ARE WE STILL UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES?

Strangely, some groups that believe in Jesus insist that we are still under this Law. One such collection of groups is the Hebrew Roots Movement. Although they concede that “no one can be saved nor made righteous by works of the law,” they maintain that we are still required to keep the OT laws for the purpose of fellowship with God:

* “We believe that Moshiach Yahshua taught all His true followers both Jew and non-Jew that all the precepts of written Torah are eternally binding. Moshiach Yahshua, never negated Torah, but expects and commands us to follow Torah (Matthew-Mattityahu 5:17-19), so as to continually express and renew our love for Him by our obedience.” (www.watchman.org)

Does Jesus teach that we are still under the Law? Not really:

• “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:17-18; ESV)

It certainly seems like Jesus fulfilled or "accomplished" the Law on the Cross, when He proclaimed that "it is finished," and the veil of the Temple was rent in two, signifying that the Mosaic Law separation between God and His people had been removed.

However, Jesus had been secretive about many things including His Deity, His Messiah-ship, the Atonement, and His instituting the New Covenant, at least until the end:

* And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom." (Matthew 26:27-29; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20)

Jesus gave many other indications that the Mosaic Covenant was coming to an end. He had equated His body with the New Temple of God, the new place that God's people would meet Him:

• So the Jews said to him, "What sign do you show us for doing these things?" Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?" But he was speaking about the temple of his body. (John 2:18-21)

He even indicated that He was greater than the Temple:

* “I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. And if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath." (Matthew 12:6-8)

Not only did Jesus declare Himself greater than the Mosaic Temple, but by declaring Himself "lord of the Sabbath," He was also declaring Himself above the Mosaic Law.

Jesus even cryptically dismissed the Mosaic Law, teaching against its stipulations:

* And he said to them, "Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?" (Thus he declared all foods clean.) (Mark 7:18-19)

This teaching contradicted Mosaic Law that specified that certain foods would defile when ingested, along with the dead and with certain diseases. As a result, Mark noted that Jesus was cryptically teaching that all food was now clean.

It also seemed that Jesus was teaching that people are also clean, despite their health condition. He illustrated this by touching many of the infirmed who, under Mosaic Law, would have defiled Him with their contact.

On one occasion, a woman with a constant issue of blood secretly touched Jesus' garment, hoping that she'd be healed. However, Jesus exposed her. She was frightened and shamed, because He had exposed her sin. However, instead of condemning her, as Mosaic Law required:

* Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, "Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well." And instantly the woman was made well. (Matthew 9:20)

Similarly, when Jesus sent out His disciples to minister, He never instructed them to teach the Law, but rather His teachings:

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:19-20)

If He had intended that His disciples would have to teach that they were still under the Mosaic Law, it is curious that He hadn't been plain about this.

Instead, in the Gospel of Luke, He commissioned His disciples:

* ...and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:46-47)

Again, no instructions to preach Moses. Jesus' commission of His Apostles in the Gospel of John was even more dismissive of the Mosaic Law. Instead of the Levites administering God's forgiveness, it would now be His Apostles:

* Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld." (John 20:21-23)

As we advance further into the NT, the teachings become more explicit that we are not under the Law. This question had become hot:

* Some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them [Gentiles] and to order them to keep the law of Moses." (Acts 15:5)

However, a council was convened in Jerusalem to decide this matter.

* And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?”(Acts 15:7-10)

Peter argued that, now, Law-keeping was an unnecessary burden. James, the head of the council concurred:

* “Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God." (Acts 15:19)

Instead of requiring the Gentiles to follow the Law, James concluded that they should merely abstain from those Gentile practices that would alienate them from the Jews.

Paul consistently taught that we are no longer under the Law and that being under the Law precluded being under Christ:

* Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. (Romans 7:4-6)

According to Paul, being under the Covenant of the Law was to be in bondage:

* For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the [Mosaic] law of sin and death. (Romans 8:2)

Instead, the bondage of the Covenant of the Law was necessary to prepare us for our liberty in Christ:

* Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. (Galatians 3:23-25)

This doesn't mean that the stipulations of the Law are no longer the Word of God or even that they are no longer normative for us. Instead, there are stipulations we must obey:

* Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:31)

Laws, like those of The Ten Commandments, have been carried over into the New Covenant and should now be obeyed Christologically. For instance, we are still to keep the Sabbath, but now we have great freedom as to how to keep it:

* One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. (Romans 14:5)

Nevertheless, some commandments, like "Thou shall not kill," need no further NT re-interpretation. However, we are mandated to understand the Old through the lens of the New. After Paul taught that Christ had fulfilled the Law, he provided us with a principle to understand and apply their ongoing stipulations:

* God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross...Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. (Colossians 2:13-14, 16-17)

The Law contained both shadow and substance, those teachings that remain Christologically normative for us today, and the shadows or types of Christ. Both of these are instructive for us, but we need not rebuild the Temple and make animal sacrifices.

