The Biblical and Christian Worldview
for the 21st Century

For discussion of 1-2, please see Truth on this website. For the remainder, see the text of the discussion that follows these summary principles.

26. One summary of the Law is the Golden Rule (Matthew 7:12). As a summary of the Law, one must look to its explicit statements to know how to fulfill.

Love, law, and justice, mercy, and grace, comprise the most central message of the Bible. However, their use among Christians is often misplaced. Quite common is the verse, “God is love.” Less common, if not rare, is “God is law.” Yet, which is more important? Which is prior?

Of course, “God is law,” may be stated as, “God is righteous” or “God is Holy.” But, as we will see, God’s law is a manifestation of His righteousness and holiness. Even, prior to those attributes, He must be truth. For, if God cannot be trusted in what He says, what He says does not matter. If we have to ferret out His truth on our own, the Bible is of no help to us. We are still on our own with or without the Scriptures. But, the central message of this website, The Christian and Biblical Worldview for the 21^st Century is that the Bible is infallible, inerrant, and bears the full weight of God’s voice and authority, as truth.

But, what is God law? First, all Christians would agree that God is righteous. But, to be “right” or “righteous,” requires a standard by which to judge what is right or wrong. God is that standard. But, God is not present here on earth for us to question Him or to have Him write down his standards. But, then, why should he? He has already done so in the 66 books of the Protestant Bible.

One source cites 613 commandments in the Old Testament!(1) Virtually all of the commandments of the New Testament are represented in those commandments except perhaps the fullest expression of the commandment to love (John 13:34, 15:12, 17:20-23; I Corinthians 13; etc.).

Ah, I hear it coming, “We (Christians) are not under law, but under grace!” That is not really the issue here (although we will address it later). We are concerned with God’s standard, His character, and what He requires of us. That requirement is the detail of the 613 commandments and the new commandment of love.

God is infinitely Holy, and to have fellowship with man, he must be “holy as I am holy.” Man cannot begin to achieve that standard. It is infinitely above him. In fact, C. S. Lewis said that a recording of moral statements that any individual makes over his lifetime would convict him without applying any outside moral standard.

You see, if you do not understand the exact and detailed standard of God’s law, you cannot fully appreciate the greatness of the sacrifice of God’s Son for sinners. The Shorter Catechism defines sin as “any want of conformity unto or transgression of any law of God.”

So, Christians start at the wrong place in starting with God’s love. God’s love enters because God is truth, and He has a standard, His law. “For God so loved the world…” (John 3:16). What was the situation that called for this love? What was wrong that the world needed God’s love? What is wrong is that man (first, Adam, and then ourselves) has broken God’s law and is unable to pay the price that God requires.

So, God’s law is prior to God’s love in salvation. For that reason, law is the most important understanding of God’s character after His being Truth. Many, many Christians have this reversed. God’s love has no content apart from God’s law. The fullness and greatness of Christ’s sacrifice is empty and meaningless without understanding God’s law being fulfilled in Christ for His people.

Biblical law is probably the most complex subject in the Bible. Robertson McQuilkin cites his father’s book in which “law” is used at least twelve different ways in the Bible (2). Dr. McQuilkin goes on to name six of these uses.

Robert McQuilkin goes on to name six other uses of “law” in his book, but this will suffice for our study here.

(Teaching moment: Now is a good time to reinforce the need for hermeneutics or principles by which Scripture should be interpreted. One of the most important is that the same word can have different definitions. “Law” probably has more than any other! The remarkable thing about this hermeneutic is that it is true for the understanding of any writing or book, not just the Bible. For more on hermeneutics.)

(2^nd Teaching moment. As a practical exercise, list how many synonyms of “law” are present in the Bible. Psalm 119 is a good place to start where testimonies, His ways, precepts, statutes, commandments, righteous and judgments appear under the first section! There are many others throughout the Bible.)

In this paper and on this website, “law” will be used to designate all laws (and their synonyms named above) of the Old and New Testaments except those that were explicitly ceremonial and those applicable only Israel as a nation within those geographical boundaries prescribed by God. (See Webster’s 1828 dictionary for his 26 definitions of “law,” below.)

