The three uses of the law

[Mikey]

So I have heard frequently about the three uses of the law from reformed folk. The three uses are phrased differently but below is a common explanations of the uses.

Its first function is to be a mirror reflecting to us both the perfect righteousness of God and our own sinfulness and shortcomings. As Augustine wrote, “the law bids us, as we try to fulfill its requirements, and become wearied in our weakness under it, to know how to ask the help of grace.” The law is meant to give knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:20; 4:15; 5:13; 7:7-11), and by showing us our need of pardon and our danger of damnation to lead us in repentance and faith to Christ (Gal. 3:19-24).

A second function, the “civil use,” is to restrain evil. Though the law cannot change the heart, it can to some extent inhibit lawlessness by its threats of judgement, especially when backed by a civil code that administers punishment for proven offenses (Deut. 13:6-11; 19:16-21; Rom. 13:3, 4). Thus it secures civil order, and serves to protect the righteous from the unjust.

Its third function is to guide the regenerate into the good works that God has planned for them (Eph. 2:10). The law tells God’s children what will please their heavenly Father. It could be called their family code. Christ was speaking of this third use of the law when He said that those who become His disciples must be taught to do all that He had commanded (Matt. 28:20), and that obedience to His commands will prove the reality of one’s love for Him (John 14:15). The Christian is free from the law as a system of salvation (Rom. 6:14; 7:4, 6; 1 Cor. 9:20; Gal. 2:15-19, 3:25), but is “under the law of Christ” as a rule of life (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2).”

What's you view of these 'three uses'? How do they refer to Christians today?

 

[loDebar]

The Law was given to the Hebrews from Moses to Jesus to sustain Israel as a nation for the Messiah to come

Those who do not know the Law still are aware of their sin.

Civil obedience is also established without knowing Israel.

We do not react now to keep the Law by things we do not do but things we should do to please Jesus

 

[Mikey]

The Law was given to the Hebrews from Moses to Jesus to sustain Israel as a nation for the Messiah to come

Those who do not know the Law still are aware of their sin.

Civil obedience is also established without knowing Israel.

We do not react now to keep the Law by things we do not do but things we should do to please Jesus

How do you think they refer to Christians today? Particularly the second one? it would go against separation of church and state. Is it right to force biblical law/morality onto unbelievers?

 

[Aaron]

The Law was given to the Hebrews from Moses to Jesus to sustain Israel as a nation for the Messiah to come

Those who do not know the Law still are aware of their sin.

They do know the law. They know it by nature. Regardless, you don't think the revelation of the law has any relevance to the nations?

 

[loDebar]

How do you think they refer to Christians today? Particularly the second one? it would go against separation of church and state. Is it right to force biblical law/morality onto unbelievers?

The Law is complete, The reason for the Law is complete.

no,, morality comes from the inside, Christ changes us, We change our actions.

 

[Aaron]

How do you think they refer to Christians today? Particularly the second one? it would go against separation of church and state. Is it right to force biblical law/morality onto unbelievers?

As soon as a thief is punished, biblical morality is enforced.

 

[Mikey]

As soon as a thief is punished, biblical morality is enforced.

the reason for the punishment of theft may not have the bible as the reason for the punishment. there are secular reason for punishing theft.

 

[Aaron]

the reason for the punishment of theft may not have the bible as the reason for the punishment. there are secular reason for punishing theft.

Not really. Saying there is a secular reason is only saying the truth of the law is evident.

 

[Covenanter]

The Law was given as a Covenant to declare the basis on which Israel could be owned as the People of God by the perfect obedience of the Messiah, living & dying to saved his people, who are condemned by the Law.

See Exo. 19 & 1 Peter 2.

 

[loDebar]

We are also condemned without knowledge of the Law.

 

[HankD]

The Law is complete, The reason for the Law is complete.

John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Galatians 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

no,, morality comes from the inside, Christ changes us, We change our actions.

True our actions are changed because Christ changes us, we are totally unable to change ourselves.

There is immediate change at regeneration:

2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

There is an ongoing change:

2 Corinthians 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed Grk. metamorphoo) into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

 

[Yeshua1]

How do you think they refer to Christians today? Particularly the second one? it would go against separation of church and state. Is it right to force biblical law/morality onto unbelievers?

The Law, or the Moral Code of God itself, should be the vry basis of governing society even today, but NOT the ceremonial as Israsel was commanded to do, but the 10 Commandments as to what crimes merit punishement.
Christians are still require to honor the Moral Code of the law, not to get saved or kept saved, but to honor and glorify God in own own bodies now!

