Dr Greg Bahnsen - Normative Ethics: The Revelatory Word as Our Norm for Living (Part 9)

Salvation by grace alone is not contrary to an ethic of external rule. We've seen that thus far in the development of our thought, we have held that the basis for normative ethics must be the revealed will of God as it's found in general revelation and more especially in the explicit words of Scripture itself. Let's back up just a second here though, and take a look at what the foundation for the will of God is. The Bible tells us that in the ultimate sense God himself is the norm for Christian living. God himself is the norm for Christian living in one John. John tells us both in chapter one at verse five, as well as chapter four, verses eight and following that God is light. John in saying, this is giving us a reflection on the nature of God at the very basic level. Other statements about God to be found in Scripture similarly of categorical import would be God is love, God is Spirit, our God is a consuming fire. Here we are told God is light by his very nature. Categorically God is self communicative. God radiates something, and in particular that which God radiates is his moral character. God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. John says the light is being used quite obviously then as a moral metaphor. John tells us in 1 John 17 and 1 John 2:9 that to walk in the light is to walk obediently or to walk righteously. He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother is in the darkness. Even until now he that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is no occasion of stumbling in him. He isn't going to stumble in the darkness, because he is loving his brother. To walk in darkness is to walk in sin. 1 John 2:11 says, but he that hateth his brother is in the darkness, and walketh in the darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because but darkness has winded his eyes. So to walk in light is to walk obediently, whereas to walk in darkness is to walk in sin. Therefore, to say that God is light is to assert that God is a perfectly holy character which is worthy of our praise and imitation, simply to ascribe that perfection, that God is light and radiates his character to others. To ascribe that perfection to God is to say that he is the norm for our lives in the Bible. It's interesting how often light is given to us in order to reveal good and evil. Light specifically has that function. There are a number of passages that are mentioned, especially in your ethics syllabus on this matter, let's look at just one of them. John 3. Well, let's look at John 1:5 and following. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness apprehends it not. Later we are told this was the true light, even the light which lights every man coming into the world. Later, John tells us that men loved darkness, didn't want to come to the light because their deeds were evil. Over and over again, the Bible tells us that the light guides us and it reveals good and evil. It illumines our ethical situation. And since God is the light, quite clearly the ultimate ethical guide for us must be God himself. God's own character is the ultimate norm of right and wrong. And by his very nature, God establishes as well as displays, radiates as light what is normative for us. So our basic responsibility in this world is to imitate the light, to imitate God, to have his character govern our behavior and attitudes. Righteousness is often presented as the imitation of God's character in Scripture. Leviticus 11:44, you shall be holy even as I AM Holy. Matthew 5:48, you shall be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect, and so forth. The implication here is that the will of God expressed in his commandments ultimately coincides with the character of God. To obey the law is to reflect the very character of God, and to disobey the law is to mar the image of God within us. For the law is a picture of God's own character. So the specific acts that God calls upon us to do if we're going to be righteous often are imitations of his own acts. You think of the Sabbath commandment. We are to rest on the Sabbath day, even as God rested from his creative work on the Sabbath day. In the New Testament, we are to imitate Jesus Christ. We are to walk in the steps that he walked. More specifically, Christ is presented in the New Testament in John 1, 4 and John 3, 19, 8, 12 and 9, 5 and 1235 and 46 as the light of the world. And yet Christ tells us that that light is to be radiated through us. We are to reflect the light of the world. He says that we too are the light of the world in John the fifth chapter. And so the basic structure for Christian normative ethics is the imitation of the character of God. God is light. In him there is no darkness at all. God radiates his moral character, establishes what is right and wrong, and expects us to reflect that light. Imitating God must be very carefully distinguished, of course, from coveting the prerogatives of God as though we could erase the creator creature distinction. We could take to ourselves the prerogatives of God as law giver. To imitate God doesn't mean that we now will formulate a knowledge of good and evil for ourselves. Adam and Eve in the garden, of course made that initial mistake when they took to themselves the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. God wants us rather to imitate him through submission rather than through competition. We don't compete with his prerogatives. We submit to whatever his will is. At the most basic level we must say that whatever ethical duties God has laid upon us, he's laid upon us because they are intrinsically worthy of obedience. That what he reveals as his standards, he is revealed as intrinsically right and wrong, as reflecting his own light like character. Well now, how do we learn about the light of God? How do we know what it means to imitate God and our behavior? Well, we learn about the character of God and we find the norm therefore for our living in both general and special revelation. The Bible teaches us that certain norms are distinguishable from the facts of experience. That if we look around us, if I experience and observe the world, that God's norms can be discerned, we can discover through nature. Paul says what God requires of us, Romans 1 and Romans 2. And for that reason a situational approach to ethics leads you to a normative approach to ethics in biblical perspective. Moreover, in Romans 2:14 Paul tells us that people know from their own personal nature. They know from their own conscience what God requires of them. Self knowledge, a knowledge of yourself will entail a knowledge of God and his character. Existential self examination leads us to a normative perspective to the normative perspective of God's law. Well, if it's true that we can find God's will in nature around us and we can find God's will in the testimony of conscience within us. If God's will can be found in the situational and existential perspectives, what advantage is there then to having the revealed word of God? Interestingly, that is something of the question that Paul asked in Romans 3:1. After all, general revelation is sufficient. Paul says, what advantage then hath the Jew? Or what is the profit of circumcision? What advantage then hath the Jew? Those who have been given the oracles of God. Well, Paul's answer is that the Jews had a tremendous advantage just in the fact that God's revealed oracles, the Old Testament scripture, was given to them. This Old Testament scripture brought greater condemnation to Them in one sense, but still, still having the oracles of God was a great advantage. Why is that? Romans 3:3. For what if some were without faith? Shall their want of faith make of none effect the faithfulness of God? God is faithful. God was being faithful to his covenant and giving them a knowledge of Himself. You see, the Old Testament Scriptures were a more complete and a clearer transcript of God's will than anything that the Gentiles had access to. Even if they considered the laws revealed through nature and conscience. The Old Testament Scriptures were more complete and more clear than general revelation itself. The revelation given to the Gentiles was but a republication of the law that was specifically revealed, explicitly revealed, an inscribed form. For the Jews, the difference was the medium of communication. The Gentiles did not have norms that went beyond Scripture. You should understand it wasn't as though the Gentiles had more information and the Jews had a very limited understanding based on the Scriptures. As the cosmonomic philosophers seem to tell us when they say that norms are available in all the modal spirits. The Gentiles did not have norms which went beyond the Scriptures. For there is no good work for which we need to seek a norm outside of special revelation. That is one of the logical implications. I think of two Timothy 3, 16, 17, where Paul says, every Scripture is inspired of God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, in order that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work the Scripture will furnish us for every good work. There is nothing lacking in our understanding of value and good works after we have understood the Scriptures properly. The fullest transcript of God's revealed will that therefore is to be found in the Scriptures. Because Paul says it was a great advantage that the Jews had when they received the oracles of God. So God's will can be discerned in general revelation. But special revelation must be the basis for our study because it is the fullest and the clearest expression of God's will. General and special revelation give the same will of God. They don't conflict with one another. One doesn't say homosexuality is all right and the other says homosexuality is to be prohibited. They both have the same ethical perspective, but the medium of communication Scripture allows for a clearer and fuller understanding of what God wants us to do. And so we come then to the sub conclusion sub point that God's Word is our norm for ethics. God's Word is the norm for ethics. To say that God's Word is authoritative is Just to say that it is our norm in Christian living. Now. The Word of God comes to us in the first place through persons. God sent His Word, revealed His Word through individuals, through spoken and written languages. God revealed His Word through patriarchs, prophets and apostles, and through preachers. The words of these patriarchs, prophets and apostles sometimes come to us. However, as I speak of the Word of God in this course, I'm going to be thinking not so much of the spoken word of God and the preached word of God as I am going to be thinking of the written Word of God as it's inscribed in the Scriptures. And the reason for that is obvious enough that whatever the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and after them preachers say, it must be first of all consultable. We must have the scriptures of the patriarchal or apostolic revelations so that we know what they actually said instead of what word of mouth, distortion and speculation say. And we must be able to check the word of our preacher against an objective norm. Consequently, the Word of God that we'll be thinking of as the standard or norm of ethics will not so much be general revelation, nor will it be just the spoken word through apostles and preachers, but it will be the Word of God committed to writing in the Bible. God's Word is found in the Bible. The Bible is a covenant document authored by the Lord of the covenant Himself, and therefore stands as the supreme norm for life within the covenant. Those who spoke for God, the prophets of the Old Testament, claimed divine authority for what they said because they were speaking God's word. What the prophets said, God said. And the same holds true for the apostolic message. The apostles were legal representatives of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, so that what they said, he said, Jesus endorsed the message, the written message of the Old Testament, and He stands behind the apostolic Word of the New Testament. And therefore all of Scripture has the same covenantal authority in our lives. The Word of God is authoritative, and we have to understand that, as I've already made passing allusion, that the Word of God that comes to us in the Scripture is unified with all other forms of revelation. It is the same God who is speaking through all of these various media. And the message that this same God communicated is consistent in all of the media. The message through nature, through patriarchs, through prophets, through apostles, through preachers, through the Word of God is the same message. The correlation between what God has written are what God has communicated through nature and history, and what God has revealed in Scripture is reflected upon in Psalm 33 as well as Psalm 19, where these two forms of revelation, natural and special, are correlated. When Paul speaks of the law written on the heart, or the works of the law written on the heart in Revelation. Excuse me, in Romans, chapter two, it's obvious that he's speaking of the same law that is known through a different medium to the Jews, so that all men have the same moral standard. So you begin to see here, just in this elementary development of ethics, the deontological character of Christian ethics. God is light and is the norm himself, and therefore ethics has a binding character to it. It's sublime. Moreover, ethics is universal because it's the same standard which all people have. The various ways in which God communicates, communicate the same message and the same standards. There's a unity to biblical ethics. Let's consider the attributes of Scripture. Since Scripture is our norm for Christian living, the Bible tells us that Scripture is characterized by power, authority, clarity, necessity, sufficiency. The power of Scripture, first of all, is that through the Spirit, all the divine utterances of Scripture carry the power of God. So that when it's received in faith, the Word of God is the source of spiritual blessing and holiness. And when it's received in unbelief, the Word brings curse and hardening to a person. We must remember that the Word of God, God accomplishes something in our lives. It's swift and powerful, sharper than any two edged sword. It is a hammer, it is a fire. Scripture is potent. It's like dynamite. It's going to accomplish some end for good or for ill. It's going to do something in our life through the power of the Spirit. Secondly, Scripture is authoritative in our lives. You'll notice that at every turning point in the basic development of human history and the drama of redemption, the issue that faces man will be how he responds to God's spoken or written word. When man was first created, his function and calling and life were defined by the Word of God. The prohibition that tested man was in fact centered on whether he would submit, submit to the Word of God himself, whether he would follow God's norm or his own thinking. The fall of God. Excuse me. The fall of man is seen in that man would not keep the Word of God. He substituted his own word, in fact Satan's Word for the Word of God. When God gave promise of salvation, his promise is spoken through His Word. And his people were to believe that word, to obey that Word, and to do so in the face of any contrary evidence or any adversity in the world. In the Mosaic