On the Discontinuity Between Law and Grace
© Scott David Foutz

The entire issue of whether of not there exists continuity between the Mosaic and New Covenants is often spoken of in terms of the relation of Law to Grace. Questions raised in this discussion include what the mosaic law meant to Old Testament Israel and what it means to contemporary Christians. These questions are significant, for their solutions impact the manner in which one approaches both New and Old Testaments as a whole from the perspective of a Christian within the New Covenant. Does the Mosaic Law play a part in the contemporary Christian's life? If so, to what degree? If not, why? This brief paper will attempt to answer these questions with some degree of adequacy.

This paper begins with a brief overview of the role mosaic law played within the old covenant. Then New Testament uses and understanding of the term "law" (nomos) will be examined. Finally, a summary of the general dispensational understanding of the topic will be presented.

The Law in the Old Testament

A common misunderstanding of those observing the dispensational position on the role of the mosaic law in the old covenant assumes that dispensationalism allows for a soteriological function of the mosaic law. In other words, by proposing that a discontinuity exists between the new covenant, which offers salvation by faith in Jesus Christ, and the old covenant founded upon mosaic law, some hastily conclude that dispensationalists therefore view the mosaic law as the means of securing Old Testament saints' salvation. This, however, is a misrepresentation of the dispensational perspective.

A degree of continuity exists between the old and new covenants in that both offer salvation through faith in God's grace. This can easily be demonstrated by examining in what manner Abraham was deemed righteous in God's eyes. Genesis 15:6 states that Abraham was credited with righteousness through his belief in the promise of God. This righteousness is imputed before any action is taken by Abraham, apart from simple trust. In a similar manner, Israel is given the mosaic law subsequent to being redeemed by God. Exodus 15:13 makes explicit mention of Israel's being a redeemed people prior to their reception of the mosaic law. Rather, the law is given in part as a sign that indeed Israel possessed special relation with God.

It is seen therefore, that the mosaic law is not the means implemented by God whereby Old Testament saints were saved. All men, in every age were, are and will be saved by faith in the grace of God. What role then, did the mosaic law play within the old covenant? One answer to this question is found in what God Himself states regarding the rewards of obedience and punishments of disobedience. Deuteronomy 28 presents Israel with a series of promises and warnings regarding their covenantal relation with God. The whole of these promises and curses pertain to Israel's physical welfare and political autonomy. In other words, the idea of the land is predominant throughout God's promises. Obedience to the mosaic law will secure for Israel lives filled with abundance (vv. 3-6), political peace (v. 7), and a global demonstration of Israel's unique relation to God (v. 10). Disobedience or neglect of the mosaic law would likewise involve the land, this time to Israel's disadvantage. Agricultural destitution (vv. 16-19), failure in all enterprises (v. 20), famine, disease and plagues (vv. 21-22) and political subjugation (vv 25ff) will all result if Israel neglects her covenantal responsibilities.

These passages reveal that the mosaic law acted as the standard by which Israel was to maintain herself as the covenant people. This covenantal status offered great national prosperity and peace if held in respect and fidelity. But the covenant also demanded that Israel be held accountable for her place in God's favor. The rewards of covenant status could easily be withdrawn if Israel did not obey the demands of the law.

Another manner in which the mosaic law functioned within the old covenant was to provide Israel with the basis from which God allowed Israel to approach Him. By adherence to the law, Israel was able to remain in fellowship with her holy and righteous God. The law also functioned as a facilitator of sanctification of the covenant people. God had provided His chosen people with a law which reflected His nature and moral demands. By fulfilling these demands with a sincere heart, Israel would grow in likeness to her God. The fact that the law was not an absolute means of securing fellowship with God and sanctification is seen in the fact that the sacrifices required were of temporary effect, and needed to be repeated regularly. This fact testified to the temporality of the law as a means of absolutely securing right standing before God. And yet, temporal though it was, the mosaic law was a priceless gift of God to Israel as a sign of her covenantal relation and beloved position of favor in the eyes of God. In this manner also, the law functioned as a testimony to the grace and loving-kindness of God to His people.