Nevertheless, those aspects of the Law that still provide moral guidance now fall under the "Law of Christ" (to which they have always belonged):

* For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. (1 Corinthians 9:19-21)

Paul contrasted being under the Law and being under Christ. It is either one master or the other. There could not be two. (Matthew 6:24)

The Book of Hebrews clearly indicates that we are no longer under the Law. It even goes further - that the Covenant of the Law has placed away, having been replaced by the New:

* In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:13)

This suggests that even the Jews are no longer under the Mosaic Covenant:

* He does away with the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.(Hebrews 10:9-10)

It was only through Christ that even the OT saints found a complete forgiveness for their sins (Hebrews 9:14-15).

James also suggested that we are now under a new regime, the “law of liberty”:

* For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. (James 2:10-12)

We are now under a new regime. However, some charge that the NT represents a perversion of the teachings of the Old. Therefore, it is imperative that we also consult the OT evidence that the Old Covenant was only meant as a temporary measure.

We even see clues of this in the Mosaic legislation, where we find that the Covenant of the Law only pertained to the Land and the theocratic State of Israel:

* You shall not do according to all that we are doing here today, everyone doing whatever is right in his own eyes, for you have not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance that the Lord your God is giving you.” (Deuteronomy 12:8-9)

Moses instructed Israel that the Law wasn't fully operative while they were wondering. Joshua reflects the same:

* At that time the Lord said to Joshua, "Make flint knives and circumcise the sons of Israel a second time." (Joshua 5:2)

Circumcision had been the sign of the Mosaic Covenant. However, it wasn't practiced during their 40 years of wandering. Evidently, the Covenant had only pertained to their time within the Promised Land. This suggests that it might not be relevant for today.

Jeremiah wrote that there would come a time when it would no longer be remembered or maintained:

* “And when you have multiplied and been fruitful in the land, in those days, declares the Lord, they shall no more say, 'The ark of the covenant of the Lord.' It shall not come to mind or be remembered or missed; it shall not be made again. At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of the Lord, and all nations shall gather to it, to the presence of the Lord in Jerusalem, and they shall no more stubbornly follow their own evil heart.” (Jeremiah 3:16-17)

The Ark of the Covenant was the banner of the Mosaic Covenant. If the Ark would not come to mind, neither would the Law.

Besides, there are many indications that it would not be able to achieve God's final goal for His people. Instead, they would continue in their uncircumcised heart (Deut. 30:6) until the arrival of the New:

* “But to this day the Lord has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear.” (Deuteronomy 29:4)

For God to accomplish His plans, some things would have to be changed. He had promised to marry Israel. However, the relationship remained very distant. Israel could not even endure the voice of God (Exodus 20) or come into His presence without being struck dead, but this would change:

* “And I will make for them a covenant on that day with the beasts of the field, the birds of the heavens, and the creeping things of the ground. And I will abolish the bow, the sword, and war from the land, and I will make you lie down in safety. And I will betroth you to me forever. I will betroth you to me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love and in mercy.” (Hosea 2:18-19)

Such an idea was foreign to the Old Covenant. A New and radically different one would be required:

* “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." (Jeremiah 31:31-34)

In order to salvage their claim that the Old will be eternal, the Rabbis maintain that the New Covenant simply represents a minor modification of the Old. However, our Lord explicitly tells us that the New will "not [be] like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt."

The New Covenant had to be radically different in order to fulfill the promises of God, in view of the fact that the Law had placed Israel under an inevitable curse:

* "'Cursed be anyone who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.' And all the people shall say, 'Amen.'” (Deuteronomy 27:26)

However, the OT extended the Messianic hope to Israel that the promised Savior would come and take upon Himself Israel's curse (Isaiah 53; Psalm 40, 22, 69; Daniel 9:24-27), indicating the insufficiency of the Old Covenant.

While the other covenants - the Noahic, abrahamic, the Davidic, and the New Covenant - are termed "everlasting," not once is the Mosaic, the Covenant of the Law, described in this way (although certain of its stipulations are regarded as everlasting.) This is surprising because the OT says far more about the Mosaic than it does about all of the others combined.

If the OT never claims that the Law is eternal and that it will be superseded, why should we!

MY YEARS IN CHRIST AS A LEGALIST

My first number of years in Christ was as a legalist. I believed in “grace” but also believed that I had to be worthy of it. However, it was becoming apparent to me that I was unworthy. This realization tormented me. I had given myself to the Lord, but I had no assurance that He had given Himself to me, an unworthy sinner.

I therefore sought to make myself worthy of Him. However, the harder I tried, the more it became apparent that I was unworthy. Even if He did save me, I couldn’t help thinking that He didn’t like me very much. Instead, it seemed that He liked others better, since He was blessing them more than He was blessing me.

As result of this thinking, I resented the very ones I was supposed to love. I even secretly resented God but wouldn’t admit it to myself.

This led to utter despair. I was so broken that hope became a rare luxury. However, in the midst of my brokenness, Christ made His grace real to me. I began to see that none of us are worthy. That’s why Christ had to die for me, the Worthy One for the unworthy.

Afterwards, I no longer could tolerate the “do better, try harder sermon,” which had so afflicted me. I just wanted sermons that would tell me that it is all about what Christ had done for me and not what I must do for Him.

However, as I became more confident in God’s grace, I began to see that the Christian life was more than just receiving Christ’s grace. A healthy lake must be stream-fed, but it must also surrender its water. Of first importance, I had to receive grace, but I also had to pass it on, responding obediently to it.

Immediately after affirming grace – “the implanted word, which is able to save your souls” (James 1:21; ESV) – James launched into describing our necessary response to grace:

·       But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing. (James 1:22-25)

Being “doers of the word” isn’t an option. A true faith is an obedient faith, while a fruitless faith is a faithless faith, an imitation of the real thing. A real faith is a tree that bears good fruit (Matthew 7:17). If we trust in Christ, we will do as He instructs us.

As we grow in our understanding of grace, we become assured that if we confess our sins, He will forgive, cleanse, and readily appoint us a fresh start (1 John 1:9). This gives us assurance and gratefulness so that we can gladly serve Him, not because we fear that He will damn us but because we are confident that He won’t.

However, when we show no interest in being “doers of the Word,” we are deceiving ourselves if we claim that we know the Savior. According to James, a barren faith is a bogus faith:

·       What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. (James 2:14-17)

Grace doesn’t relieve us of the moral requirements of the law, now called “the perfect law, the law of liberty.” We still mustn’t kill, and we must love our neighbor as ourselves (Leviticus 19:18). Instead, we “uphold the law” (Romans 3:31), but in a new way:

·       You also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code [of the Mosaic Law]. (Romans 7:4-6 )

To not uphold what the law is to damage ourselves and those around us:

·       By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice. (James 3:13-16)

We all have such temptations. Jesus was tempted in every way that we are, except without sin (Hebrews 4:15). He didn’t give in to the temptation, and we must not.

Being a “doer of the word” is more than just an indication of a true faith. It is also a source of blessing, as James had written: “He will be blessed in his doing” (1:25, above). We will also suffer if we turn back from the Word.

Grace is the good soil necessary to bring forth the crop. However, good soil without a crop is useless, while a crop without good soil is a fantasy. We were saved and endowed with God’s grace for a reason – “that we may bear fruit for God” (Romans 7:4, above).

Consequently, I think that we need those “try harder, do better” sermons, but they all must rest on the solid foundation of knowing the grace of our Lord. Without this foundation, we will be pierced by many discouragements and despair.

WHAT SHOULD GOOD PREACHING LOOK LIKE?

I used to hate the “try harder, do better” sermons. I didn’t find them uplifting, but condemning. I found that I was never able to “do better.” Instead, I would leave church feeling like a loser, a spiritual failure, barely acceptable to God.

Slowly, the Lord began to open my eyes to a deeper understanding of grace – what Christ had accomplished for me on the Cross, taking all of my sins, inadequacies, and failures upon Himself. Consequently, the Gospel set me free.

However, I continued to disdain the slightest whisper of an obedience-oriented message.  I knew that my fruit fell far short of what the preacher was requiring from me. Therefore, I convinced myself that grace had replaced the need to be obedient and to bear fruit.

However, I also began to see that it was not just the preacher who was making demands of me; it was also Scripture. Even the One who had died for me and who had directed me to just believe (John 6:29; 8:24) was requiring fruit from me:

·       For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:20)

·       For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:46-48; ESV)

How could I possibly be perfect? I couldn’t, and, once again, I felt like a spiritual failure. I also began to see that repentance was not an option:

·       “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:3-5)

In fact, so many of Jesus’ parables seemed to demand a high degree of righteousness as the ticket to enter into heaven. Right after His teaching about the need to repent, Jesus told a parable about a fig tree that didn’t bear fruit. After fertilizing it, if it still didn’t bear fruit, He would have it cut down (Luke 13:6-9). Gulp!

