III. To what extent has Christ abrogated the law and to what extent is it still in force?

The ordinary and correct answer to this Question is, that the ceremonial and judicial law, as given by Moses, has been abrogated in as far as it relates to obedience; and that the moral law has also been abrogated as it respects the curse, but not as it respects obedience. That the ceremonial and judicial laws have been so abrogated by the coming of Christ, that no longer bind any to obedience, and that they have not the appearance and force of laws in respect to the present time, is proven,

1. From the fact that the prophets even declared and foretold this abrogation in the Old Testament. “Christ shall confirm the covenant with many for one week, and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.” “Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedek. (Dan. 9:27. Ps. 110:4.)

2. Christ and his Apostles, in different places in the New Testament, expressly assert this abrogation. (See Acts 7:8. Heb. 7:1118; 8:813.) Instead of adducing a number of testimonies in confirmation of this point, we shall merely cite the decree passed by the Apostles when assembled in Jerusalem: “For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burden, than these necessary things,” &c. (Acts 15:28, 29.)

3. When certain causes are once changed, the laws which are based upon these causes are also changed. One cause now of the ceremonial and judicial law was that the form of worship and civil polity which existed among the Jews, from whom the Messiah was to be born, might distinguish them from all other nations until the Messiah would come. Another cause was that they might be types of the Messiah and of his benefits. These causes now since the coming of the Messiah, have been done away with: for the Apostle declares that the middle wall of partition between the Jews and other nations has been broken down: “He is our Peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us,” “For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. (Eph. 2:14. Gal. 6:15.) It is also everywhere taught in the New Testament Scriptures that the rites and ceremonies of the old dispensation have been fulfilled in Christ. “The Holy Ghost, this signifying that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while the first tabernacle was yet standing.” “The law and the prophets were until John.” “Let no man judge you in meat or in drink,” &c. (Heb. 9:8. Luke 10:16. Col. 2:16?)

The Jews are wont to bring forward the following objections against the abrogation of the law:
1. The Mosaic ritual and the Jewish kingdom were to last forever; the former according to the command, the latter according to the promise of God. Circumcision is an everlasting covenant. The Passover was to be observed for an ordinance forever. This is my rest forever. The sabbath is a perpetual covenant. Thy throne shall be established forever. (Gen. 17:13. Ex. 12:24. Ps. 132:14. Ex.31:16. 2 Sam. 7:16.) Therefore the form of religion and civil polity instituted by Moses, has not been abrogated by Christ. Ans. The chain of reasoning in this syllogism is incorrect, for it proceeds from that which is declared to be true in a certain respect, to that which is absolutely true. The major proposition speaks of an absolute perpetuity; whilst the minor speaks of a perpetuity that is limited, inasmuch as an unlimited continuance of the Jewish rites and kingdom is not promised in the above references, but one that was merely to continue until the coming of the Messiah who was to be heard after Moses. For the particle Holam signifies, everywhere in the Scriptures, not eternity, but the continuance of along, though definite period of time. Thus it is said in Ex. 26:6, “And he shall serve him forever,” meaning until the year of jubilee, as we may easily prove, by a comparison of this declaration with the law respecting the jubilee, as recorded in Lev. 25:40. Again: We may also grant what is affirmed in the minor proposition, that an absolute perpetuity is promised; but this is a continuance, not of the types and shadows, but only of the things signified thereby, which are spiritual, the truth of which will continue forever in the church, even though the types and signs them selves be abolished by Christ. In this respect the signification of circumcision remains in force even to this day: so there is also a perpetual sabbath in the church, and it shall be perpetual in everlasting life: so also the kingdom of David is established forever in the throne of Christ.

Obj. 2, The worship which Ezekiel describes, from the fortieth chapter to the end of his prophecy, has respect to the kingdom of the Messiah, and is to be retained in it. But that worship is merely typical and ceremonial. Therefore a typical and ceremonial worship is to be retained in the kingdom of the Messiah; from which we may infer that the Jewish religion and polity was not to be done away with, but restored by the Messiah.