“Love” must be seen in the context of this “law.” Even to begin to understand the breadth and depth of John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son…” absolutely must be framed by the background of God’s law or righteousness.

Robertson goes on to say:

Robertson McQuilkin. Let us start with the views of some others to demonstrate the intimate relationship of love with law. Since we have been spending time with Dr. Robertson McQuilkin, we will start with him (pages 28-29).

G. I. Williamson. Perhaps, the most widely read commentary on The Westminster Confession of Faith was written by G. I. Williamson. Concerning Chapter 18 of the Confession, he divides the Ten Commandments into two sections:

Thus, the Two Great Commandments of Jesus Christ (Matthew 22:33-38) are made more explicit by the Ten Commandments.

Henry Stob. Henry Stob taught at Calvin Theological Seminary in Philosophical and Moral Theology. He was founder and editor of The Reformed Journal. He has one of the best books on Biblical ethics that I have in my library. It is an unknown gem. And, for our purposes here, he has the best material that I have read on the interrelatedness of law and love. (Later, we will cite him on justice, as well.) In this book, he has a chapter on “Love and Law: The New and the Old Morality.” In general, the old morality is that of Old Testament law (a morality of rules of right conduct and of obedience). The new morality has to do with ends (as the Greeks first posited).

To put everything together, one final characteristic of God is needed: justice.

Some theologians discuss the interrelatedness of law and grace, while others discuss law and love. Still others discuss law and gospel. That difference in approach has caused me to reflect and research a great deal on these Biblical terms. In addition, mercy seems closely related, as well.

In reviewing these terms, there is a great deal of overlap.

In salvation: “For God so loved the world that He gave His own begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16), yet “By grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of god” (Ephesians 2:8-9). “He has mercy on whom He wills” (Romans 9:18).

Attribute of God: “God is love” (I John 4:8), but Jesus Christ was “full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). The Apostle Paul introduce his Epistles with “Grace, mercy, and peace.” “You are not under law, but under grace” (Romans 6:14). “Love is the fulfillment of the law” (Romans 13:10). “God who is rich in mercy” (Ephesians 2:4).

From these few hours of review and reflection, “grace” and “love” seem to be virtual synonyms, as they apply to God’s favor towards His own. However, His “common grace” applies to all mankind. He never expresses “love” for all mankind.

While mercy seems to carry the full weight of God’s saving activity and a particular attribute of Himself, it does have some nuances that separate it from love. Mercy denotes being applied to someone who is miserable and pitiable. Love and grace can be given to people in all situations, whether they are miserable or relatively comfortable. And, of course, mercy within the Godhead is not applicable at all.

And, these distinctions are the best that I can do after consulting about a dozen books and dictionaries, many Bible verses, even reviewing some of the New Testament Greek words. If some readers have some specific ideas on these words, or have a great source that discusses all three, please email me.

But, for our purposes here. Any distinctions in love and grace do not matter. We are considering the intimate connection between law and love. Since one of my references contrasts law and grace, in my discussion, I will consider grace and love as synonyms.

Justice, then, would require that God should punish all men because “all have fallen short of the glory (righteousness, law) of God (Romans 3:23). God’s love saves all those who “believe on His name.” Thus, God’s love supercedes His justice to save some. For Christians, this understanding should temper their call for justice in all situations.

But, there is another side to God’s love, and that brings us back to God’s law.

And, from John Murray:

These wise men are only telling us what God has already told us in His Word.

The concept of God’s law in relation to God’s love in salvation is the most important concept in the Bible (after God is Truth and His Word is truth). The definition of sin cannot be known without knowing God’s law, as representative of God’s righteousness. “Sin is any want of conformity or transgression of the law of God.” (See above.) What is the perfection that God requires for salvation, the perfect keeping of the law? All 613 commandments (above) or the equity (below) thereof.

Some have said that there are two purposes of the law. 1) The law demonstrates our inability to keep God’s standards of righteousness, and therefore, leads us to Christ who perfectly fulfilled the law and applies His righteousness to those who believe on His name. 2) The law gives direction to the love after we have been born-again.

