“Five Views on Law and Gospel” is part of Counterpoints series produced by Zondervan. The purpose of the series is to present differing viewpoints on various biblical and theological topics, and then a response to each viewpoint presented. The thrust of the current book, as expressed by General editor Stanley N. Gundry, is to present the “major alternatives regarding the Mosaic Law, its relationship to the Gospel, and the role it plays in personal sanctification as well as in ethical systems” (9). Only a brief overview of each contributor’s stance will be noted in this review; responses by the additional contributors will be omitted and left for the reader of the book to explore.

William A. VanGemeren
“The Law is the Perfection of Righteousness in Jesus Christ: A Reformed Perspective”

VanGemeren understands that the Mosaic Law was intended to prepare the people for the coming of the Messiah, and was therefore never intended to be an end in itself. The Mosaic Covenant then is both an administration of grace (in that the Lord dealt graciously with his people) and an administration of law (in that individuals and tribes were bound together by detailed regulations). Therefore, the Law was never intended to be the means of salvation, but functioned as an instructional base to the people for promoting a living faith in God. As far as the New Covenant is concerned, it remains true that those wanting to be like God must reflect the nature of God by practicing righteousness, love, compassion, justice, and patience.
Under both covenants God has maintained one standard for ethics in regard to holiness and wholeness of life. So, the Spirit does not replace the law in the eschatological age of the new covenant, but transforms people to live by a higher ethical standard that remains constant across the Biblical witness.

Greg L. Bahnsen
“The Theonomic Reformed Approach to Law and Gospel”

Bahnsen maintains that contrary to what some teach today, there is no question that the moral precepts presented in the law have propriety and validity that is applicable to everyone. The moral laws of God were never restricted to the Jewish nation. Therefore, two premises are presented about the law of God that should be understood to be faithful to the Scriptural witness: the law of God is good in what it demands, and that the law of God is universal in its character and application. The truthfulness and validity of the moral codes are limited to Old Testament (OT) Israel. While the New Testament (NT) condemns any legalistic use of God’s law to establish personal justification, and rejoices that the work of Christ surpasses the legal foreshadowing and rituals of the old covenant, the authors of the NT are never seen to be rejecting or criticizing the moral demands of the OT law. The Scriptures do teach that God has the ability to change his commands, but we should only countenance such changes to the commands of God when God himself teaches a particular change is required.

Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.
“The Law as God’s Gracious Guidance for the Promotion of Holiness”

Kaiser believes that the presentation of the Law’s relationship to the Gospel of grace is too absolute, antithetical, and one-sided when considered in contrast to a great number of Pauline passages. The root of all our problems in understanding the relationship between the OT and NT – as perceived by Kaiser – may be traced in large measure to our rendering of the Hebrew word tora by the Greek word nomos and then subsequently the English word law. The idea expressed by the word tora is more than simply legal hoops or hurdles, there is the deeper meaning that should be understood as directional teaching or guidance for life. To Kaiser, the idea as presented by some Christians that if one law is obeyed then all 613 laws must be kept, confuse the later Jewish traditional construct of the law with the Mosaic Torah.
The point being, since God’s character will never change, the moral law which comes from that character should also be considered as absolute and abiding as the nature of God himself. Therefore, it is the moral law of God as recounted in the Decalogue and the Holiness Code of Leviticus that must act as the absolute norms from which all other laws and commands of God must be interpreted.

Wayne G. Strickland
“The Inauguration of the Law of Christ with the Gospel of Christ: A Dispensational View”

Strickland presents an understanding of the relationship between the law and the gospel from the view of a dispensational model, but he stresses not the dispensational model. The early part of his essay consists of a review of the presentation and purpose of the Old Law for the Israelites, which then flows into a discussion of the presentation of the Mosaic law by the NT authors; specifically, the view as presented by Paul.
The arguments for the cessation of the law are founded in the death and resurrection of Christ, which inaugurates a new work in which the old covenant is inoperative. A salient point which is presented by Strickland; “Just as there was no Mosaic law during the dispensation from Adam to Moses, so also there is a period following the Mosaic era in which the law is no longer the operative principle” (262). Among some of the passages noted supporting this view are Romans 6:14-15; 10:4; 2 Corinthians 3:3, 6-8; and Philippians 3:7-9. The basic point to be gleaned from these passages per Strickland is the affirmation by Paul that the law was temporary and subsequently invalidated by Christ who establishes righteousness independent of the Mosaic Law. The law is rightly understood to reveal the problem of sin and the necessity of grace, but the law as a system of redemption is no longer binding on the Church. Rather, as Strickland stresses, the law prefigures the redemption which is revealed in the person of Jesus Christ.