covenant, the law of God is integral to the book of the covenant. The stipulations of the covenant are the heart of the covenant, showing what the Lord requires of his vassals. Jesus came to earth and perfectly obeyed the will of God is defined by his law. His life was utterly directed by biblical prophecy and the fulfillment of the promises of redemption. He spoke of the authority of the Old Testament itself. In fact, he set up his own word as a test of discipleship and provided further revelation through his apostles. And so the life and ministry, the redemptive life and ministry of Christ, center on the spoken word, likewise the ministry of the apostles after Christ. They attest to the authority of the Old Testament. They claim to be speaking the words of Jesus Christ and presenting the New Testament. And at the last judgment, the standard of judgment is going to be the word of Jesus Christ himself. This is very important for our understanding of normative ethics. John 12:48. He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him. The word that I spake the same shall judge him in the last day. Jesus says that if we reject his sayings, his very word will be our standard of judgment on the last day. The ultimate norm in the eschatological day of judgment will be the word of Jesus Christ. So as an ultimate criterion, Scripture is to function as a basic commitment. It's to be like a presupposition in our lives. All of our choices, all of our thoughts are to be made consistent with the truth of Scripture. Now this, this is metaphorically revealed to us in the Old Testament, when God required that his law be written upon the forehead and upon the hand of his redeemed people. By being written on the forehead. God was saying, my law, my revelation, should govern the way you think, the way you conceptualize the world, the way you evaluate things as written upon the hand. The law of God was to govern all the people behavior and activities in a person's life. So that God's law was the basic commitment, the basic presupposition, was to be our ultimate authority or standard. Scripture ultimately defines what our duties are to be. And that's why the basis for our duty, as we pointed out in the apologetical portion of our course, the basis of our duties is not rational, abstract abstraction or empirical examination of the world, or autonomous feeling or desire for freedom. The basis of our duty is ultimately God's revealed will. And that revealed will, as we've seen, is a reflection of the very character and nature of God himself. Scripture is not only powerful, not only authoritative, so that we are to keep the word of God for the sake of the authority of God Speaking therein, as the confession says, we're to obey God because He has the right to command our obedience. The Bible tells us that Scripture not only is powerful and authoritative, it is also clear the clarity of Scripture is important for ethics. We may never use the unclarity of Scripture, granting that in some ways it's difficult to understand. We may never use the unclarity of Scripture as an excuse for sin. For God always grants us sufficient means to carry out the responsibility that he lays upon us. And consequently, even if there are difficult portions of Scripture and it's hard to do our exegetical homework and come to convincing understanding, nevertheless, Scripture is not so unclear that we cannot receive the practical guidance we need. Scripture is not some kind of mysterious and abstract norm, nor is it something that requires an indefinite amount of study and calculation before we can understand it. There is no it's not impossible that we can go to the law of God, the revealed will of God, and understand it. Scripture is clear. Moreover, Scripture is necessary as a fourth attribute we need to consider. We are not given the prerogative. We are not given permission to let our moral opinions be formed on the basis of whatever we find in natural revelation we have followed. We live in a sinful society and we don't perceive nature properly. So we don't have the right to use our mind and our experience of the world alone to develop a norm for life. That would be dishonoring to Christ. To do that, it would say that he was not necessary and special revelation was not necessary for our living. Without the revelation of Jesus Christ, Christ salvation would not be possible. Romans 10 tells us that you know, how shall they be saved without a preacher? Faith cometh by hearing. We have to know the word of Jesus Christ to be saved, and without salvation we wouldn't be able to obey God and please Him. Morality would be impossible as well, and therefore revelation is necessary to Christian morality. It's not just a shortcut to knowing our norms. It isn't just a mere alternative to taking an existential or a teleological approach to ethics. It is necessary that we take a normative approach based on the specific or special revelation of God. If we do not have a written word from God, then we don't have a standard of discipleship. If we don't know what Christ requires us to do, then we can't do what he wants. And if we can't do what he wants, then we aren't his followers and therefore to be a Christian calls for the necessity shows the necessity of having revealed words from Christ that direct our lives. We don't have Scripture, we don't have a Lord. If we don't have Lord, then we won't have salvation. So very simply, the covenant itself demands the covenant document showing us how to live the life of obedient followers of the covenant. We must reject secular ethics of the place of autonomous reason and hold to the necessity of God's written word. In addition to holding that it's necessary and clear, clear, authoritative, and powerful, the Word of God is our norm, and it is our sufficient norm. The Westminster Confession of Faith expresses it this way in Chapter one, Section six. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequences may be deduced from Scripture, unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men. Everything that is necessary for our life is either expressly set down in Scripture, or can be deduced by good and necessary consequence. In the Bible we see that there is a continuing polemic against substituting the words of men for the Word of God. When men come, for instance, in Deuteronomy 18 and presume to be speaking in the name of God, they are to be severely judged. We are given examples throughout the Bible where men choose to follow the word of God and to speak God's word rather than their own word, or to follow the word and direction of others. And that's why there can be boldness in the face of tyrants and other powerful men. God's people, knowing God's own word, feel free to disagree even with the word of powerful individuals, kings and pharaohs and the like. Moreover, God tells us himself in the very words of Scripture that we are not allowed to add to his Word, which obviously points to the fact that his word is adequate in itself. Deuteronomy 4:2. You shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish from it, that you may keep the commandments of Jehovah your God, which I Command you. Proverbs 36. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. And of course, the concluding curse verse of the Book of Revelation has to do with the error of trying to add to God's Word. Here, specifically in the Book of Revelation, Revelation 22:18 I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book. If any man shall add unto them, God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book. Consequently, Scripture itself, by warning us severely against supplementing what God says, Scripture itself points to the sufficiency of the revelation provided us. And of course, Paul teaches that sufficiency in second Timothy 3:16, where he says that having the written word of God, the man of God is perfectly equipped for every good work. There is no good work that we're going to miss if we obey and understand the entire written script Scriptures. Nothing is lacking. God's Word is ultimately sufficient and entirely sufficient for our lives. By good and necessary consequence. In the Bible we see that there is a continuing polemic against substituting the words of men for the word of God. When men come, for instance, in Deuteronomy 18 and presume to be speaking in the name of God, they are to be severely judged. We are given examples throughout the Bible where men choose to follow the word of God and to speak God's word rather than their own word, or to follow the word and direction of others. And that's why there can be boldness in the faith. Tyrants and other powerful men. God's people, knowing God's own word, feel free to disagree even with the word of powerful individuals, kings and pharaohs and the like. Moreover, God tells us himself from the very words of Scripture that we are not allowed allowed to add to his Word, which obviously points to the fact that his word is adequate in itself. Deuteronomy 4:2. You shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish from it, that you may keep the commandments of Jehovah your God, which I Command you. Proverbs 36. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. And of course, the concluding curse of the book of Revelation has to do with the error of trying to add to God's Word here, specifically in the book of Revelation, Revelation 22:18, I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book. If any man shall add unto them, God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book. Consequently, Scripture itself, by warning us severely against supplementing what God says, Scripture itself points to the sufficiency of the revelation provided us. And of course, Paul teaches that sufficiency in second Timothy 3:16, where he says that having the written word of God, the man of God is perfectly equipped for every good work. There is no good work that we're going to miss if we obey and understand the entire written Scriptures, nothing is lacking. God's Word is ultimately sufficient and entirely sufficient for our lives. God's Word is powerful. It is authoritative. It is clear, it is necessary, it is sufficient. All these attributes will inform our use of Scripture and guide our use of Scripture in normative ethics. Now we start to narrow our consideration of Scripture. Let's remember that there are many kinds of literature in the Bible and what I've been saying in these introductory remarks about the power and authority, clarity, necessity, sufficiency of Scripture. What I've been saying applies to all these many kinds of language or many genres, types of literature in the Bible. The Bible contains, of course, imperatives, but it contains indicatives, also declarations of fact. It contains questions and promises. We find prose and poetry. There are songs. We find law, we find history, we find letters and proverbs and parables and drama and symbolism and emotive expression. And on and on and on. We could go now. Each of these is powerful in Christian ethics. Each of them is authoritative for governing our lives. Each of them is clear, necessary, and sufficient for giving us what we need in terms of Christian living. Often enough in ethics. When we think of Scripture as our foundation, I think we're tempted to think of script Scripture as a collection of commandments. But of course, Scripture is not a collection of commandments. It's a collection of commandments and promises and songs and epistles and proverbs and all the rest. Only an aspect of Scripture is law or command, and that is not found in just one place. It's found dispersed throughout the Scripture, even as all the other kinds of Scripture are found dispersed throughout, throughout the whole. And since Paul tells us that all Scripture is profitable for godliness, we must assume that every kind of passage, every kind of language, every form of literature is important in formulating a Christian ethic. We must think about the ethical implications of the psalms, of the parables, of the proverbs, of Ecclesiastes, of songs in the Scripture, of the history of redemption in the Bible. All of these things have to be taken into account when we develop our norms for living. Sometimes we need not simply the directive, go and do the following. Sometimes we need admonition, we need questioning, we need encouragement, we need parable to show us. We need poetry to motivate us. Each kind of language offers some unique contribution to our living according to God's norms. Of course, every kind of language presented in the Bible, just because that language is given from the Lord of the Covenant to those who are supposed to be obeying the covenant. Every kind of language functions in one way to offer imperative for our life. Let's just say the Bible tells us that Gideon went down and fought the Midianites with 300 men. Well, what kind of moral obligation does that lay upon us? What kind of imperative is implicit in that? Well, if nothing else, it's the imperative to believe what the word of God says, to see that God directs and protects his people. Every kind of scripture, therefore, offers to us our duty in one way or another. We are not to reduce all the many kinds of scripture genres, various kinds of literature, to just one kind, as though now we can translate the Bible into all imperatives. But we mustn't forget the imperitival perspective of every kind of literature that we find in the Bible. Let me try to offer you some illustrations here, because I But I think this is a point that's often overlooked, that the entire Bible is our law, the entire Bible is our norm. And it's not just things that come in the form of thou shalt and thou shalt not that give us law. And also, I think this little discussion will help us understand why there are differences in interpretation and application of the law today that will show us the the Hermeneutic Homework the hermeneutical homework necessary to understand the Law in our day is necessary in a way that's no different than in our study of the New Testament. Let's just consider some things taught to us in the New Testament. Matthew 5:7 says, Blessed are the merciful. Matthew 6, verse 7 says, in praying, do not use vain repetitions. Luke 10:33 and 37 tell us but a certain Samaritan was moved with compassion, and came to him and bound up his wounds. Go and do likewise. Luke 16:18 Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. John 8:31 if you abide in my word, then you are truly my disciples. Acts 5:29 we must obey God rather than men. Romans 12:14 Bless them that persecute you. First Corinthians 10:31 Whether you eat or drink, or whatsoever you do, do all to the glory of God. Philippians 2:5 7 have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who humbled himself. Colossians 4:1 Masters, render unto your servants what is just and equal. 