T HE K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S that they might be justified by faith. Now that faith in the finished redemption of Christ is come, even they are no long er under a schoolmaster (Gal. 3:19-25). As for the Gentiles, they have never had the law (Rom. 2:14), and as for the Christian, he is not under law but under grace (Rom. 6:14). The purpose of the law was to reveal man’s sinfulness in the light of. God’s holiness ( Rom. 3:20; 7:12,13). The law is good but must be rightly used (1 Tim. 1:8). The law is"not of faith and to de pend upon keeping of it for salvation makes one a 'debtor to every jot and- tittle of it (Gal. 3:12). So impossible i§ the combination of law and grace that we are told that the justification of the sinner cannot in any sense depend upon the works of the law (Rom. 3: 20; Gal. 2:16), and that if righteousness could come by the law, there would have been no need of Christ (Gal. 2:21). It was because the law was not intended to save, but only to reveal man’s need of a Savior, that Christ came (Rom. 8 :3,4). The law made nothing perfect/ but the bringing in of a better hope did (Heb. 7:19). The law works only wrath (Rom. 4:15); produces only bondage (Gal. 4:1- 3); and leaves all under a curse (Gal. 3: 10). If salvation is of grace, it cannot be partially dependent upon law-keeping (Rom. 11:6). If law enters into it, grace is completely shut out, for grace is un merited favor (Gal. 3:18). Are we, then, who have been saved by grace, left free to sin as formerly? “God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein?” (Rom. 6:2). “Sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under law, but under grace, Shall we sin because we are not under law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not to whom ye have yielded yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey?” (Rom. 6:14- 16). In no sense do we minimize the need of good works as natural fruit of the
726 cepts they must keep Saturday as the Sabbath.” As a matter of fact, we do believe and teach the divine inspiration of the Old Testament and the authority of the moral and ceremonial laws of the Old Testament in the period to which the Scripture con fines them and over the people to whom the Scripture itself says these laws were specifically given. The devotional portions of the Old Testament and the prophetic books are by all Bible Institutes accepted as of primary importance and usefulness. The position of the Old Testament laws, however, is so clearly defined by the New Testament that we are wondering how our Adventist editor can plead for “consistency” and yet utterly ignore the scores of plain passages defining the pur pose and limits of the. law. “Consistency, where art thou?” Why minimize the last twenty-seven books of the Bible? Why try to mix that which we are distinctly told cannot be mixed? (Gal. 2:16-21; 3:1-14). And »why load upon this dispensation that which Christ came to deliver us from—bondage to the law as a whole? (Gal. 3:13; 4:4-7). So fundamental is this distinction to the understanding of the Bible that the New Testament devotes many long passages to it. In view of the “isms” that have sprung up through disregard of this dis tinction, it is fitting that we should em phasize here the difference between law and grace. The Old Testament law (and by the law we mean the whole law —for Advent ists distinguish between ceremonial law and moral laws, a distinction which is unwarranted and never referred to in the New Testament) was a temporary coven ant given only to Israel and was added to the Abrahamic covenant till the seed, Christ, should come to whom the prom ise was made. Before faith came Israel was kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterward be re vealed. Wherefore the law was their schoolmaster to lead them unto Christ
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs