"As I Have Loved You"

Chapter Nine
The Sum of the Matter:
"This is My Beloved Son, Hear Him."

Historical Overview

The voice of God came out of the cloud on the mountain where Christ was transfigured and said, "This is my beloved Son in Whom I am well-pleased--Listen to Him" (Matt. 17:5, Luke 9:35). God had spoken in a final way through a Son in the last days (Heb. 1:1). The Word of God was made flesh, tabernacled in glory among men, and ushered in a reign of grace and truth which superceded the past Mosaic administration of law (John 1:14-18).

The early church was gripped by this message. This is evidenced, for instance, when Peter proclaimed:

For Moses said, "The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people" (Acts 3:22-23).

The commission given to the church after Christ's resurrection included instructing disciples worldwide to obey everything that He commanded (Matt. 28:20).

Tragically, however, by the third century the visible church had lost its sense of redemptive history. ¹ Alien Greek philosophy crept in and at critical points affected the interpretation of Scripture.

[Verses] undeniably used in respect to the historical Christ [were] confounded with the metaphysical and dogmatic use of the schools . . . . [Not satisfied] with the Logos, as historically manifested in the Messiah, [the early fathers] frequently yield to speculation . . . mixed up with foreign philosophies. ²

In the fourth century, the church became enmeshed in the whimsical political scene when Constantine constituted Christianity as the official state religion in the Roman Empire. From that point onwards, political intrigue played a role in the formation of Christian doctrine. ³

But even more importantly, the influx of philosophy and the secularization of Christianity by Constantine combined to create a new outlook for the church which differed from the vision of the New Testament. ⁴ Instead of a suffering church, the concept of a church conquering by the sword was substituted. Abraham Kuyper viewed the work of Constantine in "establishing" Christianity as the "surest proof that the conflict against Paganism had reached a provisional decision, and had terminated in a complete triumph of the Christian religion."⁵

But this theocratic vision was modeled after the old Covenant, and thus the whole life of the visible church became more Mosaic than Christic. As history went on, John W. Montgomery notes how the Old Testament was the central reference point.

The most influential factor in creating a legalistic tone in Puritanism was doubtless the Calvinist stress on a single covenant in Scripture . . . which elevated the Old Testament to a position of great prominence in Puritan theology. Old Testament laws were indiscriminately applied to New Testament situations (cf. Earle's detailed work, The Sabbath in Puritan New England) . . . . Puritan-Calvinist preoccupation with ,he history of salvation in the Old Testament gave a special cast to the New England colonists, western dream . . . consistent with their Old Testament interests, they went on to identify themselves with Israel, reading their own history as the story of a new Chosen People.⁶

Shaped by a theocratic mind-set, then, the existence of the institutional church could be described essentially as "under law." The loss of sensitivity to redemptive history caused the church to approach law and gospel primarily as subjective categories to be differentiated in various ways. Instead of seeing redemptive history move from law to gospel (Gal. 3:16-25; 4:1-5; John 1:17), the life of the saved individual was seen to move from conviction by law to forgiveness in the gospel.

Looking at the history of theology it is no wonder that in the final analysis "the gospel took on legal characteristics" and ended up being a servant to the law.⁷

Further, denuding law and gospel of their redemptive-historical setting effectively blocked any possibility of arriving at a new covenant ethic. Law alone was regarded as having the capability to command, and the gospel alone was capable of promise. But, as has been shown, embedded in the law was the Abrahamic promise, and the gospel brings with it a demand. Unfortunately, in Protestant and Romanist theology the gospel is rigidly defined "always as the promise of forgiveness, and never a demand."⁸

But in the past twenty years studies have appeared which have come to resize the significance of redemptive history.⁹ When law and gospel are viewed in light of their place in salvation history, it can be seen that God's saving action is the foundation for the moral imperatives upon the covenant peoples of both the old and new covenants. God first acts, and then He commands. It is only in this light that the gospel can be seen also as demand.