To mention “situation” in the context of discussion among Christians is to cause a vigorous, almost knee-jerk, response among evangelicals. Since Joseph Fletcher’s Situation Ethics, the word “situation” has become anathema to us. And, that has happened for good reason. (Read carefully.) Fletcher and other non-evangelicals say that the situation determines the ethics, or the right or wrong behavior to follow. The Bible says that the situation determines the commandments or the principles that we are to follow.

With Fletcher, there are no absolutes or fixed principles, only those determined by the moment. With God, His commandments and principles has already been established. The situation determines which ones apply.

Let us consider an example relative to justice. With a criminal caught in theft, the modern situation (of public opinion and court justice) is to punish the criminal by imprisonment only.

But, biblical justice has five purposes in justice: 1) restoration to the one from whom goods were stolen, sometimes several-fold of what was stolen (!), 2) punishment, not by imprisonment, 3) deterrence, 4) rehabilitation, and 5) satisfaction of the criminal’s own concept of justice.

Another example is the modern concept of adultery, commonly called divorce due to “incompatibility.” That is, if one finds himself or herself in a marriage where one spouse finds that they do not “love” the other, the situation (and modern state laws) allows them to divorce and remarry. Historically, modern divorce laws can easily be traced to the liberal “ethical” ideas of Fletcher and others.

But, biblical justice requires that divorce be granted only for adultery or for desertion of an unbeliever from a believer.(4) And, Biblical justice requires that churches deal with situations of divorce within their congregations.(5) These are commandments and principles that one will never find among situational ethicists (that is, pagan, non-Biblical worldview).

I have heard and read of pastors and other Christians who have tried to “justify” their adulteries with pagan concepts of “love.” But, this is a illustrative example of “love” that is unbiblical contrasted with Biblical love. Please re-read, if you do not remember what Murray and Stob said on the guiding directive of “law” for love. Biblical law is the only limit on “love” being anything that one wants it to be!

Let us suppose that Mr. Smith has stolen a car, valued at $25,000 from Mr. Jones, both members of the same congregation. Mr. Smith has been caught by the police with clear evidence that he is guilty. How would this sin/crime be handled at different levels?

(Caveat: What follows is within the principles of Biblical justice. I am not saying that they are either comprehensive or the best principles to be applied. I am only illustrating how justice varies with different authorities, and the great practicality of these principles.)

Biblical justice between Christians. Mr. Jones must make restitution of the car to Mr. Jones and any expenses that he incurred from the absence of the automobile. Mr. Smith must also ask forgiveness from Mr. Jones, and Mr. Jones must forgive him (even if Mr. Smith is a repeat offender -- Matthew 18:22).

Biblical justice in the Church. The church leaders (elders or deacons, depending upon the form of church government) must investigate the situation and determine what oversight that they must give (Matthew 18:15-20).

And, if Mr. Jones does not forgive Mr. Smith, Mr. Jones may become the offending party! The church leaders must give oversight to both.

Biblical justice in the courtroom. The state (used for all levels of government, not just the states of America) has the authority of God to “punish evil” (Romans 13:1-4). Automobile theft is a crime and punishable by state law.

If Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones work out a Biblically satisfying arrangement, the situation can end there! The church does not have to be involved: the verses cited above clearly state that if either party is not satisfied, then one or both takes it to the church. Now, if Mr. Smith is a repeat offender, it may be wise for Mr. Jones to take it to the church.

And, the state does not have to be involved, if Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones can work out an equitable (Biblical) arrangement.

Practical application: if individuals were allowed to settle interpersonal crimes, this would greatly reduce the caseloads of the states! However, in today’s litigious and pagan society, I would grant that this application may not work. But, in a Biblical conscientious society, I contend that it would.

Capital punishment. In cases of the loss of human life (not due to “natural“ causes), God has mandated that the state investigate, for only the state has the power of capital punishment (Romans 13:4). Of course, the individual has the God-given right to kill in self-defense, a situation where the state should declare the killer innocent.

These issues of Biblical justice ever so brief, but I have expanded them a more fully at the following URL with a reference there to a more comprehensive discussion of justice by Vern Poythress. (Crime and Punishment)

Perhaps, what comes to mind most frequently when someone mentions the word, “justice,” is social justice. “Giving everyone their due,” then, becomes the removal of all things that appear to be “unfair” in society: racial inequality, salaries for men vs. women, equal employment opportunities, sexual harassment in the work place, “right” to medical care, providing income to those below the “poverty” line, “fair” wages for blue collar workers, access for those with disabilities, etc. The list is virtually endless. We are a society which is overly concerned with “social justice.”

Yet, what have been achieved with this focus? After at least $50 trillion, poverty is unchanged. Little progress has been made against gender inequality of salaries. Medical care is demonstrably producing more harm that good. Mothers abort one in three of their children. The elderly literally rot away in nursing homes. Euthanasia looms on the horizon in America, while it is a reality in The Netherlands. Pornography is a growing industry. Social security is bankrupt. The federal budget is ballooning out of control. And, on and on.

With a society so focused on justice, what is wrong? I would posit that the fundamental problem is the concept of justice. We want a society that gives the “good” to everyone regardless of responsibility. Children cannot be failed in school because “it might hurt their feelings.” Everyone must have the latest and best medical care, regardless of their ability to pay or their responsibility for their own injuries and illnesses. Everyone must have the same pay scale, regardless of the market value of their services. Everyone must have social security income, regardless of their need. “Art” cannot be defined, because it must have its freedom of expression. And, it is the state’s responsibility to make sure that all these things happen by legislative or judicial fiat.

Now, I recognize the global nature of the three prior paragraphs. But, they are sufficiently in the “ballpark” for our application here.

Let me take my position, one step further, we need the Biblical concept of justice. The three “inalienable rights” of the American Declaration of Independence are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” But, the signers of the Declaration posited these concepts on the Biblical concept of justice, the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Writings and speeches from those times clearly demonstrate that rights and responsibilities were linked.

Perhaps, the best illustration comes from the undisputed father of American and English jurisprudence, William Blackstone. In Section 2 of his Introduction to his commentaries on law, he begins.

Blackstone moves in a few paragraphs of continuing discussion on the theme that, as the universe and all forms of life are governed by the laws of nature, man is also subject to laws, the obedience of which will lead to individual happiness and an ordered society.

The most major mistake that is made by those who might contend for “natural law” or “the law of nature’s God” is to miss its need for the specificity of the Scriptures. Blackstone does not make this error.

My knowledge of the history of natural law theory is almost nil. I do not know upon what premises such theory was based. I do not know who posited these theories and in what ages. Nor, do I know to what extent such theory has been developed. Perhaps, such law was founded upon certain Scriptures (for example, Romans 1:26, 27; I Corinthians 11:14). But, one Biblical hermeneutic is that explicit statements interpret all those statements that are less clear. Scripture is “explicit” revelation and nature is “general” revelation, if you will. (Link to specific principle in Hermeneutics.)

But, this I know and proclaim with every fiber of my rational and regenerated understanding, paraphrasing Blackstone himself: the explicit statements of divine ethics and law always, always trump natural law derived in any other manner where any difference is found.

This derivation of law with the Scriptures, as the explicit determining factor of law, is the great neglect of Bible-believing Christians. (Non-Bible-believers do not care about the Scriptures, so they are irrelevant here.) They have not been able to be both pro-life and pro-capital punishment, as Scripture is. They have not been able to show mercy to homosexuals, while upholding laws against homosexuality. They have believed that the provision of welfare by the state is Biblical charity. They have helped to enact state law for disabilities. They have not been able to support “just” wars. They have misunderstood the separation of church and state. They have just accepted the current penal system imprisonment as the only form of punishment. They have not understood the concept of civil liberty, as it grew out of the Reformation. And, and hundreds of other wrong or omitted conceptions of Biblical law.