Douglas J. Moo
“The Law of Christ as the Fulfillment of the Law of Moses: A Modified Lutheran View”

Moo presents his discussion of the law of Christ as the fulfillment of the law of Moses which he labels, specifically, a modified Lutheran view. The Mosaic Law is seen as having two primary thrusts: as a guardian of Israel, and a means to reveal sin. Yet, these purposes were limited to the time before the coming of Christ, and Moo presents two specific points regarding the limited nature of the Mosaic Law. First, the very fact that the Mosaic law was presented as covenant law, meaning the covenant was only in force when both sides abided by the terms of the covenant. Second, the recreation of a people in the future is seen as an eschatological act that is the result wholly of grace. The new covenant is based not upon the Mosaic covenant, but on God’s inviolable promises to the patriarchs. Moo then reviews some of the pertinent biblical literature as presented by Jesus, Paul, Luke, and other writers that point toward something to come, not back to something that was.
As Moo make note, a Reformed theologian may argue that we are still bound to whatever in the Mosaic law which has not been specifically overturned in the NT, but Moo himself argues that Christians are only bound to that which is clearly repeated in the New Testament teaching. The authority of the law in the era of the new covenant is not the authority of law per se, but in the authority of the Old Testament’s prophetic witness.

Concluding remarks: The strength of a series of this type, which examines various biblical and theological topics from differing viewpoints, is the side-by-side comparison which highlights the finer points of each view. One is certainly indebted to Zondervan for the Counterpoints series – the scholarly effort each author brings to the discussion of their viewpoint, and the courteous manner in which the counterpoint is presented.

Quotes from the book:

“It is not only the doctrine of grace that must be jealously guarded against distortion by the works of law, but it is also the doctrine of law that must be preserved against the distortions of a spurious concept of grace” (43).

“Some laws defined the righteousness of God to be emulated by humans (thus being moral in function), while other laws defined the way of salvation for the unrighteous (thus being redemptive in function)” (103).

“The moral law of God took precedence over the civil and ceremonial laws in that it was based on the character of God. The civil and ceremonial laws functioned only as further illustrations of the moral law” (190).

(re: Matt. 23:23; SDC) “Christ was not suggesting that any of the laws were expendable to the Pharisees. Rather, he was challenging their teaching that they could keep the dictates of the law that were easier to follow but ignore its heart” (261).

“Finally, as many NT authors emphasize, the Christian should read the law as a witness to the fulfillment of God’s plan in Christ. Its authority therefore continues – I am no Marcionite. But its authority is not, in the era of the new covenant, the authority of “law” but the authority of a prophetic witness” (376). ( )

NO OF PAGES: 416 SUB CAT I: Law & Grace SUB CAT II: SUB CAT III: DESCRIPTION: Do the Law and the Gospel belong to two separate dispensations? Has the Gospel replaced the Law? What is the relevance of the Old Testament Law to our lives as Christians? Is there continuity between it and what Christ expects of us in the Gospel? It is no secret that Christians have differed widely on these questions. This book explores five major approaches to this important biblical topic that have developed in Protestant circles. Each of the five authors presents his particular perspective on the issue and responds to the other four. William A VanGemeren (professor of Old Testament and Semitic languages, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) presents a non-theonomic Reformed view of the use of the Law. Greg L. Bahnsen (resident scholar, Southern California Center for Christian Studies) argues for a theonomic Reformed approach. Walter C. Kaiser Jr. (distinguished professor of Old Testament, Gordon-Cornwell Theological Seminary) maintains that the weightier issues of the Law of Moses are binding on believers today. Wayne G. Strickland (professor of theology and co-chair, Bible and Theology department, Multnomah School of the Bible) advocates the dispensational view. Douglas J. Moo (chairman of New Testament studies and professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) proposes a modified Lutheran approach with a clear antithesis between the Law and the Gospel.NOTES: SUBTITLE: Greg L. Bahnsen, Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Douglas J. Moo, Wayne G. Strickland, Willem A. VanGemeren