountain and preached a sermon about the commandments. As He expounded on His point, He voiced what his audience intuitively understood: Against the standard of the Ten Commandments, we are distant from God, utterly failed, and this without remedy. Unless God provides another way to access Him, we are without hope.
Jesus message was, you need a way to God the commandments cannot provide. End of sermon.
Everyone went home, tails dragging.
Three years later, during the final meal with His disciples, Jesus told them he was going away to be with God. He also told them they knew the way to where He was going.
This was not good news. Every man at the dinner table knew he couldn’t follow Jesus [to God]. Thomas spoke on behalf of the others: “Lord, we do not know where you are going; how do we know the way?”
With His answer, Jesus remedies what everyone knew the law could not do: He makes a way. “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.”
The seed of a hopeful resolution was planted. The disciples comprehended that Jesus was separating justification away from the law and singularly making Himself the way to reconciliation with God. “No one gets to God unless he comes through me. Me alone” (cf. 14:6).
Jesus’ statement was the clearest declaration of grace to date. With the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost, the spiritual eyes of His followers opened. Their faces were unveiled and the process of transformation became clear (cf. 2 Cor. 3).
The gospel is simple: Jesus plus nothing. You are under grace.
Yet, there is contradiction to the point of complexity: You are no longer under law; but the laws of God are written on the walls of your heart.
Which is it? Are we people of law or people of grace?
If the subject of law versus grace was simple, there wouldn’t be disagreement.
If law versus grace was straightforward, there wouldn’t be the deception addressed by the Book of Galatians.
If the matter of law versus grace was not important, the church would not have dealt with it since its earliest days. But with every generation of Christians since the first century, there has been theological debate over law versus grace. Typically, this unfolds with some expression of the law is bad, outdated, obsolete, completed, fulfilled, or irrelevant to Christian living while grace is amazing, magnificent, undeserved, and unearned.
In this head-to-head debate, law is a casualty and grace triumphs. An aspect of this is indeed the message of grace, but in the broader, more complex theology of law and grace, this conclusion is dangerous.
In early Christianity, diminishment or dissolution of law was embedded within Gnosticism, a concern addressed by multiple New Testament books. During the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther isolated improper management of law and coined the term, antinomian: anti, meaning against; nomos, meaning the law.
Antinomianism asserted that Christians are exempt from the law’s moral guidelines because divine grace supersedes any need for commandments. Law is an either-or proposition, just as is being taught in grace circles today. Everything from the Ten Commandments to the ceremonial laws governing Jewish holidays has zero relevance to Christianity. No matter the category—judicial, ceremonial, or moral—the law is no longer applicable for new covenant Believers (i.e., all Christians).
For the Gnostics, and some antinomians, their philosophy led to license, i.e., they were free of responsibility; consequence could be deflected, rationalized, or excused; since the law did not apply to them, they were free from obligation.
License manifested itself under the guise of trusting Jesus, resting in Jesus, peace in Christ, total forgiveness, Jesus-based acceptance, etc. Each of these is a biblical concept, but when misused they can result in an excuse for irresponsibility, passivity, perfectionism, and universalism with regard to salvation.
In each of these, human responsibility is marginalized or inconsequential. Grace is so magnificent that mankind bears no responsibility or consequence.
But let’s back up a step. Not all who reject law see themselves as lawless. While some who assert the Ten Commandments have nothing to do with Christian living, they believe morality is important. They believe in goodness, right and wrong, regret, and consequence. From their vantage point, it is the indwelling Spirit who is the guide to moral living, obedience, etc. It is the Spirit who leads Christians into truth.
This sounds biblical and grace-like, and to an extent it is, as far as it goes. But the above paragraph’s concept is so abstract that it escapes concrete application. What is the measure of truth? Where is it recorded? Who is its arbiter?
The broader context of the Spirit leading Christians into all truth stems from two standards: First, the Bible is the divinely inspired, infallible words, concepts, and revelations of God. Second: When a person becomes a Believer, they are endowed with a new heart that is the repository of, a) God’s laws, and b) the indwelling Spirit (cf. Jn. 14:16-17 and 16:13; Ezek. 36:26-27; Jer. 31:33; Heb. 10:16, et al).
Given that the Spirit’s job is to guide Christians into truth, and given that His dwelling place is within a malleable heart inscribed with the laws of God, it stands to reason He is resident in the Believer to superintend the working out of God’s ordinances, statutes, and desires.
When we speak of living from our new heart, the imagery is of the new person and the Spirit of God standing together, contemplating the writing on the walls of the heart in order to embrace, plot, and demonstrate Christ’s life via the Spirit.