There is a beautiful unity to love, law, mercy, justice, grace, righteousness, and holiness within this Biblical framework that is centered on God Himself. (7) These words and their corresponding concepts are like the facets of a diamond of perfect construction. The concept of man’s salvation, corresponds to the concept of law and justice in society and in the state. We have these concepts rooted in God Himself, as He is described in Scripture, for He cannot be described accurately in any other way. We have a system that promotes the summon bonum of individuals, families, churches, and nations, while never compromising the rights of anyone. O, Christian, grasp the fullness of your heritage!

There is a saying that “The Devil is in the particulars.” But, in this case, Christ is in the particulars!

The letter of the law is brutal. It would make no provision for applying capital punishment to both the pre-meditated murderer and the motorist who lost concentration for a moment and killed a pedestrian. Love and mercy would allow both to go free, realizing that all men are fallible and subject to their nature and nurture.

But, Biblical justice is the answer. Distinctions are made between pre-mediated murder and accidental manslaughter. A man could flee to a “city of refuge,” where he would be tried, and if found to be innocent of pre-meditated murder, then he could live there until the high priest died. There is a distinction between a woman who cries out in rape and the one who does not. And, hundreds of other factors in laws governing other crimes.

“Oh, how I love thy law,” the Psalmist cried. The law? Yes, the law. The law is foundational to love, mercy, justice, and all other Biblical concepts.

Christian, do you cry, “Oh, how I love thy law?” Do you love the whole law, the whole law of the Old and New Testaments? Do you know the whole law? Do you know the law? If not, what is your intention today to study and learn the law?

From a study of casuistry, one comes to realize that it is impossible to write sufficient details in ethics or law to cover every possible human situation. This complexity requires judgment, judges, mercy, and equity. If the law were sufficient to cover all crimes, then no judges would be needed. Any person could just look up the particular crime in a book and prescribe the penalty. But, there is the situation to be considered. Was the murder premeditated or in the heat of passion? Was this murder an isolated event, or did the person have a pattern of similar offenses? What are some principles?

1) Justice must be fulfilled. For guilty man to be saved, God’s law had to be satisfied. God focused the full wrath of His perfect justice on His own Son. In a sense, the law was twice fulfilled. Christ, the Son, fulfilled the law of God perfectly. God, the Father, fulfilled the law perfectly in punishing His Son in the perfect fulfillment of the law. Only after this double fulfillment of the law is love, mercy, and grace demonstrated and applied to some.

Mercy cannot be shown without the background of God’s law, for how else can mercy be known as mercy? For what sin or crime is mercy being shown? So, the details of God’s law written in God’s Word shows mercy in its prescription of sanctions for different situations.

But, let’s be careful here and not make the modern error of compassion (pretended mercy and love) over justice. What is the worst sin or crime under God’s judgment? Pre-meditated murder? Stealing from the church offering? Robbing widows and orphans? Drunken driving?

No, a hardened heart evidenced by unrepentance. Pre-meditated murder shows deliberate intention over time. Repetitive crimes show a pattern that has no regret. Vicious crimes show evidence of a disregard for the value of human life.

Now, there is a difference between sorrow at getting caught and repentance. The Bible describes this in II Corinthians 7:8-12. We do not have the time to go into these distinctions, but this incorrigibility is of central importance to Biblical justice. The goals in justice are always restitution, reconciliation, and repentance (a changed mind and behavior). However, the evidences of a hardened heart in the absence of any concept of the value of property or animal and human life and repetitive crimes demonstrate the difficulty, if not impossibility, of these three goals.

So, even within the particulars of Old Testament law, justice and even mercy, are woven into the law. But, with solid evidence of recalcitrance and the severity of crimes performed, punishment must be carried out, including the death penalty.

2) Every effort should be made to see that the law if fairly applied in individual cases and in all cases consistently. This principle seems self-explanatory.

