THE TWO LAWS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.
This is a subject of great importance. By not understanding it many have honestly supposed that the commandments of God were all nailed to the cross and abrogated. It is our object to show that the word law, so often used in the New Testament, does not apply to one and the same law, but that it sometimes applies to the ceremonial law of Moses, and sometimes to the ten commandments. If the word “law,” so often used in the epistles of St. Paul, refers to one law only, then the Apostle has often contradicted himself. Here we will give two texts from his epistles, which speak of the law, that the reader may clearly see the contradiction, if but one law is meant. 'Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace' Gal. v, 4. 'For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.' Rom. ii, 13. Has the Apostle contradicted what he wrote to the Galatians, A. D. 58, relative to the law, in his letter written to the Romans two years after? This he certainly has done, if he refers to one and the same law in both texts. But we are not ready to admit that there is a contradiction in his testimony. Much rather would we admit the clear distinction between the two laws, than to thus charge the Apostle. When we apply the word law correctly there is no contradiction. To do this, we should study well the context, which, with the text, will determine the true application. When St. Paul speaks of the law in Rom. ii, 13, he refers to the ten commandments alone. See verses 12—22.—That we may not mistake what law is referred to, the Apostle quotes three of the ten commandments, which proves it to be the law of God. 'The DOERS of' this law, says he, 'SHALL BE JUSTIFIED.' But when the Apostle mentions the law in Gal. v, 4, none of the ten commandments are referred to. He speaks of circumcision, which judaizing teachers were pressing upon the gospel church, and testifies that if they were circumcised they were debtors to do the whole law of shadows, of which the gospel is the body or substance, and Christ is 'end.' Surely, those who turned from a living substance, the gospel, and sought justification by the deeds of a dead law of shadows, had 'FALLEN FROM GRACE.' We are often referred to Rom. Chap. vii, for proof that the commandments of God are abolished, and we are told that verse 6, shows that the law is dead. But we think it proves no such thing. Read verse 6, with the marginal reading, and it will be seen that it is the Christian, who has been convinced of sin by the law, has submitted to obey it, and has been made free in Jesus Christ, that is dead to the law, and not the law that is dead. 'But now we are delivered from the law, [condemnation of the law,] being dead to that wherein we were held.' The law of God condemns, and leaves the sinner bound; but through faith in Jesus Christ he receives grace and freedom. 'What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, [transgression of the law,] that grace may abound?' Or, shall we who have been delivered from the condemnation of the law, and have found pardon through faith in the atoning blood of Christ violate any part of the 'royal law,' because we have found freedom? 'God forbid.' For the moment we do we are bound by its condemnation again. And further, it cannot be the law of God that is dead, for this law is the very living instrument to convict the sinner of sin, and slay him as it slew Paul. 'What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, [tenth commandment,] Thou shalt not covet.' Verse 7. 'For I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.' Verse 9. 'Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea we establish the law.' Rom. iii, 31. The epistle to the Romans was written A. D. 60. The crucifixion was A. D. 31, therefore the Apostle's letter to his Roman brethren was 29 years after the 'hand-writing of ordinances' was nailed to the cross. If the Apostle wished to teach the Romans that the ten commandments had been abolished, and had been dead 29 years, that they were a 'yoke of bondage,' and if observed by them, they would fall from grace, as many teach at this day, we might expect him to write to them something as follows—Wherefore the law is unholy, and the commandment unholy, and unjust, and bad; instead of saying, 'Wherefore the LAW IS HOLY, and the commandment HOLY, and JUST, and GOOD.' Verse 12. Paul also says, 'For we know that the law is SPIRITUAL.' See verse 14. Who dare say that this was any part of that law of ceremonies that had been dead 29 years? 'For I DELIGHT in the law of God after the inward man.' Verse 22. Who will say that he delighted in a yoke of bondage? 'I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God.' Verse 25. Will any one say that Paul thanked God that he served a law that had been abolished 29 years, after teaching the Galatians two years before that if they sought to be justified by it they would fall from grace? Certainly no sane man will charge the great Apostle to the Gentiles with such contradictions and folly. Then we cannot avoid the conclusion that he, in his epistles, speaks of two distinct laws. One was called a 'yoke of bondage,' Gal. v, 1, for when in force it could not 'make the comers thereunto perfect;' but now it had been dead 27 years. The other is called 'holy,' 'just,' 'good,' and 'spiritual,' and was the Apostle's 'delight.' James calls it the 'ROYAL LAW OF LIBERTY.' Chap. i, 25; ii, 8. One was the 'enmity, even the law of commandments CONTAINED IN ORDINANCES.' The other is the law of God the ten commandments. One was abolished at the cross, while the other remains as firm as heaven. Here we will add the testimony of Jesus in his sermon on the Mount. 'Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily, I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.' Matt. v, 17, 18. To abolish a law is to destroy it. One of the great objects of the first Advent was to abolish or destroy the law of ordinances, to make place for the gospel. But there is a law which Jesus did not come to destroy, but to fulfill. The only way to fulfill this law is to keep it. See James ii, 8. This Jesus did; for he says, 'I have kept my Father's commandments.' John xv, 10. He who knew that men would make void the law of God, and think it abolished at the cross says, 'Think not that I am come to destroy the law.' He also, in an impressive manner, declares that while heaven and earth remain, this law in all its parts will remain the same. Not one jot or tittle was to pass from it. That none may mistake what law is spoken of here, Jesus adds, 'Whosoever therefore shall break one of these68least COMMANDMENTS, and shall teach men so. &c.' This shows it to be God's law of commandments. But to make it still more sure if possible, Jesus in verses 21, 27 and 33, refers to three of the commandments of the decalogue. Men may teach for a few days that the law of God is abolished, that the fourth commandment is taken from it, that it is changed, or, as some say, 'relaxed;' but their assertions and sophistry wither before the plain and positive testimony of the Son of God, who has said, 'Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in NO WISE pass from the law.'