Ans. The major of this syllogism, if understood absolutely, is not true; because whilst the prophet speaks of the kingdom of the Messiah, he does not prophesy concerning this alone: for he at the same time speaks of the restitution of the ceremonial worship in Judea, after their return from Babylon, and foretells that it would continue until the Messiah would come. We also deny the minor proposition; for the prophet, under the description of types, did not only promise the restoration of Jewish types, but he more particularly foretold and promised the spiritual condition and glory of the church under the reign of the Messiah, which should be commenced in this life, and perfected in the life to come; which may be proven by the following considerations:

1. The history of Ezra teaches that this restoration would not take place before the coming of Christ; neither will the other prophecies which are contained in the Old Testament, respecting the coming and reign of the Messiah in this world, allow us to believe that there will ever, even after the manifestation of the Son of God in the flesh, be such a glorious state and condition of the church on earth as the Jews dream of. Hence this restoration of Jerusalem, or the church, must be understood spiritually, or else we shall be compelled to admit, what is absurd, that this prophecy never has been, nor will be fulfilled.

2. The promise, in which the prophet declares that neither the house of Israel, nor their kings, would any more defile the holy name of God, must necessarily be understood in a spiritual sense, as referring to the perfection of the life to come. (Ex. 43:7.) And it is by no means uncommon for the prophets to connect the commencement of the reign of Christ with the perfect establishment of it.

3. The waters issuing out of the temple can not be understood of elementary water, but shadow forth and signify the gifts of the Holy Spirit, which were to be poured out in large measures in the kingdom of Christ. (Eph. 47:1.)

4. Lastly, we have for our interpreter the Apostle John, who, in the twenty-first and second chapters of the book of Revelation, describes the spiritual and heavenly Jerusalem, by which is meant the glorified church of the New Testament, in words taken, as it were, from the description given by the prophet Ezekiel. This prophecy, therefore, affords no proof whatever in favor of the observance of Jewish rites in the kingdom of Christ.

Obj. 3. The best and most wholesome form of government is always to be retained. The form of government established among the Jews was the best and most wholesome, for the reason that it was instituted by God. Therefore it is to be retained.

Ans. There is here a fallacy in taking that to be absolutely true, which is true only in a certain respect. The form of government established among the Jews was the best, not absolutely, but only for that time, that country and nation: for there were many things in it adapted to the state and condition of that nation, country, time, and ceremonial worship, the observance of which would now neither be proper nor profitable, because the causes on account of which those laws were given to the Jews are now changed or removed; as giving a writing or bill of divorcement, marrying the widow of one’s kindred, &c. God did not, for this reason, institute this form of government that all nations and ages might be bound by it; but only that his own people might, by this discipline, be separated for a time from the surrounding nations. If any one should object and say, that if Christians are permitted to observe and conform to the laws of other nations, such as the Greeks or Romans, &c., much more ought we to observe those which were given by Moses, the servant of God; we readily grant the argument, if this observance is rendered without attaching to it the idea of necessity; or if these laws are observed, not because Moses commanded and enjoined them upon the Jewish nation, but because there are good reasons why we should now comply with them; and if these reasons should be changed, to retain the liberty of changing these enactments by public authority. We have thus far spoken merely of the abrogation of the ceremonial and judicial law. We must now proceed to speak of the moral law. The moral law has, as it respects one part, been abrogated by Christ; and as it respects another, it has not. It has been abrogated, as it respects the faithful, in two ways:

1. The curse of the law has been removed as it respects those who are justified by faith in Christ, in consequence of having his merits imputed unto them; or it may be said that the law has been abrogated as touching justification, because judgment is not pronounced in reference to us according to the law, but according to the gospel. The sentence of the law would condemn and give us over to destruction. Its dreadful language is, “In thy sight shall no man living be justified.” (Ps. 143:2.) The sentence of the gospel is different: its language is, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.” (John 3:36.) This abrogation of the law is the first and principal part of Christian liberty, of which it is said, “There is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus.” “Ye are not under the law, but under grace.” (Rom. 8:1; 6:14.)