Theological Overview

Redemptive History and
New Testament Ethics

There has been in the history of theology five basic approaches to law in the new covenant. First, there is the approach of Marcion and Adolf von Harnack which jettisoned the Old Testament from the Christian canon. Second, there is the traditional outlook that the civil and ceremonial aspects in the law passed away, while the "moral" commands continue in force. Third, there is the idea that the dimension of the law which divided Jews and Gentiles is abrogated, but not the law itself. Fourth, it is suggested that the key lies in holding the story and law, muthos  and ethos , aspects of the "Torah" in balance. Fifth, there is the approach to law in terms of salvation history. it is believed that "the only ultimately satisfactory solution to the relation of the two Testaments is to see them in terms of the movement of redemptive history."¹⁰ As Richard Gaffin observes:

A concern with the historia salutis  (the history of salvation] rather than the doctrine of justification by faith or any other aspect of the ordo salutis  [the application of salvation] is central to Paul. A redemptive-historical, eschatological orientation controls his soteriological outlook at every point.¹¹

It should be added that such a perspective also controls Paul's ethical outlook. But, as Oscar Cullmann notes, to my knowledge a comprehensive Salvation-historical ethics' is still be be written." ¹²

This is not surprising in light of the past "flat Bible," old covenant orientation of Christian ethics. Redemptive history must shape our theological methodology.

It is difficult to deny that in the orthodox tradition justice has not been done to the historical character of the Bible, either in terms of its origin or its contents. There has been and continues to be a tendency to view Scripture as a quarry of prooftexts for the building of a dogmatic edifice, as a collection of moral principles for the construction of a system of ethics. Inscripturated revelation never stands by itself. It is always concerned either explicitly or implicitly with redemptive accomplishment . . . . In other words, the specific unity of Scripture is redemptive historical in nature . . . . It does not appear to me, however, that the methodological significance of this correlation has been reflected upon sufficiently.¹³

Thus, ethics must be approached with redemptive history in the forefront.

The Bible has no independent interest in ethics. If God wanted to provide a manual on ethical conduct. He could have easily done so. But the Bible is not an ethical manual any more than it is a systematic theology. The Bible is written as history. It is a story on God's redemptive acts. Biblical ethics are not artificially attached to this story. They are embedded in the story itself . . . . When biblical ethics are removed from the context of redemptive history, they cease to be biblical ethics. In this respect Judeo-Christian ethics are absolutely unique. They cannot be duplicated by anyone nor incorporated into the holy history of Israel--a history which has climaxed in Jesus Christ. As far as the Bible is concerned, ethics have no independent value and no meaning outside the saving deeds of God . . . .

"[Paul's] appeals on how to live are made on the basis of what God has done for us in Christ. It is in view of God's gospel mercies that we are to present our lives as a living sacrifice to God (Rom. 12:1-3 . . . . Paul virtually never appeals to the law--'Thou shalt not.' When he demands certain behavior of the church, he appeals instead to the holy history of Christ, into which the church is incorporated, and from that stand, point then makes his ethical appeal . . . .¹⁴

The Structure of New
Testament Ethics

1. Biblical ethics must recognize the implications of the advance of redemptive history from a terminated Old Covenant economy to an eternally abiding New Covenant economy (John 1:17; Heb. 10:9; 13:20). The New Testament teaches that Moses, house has ended and Christ's house has been established. The New Covenant has brought a new order of worship (John 4:21-24), and the commandments of Christ now give structure to the spiritual temple of this age (Matt. 28:20; Eph. 4:20). The New Testament does not conceive of New Covenant superiority in terms of its unrelatedness to past redemptive history, but in terms of its fullness in Christ, as compared to a childhood age of types and shadows (John 1:14-18; Gal. 4:2-7; Col. 2:17).

