Do you honestly think that God's righteous nature is completely defined by the 10 commandments?
First, no one has ever said that the Ten Commandments define God's nature completely. But they do display the righteous nature of God to which all men are required to conform themselves, unbeliever or believer, without discrimination.
Ruth also agreed with that: “God's complete nature is NOT exclusively defined by the 10 Commandments, but the laws express some of His nature, and that does not change.”
Good, you both recognise that the Ten Commandments (“Moral Law”) do not define God’s nature completely. That is important. Nevertheless it is commonly claimed by those who insist on the law being a rule of life for the believer that “the moral law is a transcript of the divine nature”, that “the eternal moral law is the express image of God’s person”. I have read both of these statements by Reformed writers which both imply that the Ten Commandments define God’s divine nature completely. I’m glad you disagree as that isn’t true and there is no scriptural backing for it. In fact the last quote is a corruption of Heb 1:3, putting ‘moral law’ in the place of Christ.
You are right that men ought to conform themselves to the Ten Commandments. They don’t because of sin, and therefore the law exposes their sin and proves them guilty before God. But what of those who lived before the law was given at Sinai, or those Gentiles who never heard it? Well these are judged for their sins, not against the Ten Commandments as such, but according to the light they have regarding the righteousness of God. This light they have from nature and from their own conscience (Rom 2:16). Where did they get a knowledge of good and evil in their conscience? Well, think of what Adam ate in the garden.
What of those who knew the law? Is it just the law which condemns their sin? Well, the law certainly does condemn them, but the extent of their sin goes beyond that – it is sin against the very righteous nature of God. They too have the same knowledge of good and evil from nature and their conscience as the Gentiles without law do, but they also have the law plainly stated, so are completely without excuse.
What man needs in order to dwell in the presence of God eternally is a righteousness, a nature, which is conformable to God’s. Nothing less will do. The law never promised that. The law was given as a rule of righteousness for man in this present world. It commanded ‘do this and live’, but that life was never eternal life which was promised, but simply ongoing life in this world for those who kept it fully. Otherwise death.
So you see even if the law was kept perfectly, in ever way, continually, it would only give man life in this world. It never promises eternal life, or the bringing in of a righteous nature which is equal to God’s. The law was given to prove to the man under it that he is a sinner. It was ‘added because of transgressions’ Galatians 3. Life could never come from the law. (Gal 3:21)
No, eternal life, can only be received through Christ, because Christ IS eternal life. This is what the Gospel brings in which also reveals the righteousness of God – that righteousness which is higher than the law in that it is a revelation in Christ of the very nature of God. It is that righteousness which the believer needs.
Now, mankind is ultimately judged according to, not just the law (which he is judged against), but the righteousness of God. That is the righteousness he needs to enter the kingdom of heaven.
It is that righteousness which is eternal, which is why I said in a previous post that the term ‘moral law’ shouldn’t be used to refer to the eternal righteousness against which man is judged (outside of the law, eg. Those before Sinai), because it confuses it with simply being the Ten Commandments. Yet what they are judged against is more than just the Ten Commandments – it is the very righteousness of God. I wasn’t simply complaining about an extra-Biblical term (“moral law”) but the fact that that term describes something wrongly – it tries to connect the eternal righteousness of God, with the Ten Commandments given at Sinai which are not the full revelation of that righteousness.
This righteousness of God is only fully revealed in the Gospel (not in the law) which is why Romans 1:16-17 says:
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.”
Quote
Second, this does not address the issue before us; i.e., Is the moral law which does display that moral character of God and to which all men are to perfectly conformed applicable to believers? or are believers to conform themselves to something other than the moral character of God?
Yes, but those previous points are essential groundwork to understanding the standard of righteousness by which all men are judged (including those who never heard the law) which is higher than the requirements of the law, and a knowledge of which is helpful to the right understanding of whether or not the law is a sufficient rule of righteousness for the believer.
A fuller answer to the question you pose here will have to wait until another post, but in brief, no, the believer is no longer under the law. The law condemned him and crucified him at the cross in Christ. His flesh is reckoned dead. In respect of the law (that given at Sinai) he had been cursed by it and its penalty has been exacted upon him – it pronounced death, and he died. The law has no more to say to a dead man. He is delivered from it by the body of Christ and is risen again in Christ the other side of death, delivered from the law. See Romans 7. See also Galatians 2:20.
BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN THAT THE BELIEVER IS FREE FROM RIGHTEOUSNESS. That is the point. He is risen with Christ, and walks in the Spirit. He is a new creation, united to Christ. He has a new nature which is righteous like Christ is righteous. He is a partaker of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) . He has that righteousness as revealed in the Gospel, and in which he walks (see Romans 8).
Quote
Since Christ's righteousness is His perfectly keeping of the moral law of God, is there something greater than Christ's righteousness which believers are to pattern themselves after? I keep seeing you wanting to bifurcate the righteousness of Christ and God's righteousness. Can you show THIS from Scripture?
In His Grace,
Well, this is what I have been touching on. Let’s continue a bit.
You assert that Christ's righteousness is His perfectly keeping of the moral law of God. But it isn’t limited to that. There is no scriptural backing for stating that that is all it is. Certainly Christ did fulfil the law of God in every way. But His keeping the law didn’t ‘produce’ His righteousness as though He didn’t have any to start with, did it? It was simply a result of, an outworking, of that righteousness which He had from the time He was born. Christ had and has a divine nature, a perfect righteousness, the righteousness of God. Because of that He was sinless and as a man could do nothing else than to keep the law perfectly.
But nowhere in scripture does it tell us that Christ’s life under the law was that which wrought His righteousness. He was righteous to begin with. Certainly His righteousness was shown forth by His life and His lawkeeping, but His righteousness existed apart from that and was more than that. In fact every passage which deals with justification and the righteousness which is imputed to believers refers not to the ‘righteousness of Christ’ but the ‘righteousness of God’. Why? To emphasise that the righteousness we have imputed to us was not merely Christ’s as a man (and thus unique to Him, but not shared by Father or Spirit), but is the very righteousness of God, that righteousness which is equal to God’s nature.
I don’t bifurcate the righteousness of Christ and God's righteousness, because they are one and the same. But I do bifurcate the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of God, because the righteousness of God is above and beyond it. Christ had the righteousness of God and thus as a man fulfilled the righteousness of the law. But His righteousness is higher than that. It is God’s and it isn’t revealed in the law but in the Gospel, in Christ.
So can I show that from scripture? Absolutely. It’s all over the place. Romans 10 contrasts the righteousness in the law of Moses with the righteousness of faith. Romans 1:17, 3:21, 2 Corinthians 5:21, etc. all refer to the righteousness of God. Philippians 3:9 contrasts the righteousness of the law with the righteousness of God.
The righteousness of God which is revealed in the Gospel, is without law (Romans 3:21), is revealed on a principle apart from law, and it transcends the righteousness of the law. This can be seen in many passages of scripture which contrast the New and Old Covenant. Take a look at Hebrews 8 for example, or 2 Corinthians 3. In the latter passage the law engraved in stones (ie. the Ten Commandments) is referred to as the ‘ministration of death’ and the ‘ministration of condemnation’, as contrasted with the ‘ministration of the spirit’ which is more glorious and the ‘ministration of righteousness’ 2 Cor 3:9.
The believer is not to put himself back under the law from which he has been delivered (Rom 7) and to which he is dead being married to another, even Christ, but is to walk in the Spirit. He is a new creature, old things are passed away (2 Corinthians 5:7). He has the righteousness of God imputed to Him, and it is that standard of righteousness in which he walks. This righteousness is only revealed in the Gospel (not fully in the law, the glory of which is exceeded by the Gospel, the ministration of righteousness), is revealed in the person of Jesus Christ and is received by faith. In terms of ‘objective’ expression it is described in the whole word of God, not just the Decalogue, especially in the words from the lips of Jesus, but the believer doesn’t walk under a ‘law’ principle serving in the oldness of the letter, but walks in newness of the spirit. The walk of the believer in righteousness is on an altogether different principle, it is in the Spirit, by faith, looking unto Jesus, who is our life - eternal life.
That’s the Gospel, and righteousness is at the heart of it. It is the revelation of the righteousness of God in the Gospel of Christ which makes it the power of God unto salvation. That righteousness was veiled in the Old Covenant, it wasn’t fully revealed, but it is fully revealed in Christ, in the Gospel.
Not being under the law (but under grace) doesn’t mean that the believer is free to sin, or even wants to. He doesn’t want to. He doesn’t want to break the law. But he isn’t under law and he doesn’t fulfil it by trying to live according to it. The law is fulfilled by His walking in the Spirit, looking unto Christ by faith, being steeped in the word of God, having a hunger and thirst after righteousness, that righteousness which is of God, by faith, found in the Gospel of Christ. Freedom from law doesn’t lead to sin (“Shall we sin that grace may abound? God Forbid!”), but leads to righteous conduct in the believer, and is THE ONLY WAY in which that can be done. Why? Because the law, taking occasion by sin which is in the flesh, fuels that sin and causes men to fall under the power of sin – believer or unbeliever. Law, rather than helping man to live righteously does just the opposite. But being lawfully delivered from the law, being under grace, walking in the Spirit by faith, united to Christ the believer actually does fulfil the righteous requirements of the law (not fully because the flesh remains, sin remains, but nevertheless as the overall tenor of his life).