1 Thessalonians 5:17 Pray without ceasing. James 2:1 hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons. Now the list could go on and on and on. Nearly every page of the New Testament contains teaching which in one way or another expresses moral duties which ought to be kept by the Christian. But you'll notice that these duties have been communicated in various ways. The list of examples I've given you indicates that sometimes we find a direct imperative which is meant for everyone. For instance, do not be repetitious in prayer. The imperative is obvious. It's direct and it's meant for everyone. But sometimes there's a directive that is given to a particular class of men, as when Paul says, masters, render unto your servants what is just. That's not intended for everyone, that's intended just for masters. At points, our moral duty is ascertained from an illustration which is given as normative. For example, the illustration of the Good Samaritan tells us how we should live. At other points, the moral duty is seen in terms of the value which is placed placed upon some attitude or characteristic, as when Jesus says, blessed are the merciful. Elsewhere, the moral duty is inferred from the evil effects which are said to follow from something. For instance, adultery following divorce. Sometimes the duty is expressed in terms of a goal after which we must strive, for instance, the glory of God in all things. There are times when the Christian's moral duty is found in emulating a historical precedent. Like the apostles, we should obey God rather than men. The moral duty may pertain to a concrete action. Pray without ceasing, Paul says, or to a more generalized attitude. Have this mind in you which was in Christ Jesus. The moral duty can be couched in hypothetical expression. If you abide in my word, then you are truly my disciples. Or it can be given in categorical expression. Hold not the faith with respect of persons. So you see, there are many ways in which the New Testament expresses moral duties which have been laid upon the Christian believer. There are many ways in which God tells you, this is the way you should live. We could have looked at Peter, do you love me? We see hypothetical expressions, we see parables, we see illustrations, we see generalized imperatives, particularized imperatives, and all the rest. There are many ways in which the Bible expresses moral duties, and we must be careful to distinguish between moral duties of a standing character in the New Testament, which are meant for a general group over a period of time. For instance, Ephesians 5:28, husbands ought to love their wives and particular commands given for just a localized situation. For instance, when Paul tells Timothy to bring him his cloak. Or when, in Romans 15, Paul says that the Romans should send an offering to the saints in Jerusalem. Not everybody should be carrying a Cloak to troas. Today, not everybody should be sending money to Jerusalem. That was a particular command for a local situation. And that kind of distinction is necessary even in understanding the direction of the New Testament. For our lives. We must discern cultural peculiarities which are mentioned in the expression of our general duties as well. In First Corinthians 16:20, we are told to greet each other with a holy kiss. Kiss. Now, what that means is we should give a common greeting to people who are our brothers and sisters in Christ. It turned out that the kiss was the socially acceptable way of doing that that day. We must understand the difference between the kiss which illustrates the greeting or is the expression of the greeting, and the greeting which is the substance of the requirement. We must be careful, therefore, to read the New Testament text carefully and sensitively, paying attention to sound guidelines of biblical interpretation and recognizing the various literary genres and pedagogical devices which are to be found there. Now, what I'm saying about the New Testament holds equally for the Old Testament. It is sometimes big been a source of misguided criticism on the part of those who don't like the theonomic thesis that they can go to the Old Testament and find expressions of duties that quite obviously we wouldn't apply today, like putting a railing around the roof of the house. But you see, that kind of dullness and understanding the will of God expressed in his law, I think can be likened to the dullness in interpreting Jesus words, go and do likewise with respect to the Good Samaritan, meaning that we have to go find people and put them on our donkey and carry them to a tavern. Jesus is illustrating a manner of relating to people, and we are to follow what that illustration points to. That is, what we are supposed to do is we are to help those who are in distress. But that doesn't mean we have to help them in that particular way. The Old Testament said, you put a railing around the roof of your house, meaning you are to protect innocent human life. But that doesn't mean that the only way to protect it in that culture or in our day is by putting a railing around the roof of our house. You don't put a railing around the roof of your house today if it doesn't accomplish the purpose for the railing as it was revealed in the Old Testament. Likewise, we distinguish in the New Testament between localized imperatives. Bring my cloak to me, send an offering to Jerusalem, and universal are abiding imperatives such as husbands ought to love their wives. The same thing is true of the Old Testament There are certain rules or imperatives laid down in the Old Testament that were not standing laws. For instance, the requirement to kill the Canaanites as the Jews were occupying the Promised Land. That commandment is not Jews were not throughout their generations to be killing Canaanites. Jews are