 

[Mikey]

The Law, or the Moral Code of God itself, should be the vry basis of governing society even today, but NOT the ceremonial as Israsel was commanded to do, but the 10 Commandments as to what crimes merit punishement.
Christians are still require to honor the Moral Code of the law, not to get saved or kept saved, but to honor and glorify God in own own bodies now!

so would you would enforce every 10 commandment by law on the nation trough fear of punish? 10years imprisonment for worshiping another God? or using his name in vain?

 

[Yeshua1]

so would you would enforce every 10 commandment by law on the nation trough fear of punish? 10years imprisonment for worshiping another God? or using his name in vain?

No, not into deciding how to punish, but that we should try to have His standard of right and wrong reflected into our culture. For example, would not say one must believe in jesus, but hat the biblcal morality he talked on shoudl be enforced! Honor marriage, but not gay ones another example!

 

[Martin Marprelate]

So I have heard frequently about the three uses of the law from reformed folk. The three uses are phrased differently but below is a common explanations of the uses.

These are the three uses of the Moral Law, summarized in the 10 Commandments and epitomized in the so-called 'Royal Law' (James 2:8). The ceremonial laws are fulfilled in Christ; the judicial laws were particular to Israel and passed away when they ceased to be a nation.

Its first function is to be a mirror reflecting to us both the perfect righteousness of God and our own sinfulness and shortcomings. As Augustine wrote, “the law bids us, as we try to fulfill its requirements, and become wearied in our weakness under it, to know how to ask the help of grace.” The law is meant to give knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:20; 4:15; 5:13; 7:7-11), and by showing us our need of pardon and our danger of damnation to lead us in repentance and faith to Christ (Gal. 3:19-24).

This is about right.

A second function, the “civil use,” is to restrain evil. Though the law cannot change the heart, it can to some extent inhibit lawlessness by its threats of judgement, especially when backed by a civil code that administers punishment for proven offenses (Deut. 13:6-11; 19:16-21; Rom. 13:3, 4). Thus it secures civil order, and serves to protect the righteous from the unjust.

This is right. The law is written on the hearts even of unbelievers, though smudged and defaced by the fall (Romans 2:14-15), so that they are aware that murder and adultery are wrong, even though they may still commit them. When we are born again, the law is re-written on our hearts so that we delight to do God's will.

Its third function is to guide the regenerate into the good works that God has planned for them (Eph. 2:10). The law tells God’s children what will please their heavenly Father. It could be called their family code. Christ was speaking of this third use of the law when He said that those who become His disciples must be taught to do all that He had commanded (Matt. 28:20), and that obedience to His commands will prove the reality of one’s love for Him (John 14:15). The Christian is free from the law as a system of salvation (Rom. 6:14; 7:4, 6; 1 Cor. 9:20; Gal. 2:15-19, 3:25), but is “under the law of Christ” as a rule of life (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2).

Just so. "If you love Me, keep My commandments." 'For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome' (John 14:15; 1 John 5:3; c.f. Matthew 5:19).

What's you view of these 'three uses'? How do they refer to Christians today?

I think they're great and absolutely relevant for today.

 

[1689Dave]

Face it, Al Capone could keep the Ten Commandments if there was something in it for him. But he could never keep the Two Great Commandments, from which the Ten came. That is, without first having a change in heart wrought by God, no one can practice the Two Great Commandments. We need to differentiate between the Law of the heart and the law of the flesh.

Jeremiah and Hebrews say the New Covenant replaced the Old (Ten Commandments). But the New Covenant imports some of them for instruction and commentary purposes. Christians walk in the light of the Two Great Commandments doing good in love for God and people.

 

[Reformed]

So I have heard frequently about the three uses of the law from reformed folk. The three uses are phrased differently but below is a common explanations of the uses.

Its first function is to be a mirror reflecting to us both the perfect righteousness of God and our own sinfulness and shortcomings. As Augustine wrote, “the law bids us, as we try to fulfill its requirements, and become wearied in our weakness under it, to know how to ask the help of grace.” The law is meant to give knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:20; 4:15; 5:13; 7:7-11), and by showing us our need of pardon and our danger of damnation to lead us in repentance and faith to Christ (Gal. 3:19-24).

A second function, the “civil use,” is to restrain evil. Though the law cannot change the heart, it can to some extent inhibit lawlessness by its threats of judgement, especially when backed by a civil code that administers punishment for proven offenses (Deut. 13:6-11; 19:16-21; Rom. 13:3, 4). Thus it secures civil order, and serves to protect the righteous from the unjust.