I struggled with the idea that perhaps Scripture was hopelessly conflicted and that all of my hope was for naught. How could salvation be a free gift and still be something that we earned through our good deeds?

My confidence in the Gospel hit bottom. I was in despair once again until the Spirit opened my eyes to the fact that, while the Good News of the Gospel still stands, a real faith along with a real new life will bear fruit as Jesus taught about a good tree:

·       “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. (Matthew 7:15-19)

If we are a good tree, by the grace of God, and have a real living faith, based upon the new life He has given us, then we will bear fruit as does the good tree. If we continue to bear bad fruit as the fig tree had, then we are not a good tree and should be cut down.

What then must biblical preaching look like? The Bible! It must include Gospel and law (obedience). Although the law, even the law of Christ, is not the Gospel, the two are inseparable. Faith and obedience always go together, and they should. If we trust God, we will do what He tells us to do. We will abide in His Word and keep His commandments. If we do not, we do not have a real living faith, the faith that comes to us as a gift from God:

·       And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him. (1 John 2:3-5)

While obedience does not save us, it gives us the assurance that we are in Him. If we do not obey Him, we do not know Him savingly.

In fact, obedience is also necessary for growing in grace. They are interdependent. How? While trying to obey the Gospel, we reap blessings, but also frustration. Our failures to live obediently cause us great distress, knowing that we must conform our lives unto Christ (1 Peter 1:15:16). Even more troubling, we begin to see how unworthy we are of anything that comes from God (Luke 17:10).

This can throw us into crisis mode, where we see that our only hope is in the mercy of God. We therefore confess our sins and repent in brokenness. Through this humbling process, our Lord lifts us up, so that we can again see His mercy in neon lights. Encouraged, we recommit ourselves to the Lord and to obedience to His teachings.

This cycle is something we continue to experience. Each time, it deepens our appreciation of our incredible Lord and His Gospel.

Please note, that without pursuing obedience, we are not adequately humbled. Without the humbling, we will not be lifted in order to receive a more vibrant portrait of the Gospel and recommit to the Lord with ever-increasing vigor.

What does this suggest about biblical preaching? We need to preach both the law and Grace, the Gospel and our complete obedience to it. We must preach to expose and indict all sin and to comfort with the all-sufficiency of the Gospel.

PREACHING GRACE ALONGSIDE OF THE LAW AND OBEDIENCE

What should a good sermon look and feel like? One Christian scholar and Reformed brother answered the question this way:

• Sermons and Bible studies that focus on “law” (the demands of Scripture for our obedience), no matter how accurately biblical in context, tend simply to add to the burden of guilt felt by the average Christian. A friend of mine calls these sermons “another brick in the backpack” – you arrive at church knowing five ways in which you are falling short of God’s standards for your life, and you leave knowing ten ways, doubly burdened. In my experience such teaching yields little by way of life transformation, especially in terms of the joy and peace that are supposed to mark the Christian life.

There is truth in this. To understand the Bible is to perceive its Christo- grace- and Gospel-centricity. It’s all about Christ and what He accomplished for us on the cross. Because of this, all the promises of God are fulfilled in Christ:

• For no matter how many promises God has made, they are “Yes” in Christ. And so through him the “Amen” is spoken by us to the glory of God. (2 Cor. 1:20)

Jesus also repeatedly pointed back to show how Scripture is about Him (John 5:39; Luke 24: 25-27; 44-48). Peter (1 Peter 1:10-11) and Paul did likewise (Acts 26:22-23).

Understandably, the above scholar warns against the do-better-try-harder sermon as unbiblically burdensome, tending “simply to add to the burden of guilt.” After all, since He is the One who has secured our grace and forgiveness through the cross, shouldn’t our teachings be Christ-centered, focusing on His mercy and not the moralistic, death-dealing requirements of the law? Yes! However, I think that this assessment requires some modification.

Christ is not only the mercy of God; He is also the righteousness of God. He is the all-in- all, embodying the fullness of God (Col. 2:9-10):

• But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.  This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. (Romans 3:21-22)

• It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.(1 Cor. 1:30)

However, the gift of Christ’s holiness does not let us off the moral hook. Instead, we too must be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:15-16). Jesus taught the very same message:

• Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:48)
  

Paul claimed that we must follow God’s unchanging moral dictates, even though no longer under the law:

• Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:31)

Having been freed from the Covenant of the Law doesn’t mean that we are now free to murder and steal. Instead, we are now freed so that we can live under Christ and bear moral fruit by the Spirit:

• So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code [the Covenant of the Law]. (Romans 7:4-6)

Under the headship of our Savior, we have been reconciled to God, have received the Spirit, and He has His laws upon our hearts (Jeremiah 31:31-34). And these laws are there for a purpose. They not only instruct us but they also guide us into moral obedience, and our teaching should reflect the Spirit’s plan.