3) Distinction between sins and crimes. Passages like Matthew 5:38b and Romans 12:17-21 are instructions in personal relationships with believers and unbelievers, not the avoidance of self-defense or tolerance of repetitive crimes. Crimes within the framework of justice and mercy above, must be punished according to the law, as prescribed by Romans 13:1-5 and elsewhere. While Christians must be pacifists relative to personal revenge and tolerant to personal offenses, they cannot be tolerant to evil. God has ordained the “sword” of the civil government to this end.

While the church is limited to the power of spiritual judgment only, the power of the state may have to be appealed for intervention if the person who is disciplined becomes physically aggressive towards the church or any of its members. Likewise, the church may assist the state to carry out acts of mercy and love, even as the state exercises the power of the “sword” (physical punishment). So, each has its sphere, but the two should be mutually supportive to each other’s mission.

I am so serious that I will go further. The Old Testament Law is the only source of ethics and law that will deliver us from the modern culture of disease, debt, and death. Am I then, a theonomist? Well, yes and no. I am a theonomist in the sense in which I just made that statement and the statements that follow here. I am not a theonomist by the caricature in which that term is usually applied. If you have come this far, come with me further. (And, for a reasoned view of theonomists, see Reconstruction under Worldview Areas.)

The Apostle Paul said, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain” (I Corinthians 9:9; I Timothy 5:18). Virtually every Christian, especially pastors, agree that this verse applies to the payment of support for ministers of the Word. Yet, look at the leap! From allowing an ox to graze while working in Old Testament times to the financial support of 21^st Century ministers and missions is a huge leap! Christian, don’t miss this leap. It is central to the concept of worldview and the solution of social and state concerns.

Or, “When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it” (Deuteronomy 22:8). A modern application would be to have a fence around one’s swimming pool to prevent children and animals from falling in and drowning or on a balcony on a building. Again, from Old Testament homes with roofs on which people walked to modern swimming pools and balconies is a vast leap of time and culture.

I believe that diligent study would find great creativity in the application of these laws to modern society. But, if the study is not done, we will never benefit from God’s gracious instructions.

If the choice that Moses gave to his people was to follow the law to life and prosperity or to disregard the law to their destruction and despair (see below), is our choice any different today? Is not our choice to follow God’s law today the same as that proclaimed by our forefathers to the ends of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” (10)

We have forgotten our heritage. The Reformers (John Calvin, Martin Luther, John Knox, and others) knew this Old Testament link. I have quoted William Blackstone who probably applied more Biblical law to civil law than any other man in history. The English common law was sometimes called “The Law of Liberty of Moses.” Its application to case law became so widely known that even today one definition of equity is that system of law.

And, there is the obvious heritage of the Ten Commandments. Our example of “muzzling the ox” as paying the preacher would be covered by the Eighth Commandment. Our example of fencing one’s roof or swimming pool would be covered by the Sixth Commandment.

Perhaps, the greatest expression of the broad, but accurate, application of the Ten Commandments is the Larger Catechism of the Westminster Confession of Faith. In the discussion of this website title, "The", I have shown how Christians in the pro-life movement could have found balance in their views of capital punishment, just war, and self-defense from Q/A 136 in one phrase!

So, Christian, the Old Testament as the basis of law and culture is not new! As Blackstone said, it is as old as the Garden of Eden and man’s musings in nature until Revelation. Explicitly, it is as old as the Word written itself. More recently, it is the fabric and foundation of the Protestant Reformation and the Great Awakening in America!

(Oh, by the way, if you agree that Paul was right, that is, God was right about “not muzzling the ox” and paying workers of the Word, then you are a true theonomist!)

If you want to throw out the Old Testament and avoid being a true theonomist, the New Testament will not let you off the hook. While the New Testament does not have the civil application of the law, as the Old Testament does, there is considerable evidence that the law continued to have the same high regard in the New Testament, as in the old.

There is also the question, “Where does any law come from?” Law always and inevitably comes from someone’s ethics, that is what one thinks is right or wrong or what one considers to be righteous or sinful. As we will see in the next section, the sources for morality are quite limited, and their authority is quite suspect from the beginning (rule of a majority vote or individual power).

“But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man). God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?” (Romans 3:5-6). My simple conclusion is that, if the law is God’s criteria for judging the world, can there be criteria from any other source that is better?