The inescapable implication is: If the law is no longer important or relevant, why did God inscribe His ordinances and statutes on the hearts of His people?
Could it be that the Spirit is interpreting God’s law and desire for the Believer in keeping with their new nature?
Of course, a careful reading of Hebrews notes that the author references Jeremiah’s prophecy about the new heart in Chapter 8 as well as Chapter 10. Those anxious to marginalize the law quote verse 13: “When He said, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.”
A thoughtful reading will also notice that there wasn’t anything wrong with God’s covenant. Rather, it was the children of Israel who were in the wrong. God didn’t change His mind about the commandments. Why would He? The law is righteous and good; it’s a reflection of God’s standard, character, and holiness.
The conclusion of Chapter 8 is tying up a loose end: If there is a new covenant, what happened to the old covenant? God’s standard didn’t change.
Rather, the manner in which He would interface with His people changed.
As part of this covenantal change, He determined to transform the hearts of His people. Instead of commandments etched in stone, He decided to inscribe the commands on the walls of the Believer’s new heart.
Candidly, it’s a bit abstract to tell people who walked in darkness that they are now children of light and should act like it. What does that mean? How does this look? What does God like, want, desire, intend—and furthermore, as a new person in Christ, what do you like, want, and desire? What do you desire to demonstrate as a person-made-new?
When you were lost to God, the law outlined divine demands.
But as a new creation, the law describes desire rather than imposing demands. The commandments are no longer a ceiling you strain toward but a portrait of what your new heart desires.
But this is still confusing. Paul states in Romans that the law is good. Then in 2 Corinthians he says it is a minister of death.
Hmm. I like the sound of good; minister of death… sounds ominous.
Actually, when Paul says the law is good, he says, “So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good” (7:12).
How then is the law also a “minister of death” (cf. 2 Cor. 3:7a)?
Like Paul does, let’s use the Ten Commandments to shed some insight into this apparent dilemma.
First: Are the Ten Commandments good? Of course.
Second: Can following the Ten Commandments—even perfectly—gain you favor and acceptance with God? No. As a matter of fact, as Jesus pointed out in His sermon on the mountain, the spirit of the Ten Commandments is an even higher standard than the commandments state.
Thus, if your question is about gaining God’s acceptance, the Ten Commandments, a) establish that you are dead in your sins and your sinfulness, and b) offer no remedy for your problem.
How do we think about this?
Take note: We are attempting to manage two, distinct questions simultaneously.
Here are the two questions: 1) Can the law bring about justification and acceptance with God? 2) Did the cross of Christ eradicate, or render pointless, the law?
Can the law bring about justification and acceptance with God? No—and in answer to the Galatian error, not even a little bit. Salvation, justification, reconciliation, redemption—all of this is through Christ alone.
Did Christ’s work on the cross eradicate, or render pointless, the law? No. In fact, He said, “I did not come to abolish [the law]” (Mt. 5:17).
Why would He do that anyway? The law is holy, righteous, and good, i.e., the law is a reflection of God’s standard.
Thus, the law defines holiness, righteousness, and goodness. It also defines humanity’s distance from God: We are fallen and dead. God is righteous and alive.
Clearly, this is a significant problem.
As a minister of death, the law establishes your problem: Against God’s standard, you are dead and dead-wrong. For this, the law offers no remedy or solution.
Jesus Christ [alone] reconciles man to God.
While the commandments are no good at justifying life and securing acceptance with God, they are good at revealing what holiness looks like in those who are redeemed (cf. 2 Cor. 3).
Is this a complex question for the Believer? Sure. Thus, all the disagreements.
But wait a minute. Romans states that people-made-new in Christ “are not under law, but under grace” (6:14). This seems pretty definitive—and it is, but what’s it definitive about?
Romans 5-8 establishes that justification with God is through Christ alone. The passage establishes that every grievance God has against you is reconciled in Christ alone. It further establishes that neither poor performance nor excellent performance have anything to do with acceptance with God. But the passage is also pragmatic: If all of this transformative good news is true, how come you fail to live like the transformed person you are?
Paul answers by explaining that the principle of sin takes advantage of the law to propose genuinely tempting temptations to you. This doesn’t mean the law is bad, it means sin uses something good to tempt you with evil.
Said differently, you are not under law in order to achieve justification with God. You are under grace.
Just as the power of sin utilizes the law to tempt you, sin also uses grace to tempt you. Obviously, this accounts for a lot of the confusion on this topic.
The enemy of your soul is not the law any more than grace is. It is the principle of sin seeking to take advantage of you using whatever means are available.