not today to be killing Canaanites. We today don't bear that responsibility or obligation. That was a positive law given for a particular situation. It was not based on some universal principle that has to be pervasively and kept through the ages. Now when we answer that to the anti theonomist who says, well, if you believe in following the Old Testament, then you have to believe in holy war. When we answer no, holy war was never intended as a standing law for behavior, then sometimes the response is, well, that's weaseling. That's trying to wiggle out of something. That's an embarrassment for our thesis. But that's no more weaseling than it is weaseling to say that we're not under obligation to be carrying a cloak to troas today. But that is not a moral duty laid upon us, even though you can find that written in the word of God. So we need to apply proper hermeneutical techniques to the New Testament so that we appreciate the full range of literary devices by which God expresses the norms for our behavior and so that we don't misapply the actual meaning and the enduring obligation of the will of God as expressed in the New Testament. And that's true of the Old Testament as well. Well, now let's see if we can review what we've been saying during this particular lecture and presentation of normative ethics. We've already seen that Christianity is characterized by an ethic of external rules and that the rule for Christian living is found in the revelation of God. First of all, the standard must be God himself. God is the light. And then God radiates this light, makes known what his will is, what his character is like, through both general and special revelation. God's law can be found in nature, can be found in conscience. But there's a great advantage if you are given the oracle of God. According to Romans 3:1. So our ultimate standard is going to be the written Word of God. And this word has come in spoken form through inspired messengers and ordained preachers. However, the final authority and the enduring authority must be the written Word of God. And that written word of God is characterized with power, as having power, authority, clarity, necessity and sufficiency. As we look at the written Word of God define the actual norms. I've said that all of the literature of the Bible is normative. We must remember all the different forms of language and ways of expression that are found. And then the last remark that I've made and have elaborated on is that we must be careful to to use proper hermeneutical techniques both in the New and the Old Testament. Seeing the many ways God tells us how we should be living, he doesn't always just come out and say, do this, don't do that, but God expresses His will, which I will now call generally his law, expressing what godliness is. God expresses his law in many different grammatical forms in many literary genres. And we must distinguish between standing and localized laws. We must know the difference between a cultural particular and the underlying point of the illustration given to us in the various kinds of revelation of God's will that are found in the Scriptures. Okay, I'm trying to do justice to the broader context and then narrow things down finally to the subject that is going to be of interest to us. And this brings us now to a question of whether the laws of the Old Testament, not in the broad sense of just anything that expresses a moral duty, be it a proverb or a psalm or a song or an exhortation or an illustration or a parable, but the specific commandments of the Old Testament, the explicit thou shalt and thou shalt nots of the Old Testament, are they binding on us today? Should it be thought that Christians have to follow all of the norms of the Bible, follow the Old as well as the New Testament, when it comes to ethics? And after we take a break, we'll come back and begin a consideration, consideration of our affirmative answer to that question. It seems to me most reasonable that if we as evangelicals want to appeal to the Psalms and the proverbs of the Old Testament and to the prophecies of the Old Testament, as just about anybody in the evangelical church wants to, that we will be highly inconsistent if we are unwilling to appeal to the Mosaic Law as well. I have known, however, people who are just that inconsistent, who are willing to cite the Psalm, for instance, and it tells us how the righteous man lives, are willing to cite, for instance, that only those who have clean hands, those who have not sworn deceitfully, only those who don't lend out money at usury and so forth. Only such people as these detailed for us in the Psalms can dwell with God. They'll appeal to the Old Testament psalms to support an ethical position, but they are unwilling to appeal to the Mosaic commandments of the Old Testament, which were equally endorsed by the psalmist. O how love I thy law. Moreover, the Psalms and the prophecies of the Old Testament are built upon the Pentateuch and the Mosaic revelation of God's character and God's will for his people. And so I'm going to be arguing when we come back, then indeed we are under the law of the Old Testament as a norm for living.