State authorities are to “minister to you for good” and “to execute wrath on him who practices evil.” The full power of these simple phrases here can be easily missed. How does a minister determine what is good and what is evil? If he cannot determine what is good and what is evil, then he cannot “minister.”

Now, as a Christian, where do you want him to get his concepts of good and evil? From the All Righteous God and His Word? Or, from totally sinful man and his creative ideas? Even, if you chose the latter, you must still have some standard by which to know what is good and evil from the thousands of ideas and proposals from history and modern times. A standard of right and wrong is inescapable. The only alternatives are back to an arbitrary majority or individual power. It follows that any magistrate who pervasively, persistently, and importantly avoids what is good and enjoins what is evil, is thereby no true civil magistrate, though he may retain considerable state power.

I simply propose that the New Testament and the Old Testament are the greatest source of moral good, and therefore, the greatest source for “good” civil law.

I make no claim that the application of Old and New Testament law is either easy or straightforward. However, the first step for the Bible-believing Christian is to understand that God has provided this law for the benefit of mankind, both Christian and non-Christian.

There are really only two choices in law-making, as in ethics: man’s ethics and law or God’s ethics and law. And, under man’s law, there are only two choices: rule of the majority (in legislative process, judicial decision [where more than one judge rules] or popular vote)

You might respond, “Even if the entire Bible is believed as law, the same two processes have to take place to enact law.” Yes, I agree, but in accepting the Bible as the source of law, all persons in the process of writing or positing law are limited to one body of knowledge and not the entire range of human opinion from all of man’s history.

And, there is considerable historical precedent, as recorded above. This history allows lawmakers to see how the peoples of those times, also distant from Biblical times and culture, applied law to themselves.

Then, there is the problem of sanction, that is, what penalty is imposed for a crime? Without the Bible, where does one go for a punishment that fit’s the crime? Perhaps, historically, this connection can be seen more clearly. With rex lex, the king is law, subjects could be executed for a petty crime against the state or against the king. And, not only the king, but any nobleman or high-ranking person could impose virtually any penalty on their serfs or slaves.

The institution of “an eye for an eye,” by Moses, as directed by God, was actually a strict limitation on the culture of the times. When one man killed another, the family of the man killed would retaliate, not with a life for a life, but against anyone or several of the killer’s family -- and, such back and forth killing could go on for generations. The Mosaic limit morally and legally limited such escalation of murders.

The concept of restitution, also limited such wanton allowance of “payment” for harm that was done through property damage. An Israelite could not just destroy the entire herd of someone who had stolen one of his sheep. He was due restitution “in kind,” sometimes additional compensation applied for the hardship of doing without what was stolen or for other reasons, such as, the cost of catching the malefactor.

“Trifles,” you say. “We have a great system of law in American today!” I agree. We do have a great system of law. The best in the world. But, not the best in history, and a costly system even in its “greatness.”

Dollars. Forgive me for not looking up the current number, but the cost of the War on Poverty since the mid-1960s is somewhere over $50 trillion. And, by the same standards by which this war was engaged, nothing has changed! $50 trillion! Any rational person would conclude that the plan was defective, but we continue to spend more and more.

Deaths. Since Roe v. Wade, over 50 million unborn American children have lost their lives in abortion facilities.

Families and Children. Easy divorce has wreaked havoc with American families and its children. Fathers are able to leave their families with virtually no income and the courts make it difficult, if not impossible, for former wives to get support for her children.

Just and righteousness. The relationship of justice and righteousness are evidenced by the fact that the same Greek word, dikaios, may be translated “just,” as in “the just shall live by faith“ (Romans 1:17), or “righteous,” as in “the righteousness of God,” (Romans 3:21). Often, these words are used the context of obedience to the law or the concept of justice or judgment.

Justice and judgment. “The words, ‘justice’ and ‘judgment’ are actually used interchangeably throughout the Bible. And for good reason. What is right and just and true contradicts and condemns what is evil and wicked and perverse.” (George Grant, The Micah Mandate, page 89).