But just as sin uses both law and grace in pursuit of his nefarious ends, Paul describes doing the same in order to effectively evangelize (cf. 1 Cor. 9:19-23).
The law is not the means to justification, redemption, or sanctification. It is the means by which a person recognizes their need for God and it is the portrait of God that outlines how they conduct themselves once they are a Believer.
Conservative Christians believe the Bible is the inspired, infallible Word of God. All of it, not just the New Testament, not just the verses that are our favorites, and not just the truths we comprehend.
Thus, marginalizing or diminishing the law because it is “fulfilled” doesn’t work. This does not in any way compromise the magnificence of grace.
Just because the law is not suitable to accomplish justification of life with God—and grace is—doesn’t render the law irrelevant; it’s just not suited to remedy your need for justification with God.
Now, do some folks attempt to supplement the grace of the gospel with works of the law in an effort to improve their standing with God, make Him happier with them, etc., etc.? Yes. This is the problem in the Book of Galatians—and Paul makes certain we understand: this is bad theology.
But let’s be clear about what Galatians is telling us and what it’s not telling us.
The Galatians embraced the belief that the gospel could be supplemented with law. That is, they believed acceptance with God was not through Christ alone but could be improved upon via works of the law, i.e., Christ plus [your contribution], not Christ alone.
Paul’s letter to these mistaken Believers aggressively reasserts that the gospel—salvation, justification with God—is through Christ alone. Works (acts of law) have nothing to do with justification, reconciliation, redemption, and sanctification.
Before concluding his letter, Paul briefly explains what life in the Spirit looks like (cf. Chapters 5 and 6). His closing statement is blunt: “Stop misusing both law and grace. My physical body is a wreck on behalf of the gospel. Having to distinguish law versus grace for you has gotten on my last nerve. The end.”
Paul does not marginalize or throw out the law. He clarifies what the law is and is not versus what the gospel is.
Paul exhorts the Galatians to walk by the Spirit. A bit later, he lists characteristics of what life in the Spirit will manifest (cf. 5:16, 22-23). This is a little abstract, but then Galatians is a short letter.
Paul elaborates in Romans 13:8-10 (cf. Gal. 5:14). He guides his readers to love their neighbor. He then defines love by citing a portion of the Ten Commandments regarding murder, stealing, and coveting. Then, he circles back to love for emphasis.
Does the law have relevance to how you live the Christian life? Sure it does. If you love your neighbor properly, you will refrain from murdering them, stealing from them, and coveting what they have.
If you do this, will it gain you increased love, acceptance, standing, or improved justification with God? No. Acceptance with God is established through Christ alone apart from the law, i.e., justification is not what the law does.
At this point, the obvious question is: The law is six-hundred-plus standards, not ten. What are you suggesting?
What Jesus did, and Paul (et al) followed up on, is to say that the Ten Commandments are a statement of God’s character and standards. It’s important how you think about them.
This presents some options: One option is to do what the Rabbinical leaders did and create hundreds more laws as commentary on the Mosaic Ten.
Another option is to explore whether or not keeping the ten can lead to justification with God. Jesus spoke to this during His sermon on the mountainside, concluding that this approach to acceptance by God requires perfection in the way God is perfect.
The option consistent with the whole of Scripture is to conclude that justification is through Christ alone. As redeemed folks, the life of Christ through us will demonstrate holiness, righteousness, and goodness, each of which is a godly quality hinted at in the Ten Commandments.
Jesus said that the law and the Prophets hang upon how you love God, your neighbor, and yourself (cf. Mt. 22:36-40). Clearly, He is not abolishing the law, the Prophets, or the Old Testament.
In the same passage, Jesus says He did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. As is always the case with communication, it is essential to understand what a word means and how it is used.
Unless Jesus is speaking out of both sides of His mouth, “fulfill” cannot mean concluded, ended, completed, or rendered irrelevant. Otherwise, the law and the prophets wouldn’t depend on us loving as He exhorts us to do (cf. Rm. 13:10).
Therefore, those who are new creations, endowed with a new heart with the laws of God etched on its walls, love God, love yourself as God loves you, and love others. As you do this, you fulfill the law.
This is the law of love, the law of Christ, the law of the Spirit. This is also “the grace given to us” (cf. Rm. 12:3).
The law does one thing. Grace does something else. Mix them up and bad things happen. Keep them straight, and you demonstrate how a new person in Christ loves God, loves themselves, and loves others.
My friend Victor put it this way: “For the Believer, the most important thing is accomplished. From that point on, you have a family name to uphold. You refer to the law to see how to do that.”