In summary, then, we may say that within the old covenant, the mosaic law was not intended by God to serve a soteriological function, but rather was a sanctifying element of the covenant relationship already granted Israel through the grace of God, in accordance with His grace promised to their father Abraham. The law did, however, play significant roles within the old covenant. It served as a standard whereby Israel was set apart as a visible covenant community. This privileged community would receive material blessings and peace as a result of its favored status, but also faced the responsibility of their covenant relation. The law also served as a facilitator of sanctification and right fellowship with God, in that the law reflected the moral demands of God. And lastly, the law served as a testimony to the grace and love of God toward His chosen and unique people.

The Law in the New Testament

Statements in the New Testament regarding the "law" have provided the fuel for most of the debates revolving around the issue of continuity or discontinuity between Law and Grace. Some references to law are made in the Gospels by our Lord (Matt. 5:17-19; Mark 7:1-23). James also refers to the law in his epistle (2:8-10). But by far, the majority of the references belong to Paul, and are dispersed throughout many of his epistles. This length of this paper does not allow for a thorough investigation of these references, not even of the major references. Therefore, a few of the clearer examples will be examined, along with a brief discussion of the possible range of intended definitions of the term "nomos", and how this will or will not allow for apparently contradictory statements by Paul regarding the value of the law in the believer's life.

Based upon Paul's writings, he saw in the law two basic purposes: to expose sin, and to act as a tutor until the arrival of Christ. On the first purpose, that of exposing sin, Strickland writes, "Paul's discussion of the law's relationship to sin may be grouped under three headings: (1) law as revealing the reality of sin (Rom. 3:20); (2) law as demonstrating the sinfulness of sin (7:7); and (3) law as revealing of the guilt associated with sin (3:19; Gal. 3:22; Col. 2:14)." (241) According to Paul, the law served as the microscope under which the individual was forced to scrutinize himself. This scrutinization led not only to the realization that imperfections existed, but that these imperfections were damaging to the individual in relation to God, in that he was held ultimately responsible for their presence. These realizations would ideally drive the individual to seek the grace and forgiveness of God and motivate him toward obedience. The law, therefore, rather than providing a means of achieving freedom from sin's guilt, acted instead to increase the individual's awareness of sin's presence and effect, resulting in the law's condemnation of that individual. This fact becomes the basis of Paul's dichotomy, not between sin and grace, but between law and grace.

Galatians 3:23-25 states that the law acted as a tutor until the arrival of Christ. The function that Paul mentions here is the same as that mentioned above under the discussion on the law in the old covenant. Israel required some form of guidance regarding life within the covenant relationship. The law, as we have seen, provided Israel with a standard of life in accordance with God's moral demands, served as a facilitator of sanctification, provided a testimony to God's love for His covenant people, and it implied concrete blessings and punishments. Paul clearly states that now that Christ has come, the former tutor is no longer required. Christ becomes for the believer the standard, hope of renewal, affirmation and blessing. For this reason Paul claims, "Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law." (3:25)

Based upon Paul's understanding of the Law, that of exposer of sin and tutor, we are able to understand how he is able to make various statements which at first glance appear contradictory. One the one hand, Paul writes that "the law is holy, and the commandment is holy righteous and good," (Rom. 7:12), that the "law is spiritual" (7:14), and that in his inner being he "delights in God's law" (7:22). And to Timothy Paul writes that the law is good if it is used properly (1 Tim. 1:8). These are accurate and appropriate descriptions of the law as that guide or tutor which God provided Israel as a means of understanding His holiness and righteousness, and whereby they were instructed in right living and sanctification. The mosaic law as a temporal manifestation of the moral law of God can be none other than holy, good and righteous. And it is in this understanding that Paul makes such references to the law.