Synonyms of Biblical law. There are many synonyms of biblical law, especially in the Old Testament: precepts, commands, commandments, statute, principle, code, act, enactment, ordinance, decree, directive, edict, fiat, ruling, regulation, rule, prohibition, restriction, canon, testimonies, His ways, righteous judgments, Your Word, wonderful works, truth, and moral law. Many, if not most, of these are found in Psalm 119 alone!

The only difference between the law of gravity and God’s laws for life is the freedom to choose in the latter. When a persons jumps off a building, the law of gravity takes over and his body will be broken on the ground below. When this law is broken, the choice is irreversible. But, what is often overlooked is that violation of God’s laws for life are just as destructive, if not more so. Violation of God’s laws of sexuality has resulted in the epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases that is present today. The violation of His laws for marriage has caused immeasurable heartache, economic expense, medical and psychological problems, and millions of children with the horror of divorce. The violation of laws of economics has caused runaway inflation. (See all the examples above.)

There is great freedom in God’s law. When the laws of gravity and aerodynamics are obeyed, there is great freedom in flight via airplane, sail plane, kites, gliders, parachute, and sky-diving.

When God’s laws for life are obeyed, there is great freedom and reward. Marriage gives security, mutual help, reduced expenses, time to pursue other interests, and the great reward of children. There are several studies that even show that sexual enjoyment (by self-assessment of the individuals themselves) in marriage exceeds that of singles.

Following God’s laws of economic freedom in production and trade has produced the great prosperity of the West, and now East, even though that freedom is severely threatened today.

Too many people, perhaps even many Christians, think of God’s laws as restrictive, but in reality they provide great freedom and peace for individuals, families, cities, states, and nations.

The instruction of Micah 6:8 is a simple phrase, “to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.” It is quoted often by both liberal and conservative Christians. I trust, however, that you now realize that the first and second instructions of The Micah Mandate invoke the full application of the entirety of the Old and New Testament law at the level of individuals, families, and nations! This verse is no simplistic direction, but the same as The Cultural Mandate of Genesis 1 and The Great Commission of Matthew 28! George Grant has written a wonderful book by the same title as this section. (See Endnotes.)

As Moses gave a choice to his people, we have the same choice today. “I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live” (Deuteronomy 30:19).

Increasingly, the United States has chosen the opposite of God’s law. Therefore, we are increasing the presence of real death.

John Calvin in his commentary on Matthew summarizes Christ’s identity of The Golden Rule, “Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets” (Matthew 7:12).

1) 613 Commandments of the Old Testament

2) Robertson McQuilkin, An Introduction to Biblical Ethics, (Tyndale: 1989), pages 45-83, citing Robert C. McQuilkin, God’s Law and God’s Grace, (Eerdmans, 1958), pages 13-17).

3) I have substituted “worldview” for “ethic.” They are synonyms. John Murray, Principles of Conduct, (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1957). Available from Our Bookstore.

4) See Jay Adams, Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage, available from Our Bookstore.

5) See Jay Adams, Handbook of Church Discipline, available from Our Bookstore.

6) There is a website devoted to The Law of Nature and of Nature and Of Nature’s God, www.lonang.com. Just remember that Biblical law always trumps and is more explicit than “natural law.” Quotes in text from Section 2.

7) In my readings for this article, I frequently came across “beauty” relative to grace, mercy, and love. What greater beauty can there be than that of God’s harmony in all things involving His universe and plan for mankind?

8) http://www.opc.org/confessions.html Westminster Confession of Faith, Larger and Shorter Catechisms.

9) Equitable reviews of theonomy and theonomists. Link to Link.

10) I am told by a legal scholar that with the early influence of the Enlightenment, “life, liberty, and property” became “life, liberty, and happiness.” If a man cannot own property, he cannot protect his “life” or have true “liberty.” These concepts are mutually dependent.

The following books are incomparable on the issues discussed in this article. Unfortunately, those not listed in Our Bookstore are Out of Print. However, used copies may be found among used books at Amazon.com and many other used book dealers. They are worth searching for.