2. The law has been abrogated in reference to Christians, as it respects constraint. The law no longer forces and wrests obedience as a tyrant, or as a master compels a worthless servant to render obedience to his behests; because Christ commences in us by his Spirit a free and cheerful obedience, so that we willingly comply with whatever the law requires from us. The Apostle says, concerning this part of Christian liberty: “Sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” (Rom. 6:14.) What this liberty is, the Apostle explains in the seventh chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. “The law is not made for a righteous man; but for the lawless and disobedient,” &c. “Against such, there is no law.” (1 Tim. 1:9. Gal. 5:23.)

Obj. The law and the prophets were until John. (Matt. 11:13.) Hence if the law was then first abrogated, as it respects condemnation, when Christ appeared in the flesh, it follows that the faithful who lived before the coming of Christ must have been under condemnation.

Ans. The law was abrogated, as touching condemnation, no less to the faithful under the Old Testament, than to those who live under the New Testament: to the former as to efficacy and power; to the latter as to fulfillment and manifestation.

But the moral law, or Decalogue, has not been abrogated in as far as obedience to it is concerned. God continually, no less now than formerly, requires both the regenerate and the unregenerate to render obedience to Ms law. This may be proven:

1. From the end for which Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law. This was that he might make us, who were delivered from sin and the curse of the law, the temples of God; and not that we should persist in sin, and hatred to God.

2. We are bound to render obedience and gratitude to God in proportion to the number and greatness of the benefits which he confers upon us. But those who are united to Christ by faith, receive from the hands of God more and greater benefits than all others: for they do not merely enjoy, in common with others, the benefit of creation and preservation, but enjoy in addition to this the grace of regeneration and justification. Therefore we are more strongly bound to render obedience to the divine law than others, and that more after our regeneration and justification than before.

3. From the testimony of Scripture: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” (Matt. 5:17.)

This is spoken, indeed, of the whole law, but with a special reference to the moral law, which Christ has fulfilled in four respects:

1. By his own righteousness and conformity with the law. It behooved him to be perfectly righteous in himself, and to be conformable to the law according to each nature, that he might make satisfaction for us, as it is said: “For such an High Priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners,” &c. (Heb. 7:26.)

2. By enduring a punishment sufficient for our sins: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.” (Rom. 8:3.)

3. Christ fulfills the law in us by his Spirit, by whom he renews us in the image of God. “Our old man is crucified with Christ, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” “If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies, by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” (Rom. 6:6; 8:11.)

4. Christ fulfilled the law by teaching it and restoring its true meaning and sense, which he did by freeing it from the corruptions and glosses of the Pharisees, as appears from his sermon on the mount, and from other portions of his teachings. If Christ, therefore, teaches and restores in us obedience to the law, he does not abolish the law in respect to obedience. Paul teaches the same thing when he asks: “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law.” (Rom. 3:31.)

The law now is established by faith in three ways:

1. By confessing and approving the sentence which it passes in reference to ourselves, that we do not render the obedience which is due from us to the law, and are, therefore, deserving of eternal condemnation. We also confess the same thing by seeking righteousness without ourselves in Christ.

2. By satisfaction. By faith we apply unto ourselves the satisfaction of Christ, which is equivalent to everlasting punishment, which the law requires from us in case we do not render a full and perfect obedience to its claims. It is by means of this satisfaction now that we are justified, not indeed by the law, nor yet contrary to the law, but with the law, which Christ has fully satisfied by his perfect obedience in our room and stead.

3. By new obedience. This obedience is commenced in us in this life by the Spirit of Christ, and will be perfected in the life to come. The same thing may be expressed more briefly, thus: The law is established by faith, both because the doc trine concerning the righteousness which is by faith, teaches that we are righteous, not in ourselves, and that we cannot be justified unless the perfect satisfaction which the law requires intervene, and also because the restoration of obedience to the law in us is brought about by faith. The sum of what we have now said, touching the abrogation of the law is this: That the ceremonial and judicial laws instituted by Moses have been entirely abolished and done away with by the coming of Christ, as far as it relates to obligation and obedience on our part. The moral law, however, has not been abolished as it respects obedience, but only as it respects the curse, justification and constraint.

The objections of the Antinomians, Libertines, and others of a similar cast, who contend that the moral law has no respect to Christians, and that it ought not to be taught in the church of Christ, will be noticed when we come to the exposition of the 115th Question of the Catechism where we shall speak of the use of the law.