Consequently, although Paul’s Pastoral Epistles are Christ-centered, they also law-centered. They require that our teaching and preaching demand moral holiness. In line with this, Paul insisted that all Scripture “is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16), not just the parts that emphasized God’s mercy.

He instructed Timothy to ”Teach these things” (1 Tim. 4:11). Which things did Paul think that Timothy should teach? Just things of grace? No:

• For physical training is of some value, but godliness has value for all things, holding promise for both the present life and the life to come. (1 Tim. 4:8)

Paul taught about how servants and masters should treat one another. Then he instructed Timothy to teach “these… things”:

• These are the things you are to teach and insist on…If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, they are conceited and understand nothing. (1 Tim. 6:2-4)

Understandably, it would have been difficult for servants to obey a harsh master, and so this command would have provoked feelings of guilt and possibly disdain. However, this should not be the last word for a Christian. Instead, the guilt should continue to lead us to Christ, forgiveness, and restoration.

Paul then instructed Timothy:

• Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. (1 Timothy 6:17-18)

These commands were not to simply be expressed on a personal level but also through teaching and preaching. It is unthinkable that these moral teachings could not be expressed in sermons or Bible studies.

In his next letter to the young pastor Timothy, Paul instructed:

• And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others. (2 Tim. 2:2)

Paul didn’t simply teach Timothy about grace, but also the need for grace in the face of ubiquitous moral failures. Teaching adherence to the requirements of the law was central to Paul’s message to Timothy:

• Keep reminding God’s people of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen… Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly… Flee the evil desires of youth and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. (2 Tim. 2:14, 16, 22)

Paul then instructed Timothy about the lawlessness in the last days when people would no longer be interested in hearing moral teachings. What was the answer? Teaching a message consisting only of “God loves you?” No! Preaching Scripture in its fullness would be required:

• Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. (2 Tim. 4:2)

This would be a message that would not only embody encouragement but also moral correction and rebuke!

Paul’s instruction to Titus about the substance of his teaching was similar – it had to include moralizing:

• You, however, must teach what is appropriate to sound doctrine. Teach the older men to be temperate, worthy of respect, self-controlled, and sound in faith, in love and in endurance. Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. (Titus 2:1-3) 

It is the teaching of the law – the commandments of God – that serves to highlight grace. Moralizing and preaching obedience must not be isolated from grace. They should work inseparably:

• For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.  It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age. (Titus 2:11-12) 

“Grace… teaches!” What does grace teach? “It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness!” The law should not be taught without the hope of grace; nor should grace be taught without the requirements of the law and our failures in light of them.

In light of this, theologian Iain M. Duguid wrote:

• To put it simply, he [Paul] never preached Ephesians 4-6 (the ethical imperatives) without connecting them to Ephesians 1-3 (the Gospel indicative.) (Is Jesus in the Old Testament? 12)

Law (requirements) and grace (the gift) should not be separated in our teaching and preaching. They are partners that complement each other. The law highlights the exceeding beauty and necessity of grace, while grace is the necessary answer to our ubiquitous failures in light of the teachings of our Savior.

Paul observed that the law was instrumental in leading us to Christ (Galatians 3:22-24). I think that the convicting and humbling power of the law continues to show us the relevance of Christ:

• Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.  Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin. (Romans 3:19-20)

God continues to humble us so that He might also exalt us:

• Grieve, mourn and wail. Change your laughter to mourning and your joy to gloom. Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up. (James 4:9-10)

Good preaching should grieve us, but it must also lift us! Okay, we are no longer under the law. We are under Christ, but even His teachings still humble and provoke guilt. However, these difficult teachings serve to lead us back to the mercy of Christ where we again grasp what He accomplished for us on the cross.  It is when I am overcome with the sight of my own sins that the cross appears in its glorious splendor.

Without this, the God-loves-you message can become insipid and uninspiring. Instead, we need constant reminders of how much we need His love and forgiveness. Without these reminders, our preaching might be casting God’s precious seeds upon hardened ground unprepared to receive them.

I therefore think that the law still leads us humbly to the cross, while the cross gratefully and confidently leads us back to the law – a functional and growth-producing marriage.