Yet elsewhere, Paul clearly makes a strong distinction between the believer's life under the grace of God through Jesus Christ, and life under the condemnation of the law. Romans 6:14-15 clearly contrasts law and grace, stating that the Roman believers are under grace, not slaves to sin as they were when they were under the law. In Romans 10:4, Paul writes that, "Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes." Here Paul clearly stresses the completion of the law in Christ, whereby we who were once condemned under the law are now able to be made righteous through Christ. And in 2 Corinthians 3:3, 6-18, Paul writes about the believer's freedom from the law. In this passage, Paul stresses that the old covenant "kills", whereas the Spirit of the new covenant "gives life" (v. 6). These and other passages clearly reveal that Paul considers law as seperate from grace, and that the latter alone and the freedom it provides is to be the ground of the Christian life.

These passages make sense when we consider Paul's understanding of the law as that which exposes sin to the individual. On the one hand, Paul believes that this function is still necessary, but only toward those who are unregenerate (1 Tim. 1:8-10). But for the believer, we are delivered by the blood of Christ from the condemnation which the law naturally brings to the lives of fallen humanity. It is not the law itself which is bad (Rom 7:7). Rather, we are made free from its function through Christ who has fulfilled and completed it for us (10:4).

This explanation of the seeming duality of Paul's treatment of the law is not shared, however, by those who propose continuity between law and grace. Continuity arguments see Paul's duality as reflecting a duality of (if not more) intended meanings for the one term "nomos". Although a survey of Paul's use of this term does reveal that he uses it in different ways (e.g., Torah, Pentateuch and Mosaic law), and that the great majority of the references involve the meaning of mosaic law (Strickland, 246), continuity proponents do not advance their argument on the basis of these common definitions. Instead, the most common argument of continuity proponents is in favor of seeing some references involving "nomos" as refering to the pharasaic abuse and misunderstanding of the mosaic law. In other words, where Paul contrasts law and grace, he is not contrasting grace and the mosaic law per se, but rather he is contrasting righteousness through obedience in faith and righteousness attempted through mere works. If the term "nomos" in these crucial passages were able to sustain such definitions, then there would be no need to seek a radical break or discontinuity between the role of the mosaic law in the old covenant and in the new covenant. (Most scholars in favor of continuity would, however, qualify to what degree the mosaic law is continuous into the new covenant. There point is, however, that continuity exists.)

In response to this, it may be pointed out that in several passages such attempts require forcing this definition into contexts which show no evidence of such an intention on the author's part. For example, in Galatians 3:10-12, some scholars proposing continuity see here a reference to legalism as opposed to a simple reference to the mosaic law. But such a reading seems to force upon the passage an unintended terminology, which is not supported by the context.

Conclusion

This paper has in brief fashion sought to present in some degree of adequacy the dispensational position on the discontinuity between the mosaic law and grace. We have seen that the mosaic law within the old covenant served as a facilitator of sanctification and not of justification, in that it guided Israel as a graciously chosen people into right living and right understanding of God's moral demands. It also defined and made real in the lives of individuals the significance and guilt of sin. Paul refers to both of these functions of the law in his epistles, allowing him to recognize the holiness of the law, while at the same time teaching that believers who are cleansed by the sacrifice of Christ are set free from the condemning nature of the law. For this reason, the law as guide (tutor) and exposer of sin ceases to contribute to the Christian life. To the unregenerate, the law may still function as it exposes sin in the individual and brings conviction of guilt. In this way, the unregenerate may be driven to seek forgiveness from Christ, whereby that individual would then be set free from the condemnation which the law created.

For the believer, we are given a new law, namely, the law of Christ, which is epitomized by love for God and our neighbor. The moral content of the law of Christ is based upon an accurate reflection of the moral nature and demands of God upon His people. But whereas the mosaic law stemmed from a unique covenant between God and Israel, it ceased when that covenant ceased (Jeremiah 31:32). The new covenant (31:31) brings with it a new manifestation of the same moral law of God. And whereas the mosaic law centered on the sacrificial system, the new law (the law of Christ) centers on love, since Christ has been sacrificed once and for all. In this way, dispensationalists see a continuity of the moral law of God throughout all ages (including pre-mosaic), but sees evidence of a discontinuity between the temporal manifestations of that moral law, namely, between the mosaic law and the law of Christ.