Its third function is to guide the regenerate into the good works that God has planned for them (Eph. 2:10). The law tells God’s children what will please their heavenly Father. It could be called their family code. Christ was speaking of this third use of the law when He said that those who become His disciples must be taught to do all that He had commanded (Matt. 28:20), and that obedience to His commands will prove the reality of one’s love for Him (John 14:15). The Christian is free from the law as a system of salvation (Rom. 6:14; 7:4, 6; 1 Cor. 9:20; Gal. 2:15-19, 3:25), but is “under the law of Christ” as a rule of life (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2).”

What's you view of these 'three uses'? How do they refer to Christians today?

Your post basically mirrors how R.C. Sproul explained the threefold use of the Law: The Threefold use of the Law

Too many Baptists have antipathy towards the Law. The equate any reference to the Law as a works-based righteousness system. A proper understanding of the Law's usefulness allays those fears. I am in agreement with the classical Reformed view of the Law. The Law does act like a mirror, revealing our sin and the need to cling to Christ. The second use of the Law gives power to the civil magistrate to maintain law and order. The law's third function is to actually fulfill the law of Christ (Gal 6:2).

 

[Mikey]

Your post basically mirrors how R.C. Sproul explained the threefold use of the Law: The Threefold use of the Law

Too many Baptists have antipathy towards the Law. The equate any reference to the Law as a works-based righteousness system. A proper understanding of the Law's usefulness allays those fears. I am in agreement with the classical Reformed view of the Law. The Law does act like a mirror, revealing our sin and the need to cling to Christ. The second use of the Law gives power to the civil magistrate to maintain law and order. The law's third function is to actually fulfill the law of Christ (Gal 6:2).

This is right. The law is written on the hearts even of unbelievers, though smudged and defaced by the fall (Romans 2:14-15), so that they are aware that murder and adultery are wrong, even though they may still commit them. When we are born again, the law is re-written on our hearts so that we delight to do God's will.

Just so. "If you love Me, keep My commandments." 'For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome' (John 14:15; 1 John 5:3; c.f. Matthew 5:19).

I think they're great and absolutely relevant for today.

The second use of the law seems to me to be promoting the idea that the civil magistrate should be implementing Christian morals and laws through force of law, that everyone must outwardly - if not internally- conform to Christianity. this goes against the idea of religious freedom and separation of church and state.

 

[Reformed]

The second use of the law seems to me to be promoting the idea that the civil magistrate should be implementing Christian morals and laws through force of law, that everyone must outwardly - if not internally- conform to Christianity. this goes against the idea of religious freedom and separation of church and state.

Here is what the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith has to say about the duties of the Civil Magistrate:

1. God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, has ordained civil magistrates to be under him, over the people, for his own glory and the public good; and to this end has armed them with the power of the sword, for defence and encouragement of them that do good, and for the punishment of evil doers.

2. It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a magistrate when called thereunto; in the management whereof, as they ought especially to maintain justice and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each kingdom and commonwealth, so for that end they may lawfully now, under the New Testament, wage war upon just and necessary occasions.

3. Civil magistrates being set up by God for the ends aforesaid; subjection, in all lawful things commanded by them, ought to be yielded by us in the Lord, not only for wrath, but for conscience’ sake; and we ought to make supplications and prayers for kings and all that are in authority, that under them we may live a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty.

First, there is no such thing as a separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson coined this phrase in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. He was emphasizing the protection against state-sponsored religion as explained in the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Big "T" theonomists believe that the magistrate has the duty and obligation to bring all under his charge into at least outward conformity to Christian principles. Small "t" theonomists view Christian principles as being in the best interest of society but stop short of demanding outward conformity by all people. I would fall under the small "t" theonomy camp. Biblical views of both moral and civil law yield a stronger and healthier society for all citizens, regardless of whether all are believers. While society may allow for religious freedom (depending on a specific nation's laws), the Church has no place validating false religions. Just because practicing Islam is legal in the United States of America does not make Islam an acceptable path to God. It is a false religion that denies the central tenets of the Christian faith. Yes. We can live peaceably with our Muslim neighbors and partner on certain social issues that have a common benefit for all citizens, but we cannot place our stamp of approval on their religion. The difference between big "T" and small "t" theonomists is that the big "T's" advocate compelling outward obedience to Christianity, whereas small "t's" do not.

 

[1689Dave]

RE: Separation of Church and State; I believe Jesus abolished the church/state relationship in bringing an end to physical Israel. Only the body of believers remained as Israel. And he told us this kingdom was not of this world. So Jesus originally introduced separation of Church and State. In telling us not to be unequally yoked together with unbelievers he drove a wedge not only between church and state, but between believers and state too.

And, all millennial kingdom theories err in making the kingdom physical and domineering (of this world) instead of spiritual.