2. Biblical ethics must recognize that Moses would plead with us to listen to the Prophet of Whom he wrote (Deut. 18:15, 18; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37). Even though Moses is dead, he still speaks to us in the clearest language that we are to listen to the Prophet of a new age: "Him you shall hear in all things whatsoever He says to you" (Acts 3 :22). This is not to say that what Christ has said is in violent opposition to what Moses wrote in times past (for they are in absolute ethical harmony); but it is to say that from the vantage point for the believer is to be found in the person of Christ the Prophet, not in the prophet Moses who wrote of Christ (John 5:39, 46).

3. Biblical ethics must recognize that God's own voice has spoken definitively from heaven and commanded us to hear the Son of Whom Moses wrote (Heb. 1:1; Matt. 3:17; 17:5; Acts 7:37). To hear the Son does not mean that Moses is rejected. Again, the point is simply that in the consummation of redemptive history, God brought all the central institutions of Israel--Prophet, Priest and King--to fulfillment in the person of His Son. The passing away of the Old Covenant, with Moses as its head, was preparatory for a New Covenant with Christ as its Head. God had spoken often in the ancient days; but in these last days He has spoken once for all in His Son.

4. Biblical ethics must recognize that Christ on the cross ratified a new covenant, and connected with His death a new commandment (I Cor. 11:25; John 13:34-35; 15:12-13). The act which ratified the New Covenant also illustrated a "new commandment.,' When Christ said, "if you love Me, keep My commandments" (John 14:15), He obviously did not mean "keep all the details of the Old Covenant." He meant, "keep all the commandments I have given you in the course of My earthly ministry," (John 17:8), which would certainly focus on the Sermon on the Mount. Genuine love for Christ will produce in a man the desire to keep Christ's commandments-- the commandments He has given as the final Prophet (Matt. 28:20)

The following point is of utmost importance: just as the redemptive act of God in the Egyptian exodus brought with it a law-code upon the national old covenant people, likewise the new exodus (via the cross, Luke 9:31; Eph. 4:8) brings with it commandments for the spiritual New Covenant people. This is simply to emphasize that "to a covenant belongs a law-giving." ¹⁵

This is confirmed in Heb. 8:6, where the Greek verb nomotheteo  is used. The New Covenant here is said to be "enacted on better promises." This verb properly means "that which has the force of law."¹⁶ Thus, law must be identified with the covenant in force, that is, the covenant that has been put into effect as law. With the shedding of blood by Christ the New Covenant was put into effect legally, and it is in this light that we can see the "law of Christ" flowing out of this historical ratification.

The importance of this law-giving in connection with the New Covenant cannot be overemphasized. This "enactment as law" settles once and for all the ethical touchstone for the Christian.

5. Biblical ethics must recognize that Paul's basic ethical orientation centered in the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2; I Cor. 9:21). After Christ was resurrected He spent many days giving "to the apostles commandments through the Holy Spirit" (Acts 1:2-3). The "new commandment" was for the brethren to love one another. All other commandments flow out of this one, for he who loves fulfills anything the law requires (Rom. 13:10; Gal. 5:14).

6. Biblical ethics must recognize that the use of the Old Testament for ethical instruction and example by the New Testament is qualified by redemptive-historical realities (I Cor. 10:11; Heb. 3:7-4:11; Col. 2:16-17; Acts 10:14-15; 15:10-21; II Tim. 3:15,). Obviously, the New Testament is not "afraid" to derive ethical instruction from the Old Testament (Eph. 6:1-2; James 5:10-11). However, while the use of the Old Testament in this regard is constant and natural, it is not unrestricted. This is simply to say that the Old Testament is not viewed in isolation from the consummation of redemptive history in the new Covenant. Or, to put it another way, the Old Testament as always approached through the Person and work of Christ. Herman Ridderbos captured this truth beautifully by saying:

Christ also represents the new standard of judgment as to what "has had its day" in the law and what had abiding validity? (Col. 2:17) . . . .The church no longer has to do with the law in any other way than in Christ and thus is ennomos Christou . . . . The new creation brings in a new canon, a new standard of judgment, along with it. This is above all redemptive historical in character . . . . The law no longer has unrestricted and undifferentiated validity for the church of Christ. In a certain,sense the church can be qualified as "without the law."¹⁷

Thus, the "norm of Christian conduct" must be identified with those demands which flow out of union with the Christ Who accomplished a new exodus (John 15:13; I John 3:1'0; II Cor. 5:14-15). The Old Testament, then, is freely employed in the new age as a rich source for instruction in righteousness; but it is in the New Testament always referenced in some wav to the centrality of Christ in these "last days."

The New Testament reveals an ethic which centers in the person of Christ (Who is the supreme example of love, I John 3:16), the words of Christ (which are seen to be "the words of eternal life," John 6:68), and the new covenant work of Christ (which brought with it a new demand upon his followers, John 15:12-13, II Cor. 5:15). It is only as the church listens to the Son that her joy will be full (John 13:17).

The Elements of New
Testament Ethics

Broadly speaking, Biblical ethics involves the interplay of (1) the work of Christ, (2) the Holy Spirit, (3) the word of Christ, (4) the believers, and (5) the situations faced in life.

Christian ethics involves both agape [love] and principles for its completion . . . . Principle-agapism furnishes content and guidelines for the direction that love may take in concrete situations. Hence, principle-agapism saves Christian ethics from the twin perils of,legalism and antinomianism.¹⁸

But all of this is meaningless without the Holy Spirit's ministry.

Without the Mind of Christ through the activity of the Spirit at work in the believer, the principles of the Law of Christ remain remote and unattainable . . . . The precise function of the Spirit in this matter of the exercise of Christian liberty is probably best summed up in the Apostle's use of the word dokimazo , i.e. testing, determining, proving.¹⁹

Guilt or grace? Mainline Christian ethics has never been in a position to articulate an ethic of grace because it has severed ethics from its moorings in redemptive history. Hence, the central motivation of ethics, in the final analysis, has been guilt and not the grace of God rooted in the work of Christ (I John 3:16; Titus 2:11-12). What Robert Brinsmead says about Adventism and Romanism can be applied across the board to every religious body.

I fear that far too much Adventism is an ethic of guilt. People are motivated by guilt to keep the Sabbath, to pay tithe, to be loyal to the denomination, to eat the right food, to eschew jewelry, to avoid worldly amusements....... The motivation of guilt will produce results....... The Pauline Epistles do not present a motivation of guilt but a motivation of grace. Unless a religious group gives free course to the gospel, and unless its pulpits ring with the liberating proclamation of grace, the religious group will become a religious slave camp . . . . The greatest instrument of coercion in traditional Adventism is guilt. The two greatest motivational forces in the world are guilt and grace. Where the gospel is not paramount, guilt is the instrument by which we motivate ourselves and others . . . . Guilt will drive a missionary to compass land and sea to make a single convert. Rome has learned to harness the power of guilt . . . . Rome has always complained that justification by faith alone severs the nerve of the moral imperative. But she is really concerned with people who are no longer guilty and can therefore no longer be manipulated. If the Adventist community does not live by the gospel, it is guilt which makes people keep the Sabbath, pay tithe. . . . Sermons which,exhort people to conform to certain behavior are generally intended to make people guilty enough to elicit the desired response.²⁰

Summary of New Testament Ethics

It would be difficult to find a better concise summary of all that must be said concerning Christian ethics than that given by Richard Longnecker:

The Christian life in Paul's teaching is (a) based upon the fact of a new creation "in Christ," (b) directed through the correlation of the "law of Christ" and the "mind of Christ, 11 (c) motivated and conditioned by --he "love of Christ," (d) enabled by the "Spirit of Christ," and (e) expressed in a situation of temporal tension between what is already a fact and what has yet to be realized. Although they can be spoken of separately, all these elements must be combined and merged in our consciousness if the apostle's thought is to be rightly understood and the Christian ethic truly exhibited.²¹

1) Oscar Cullmann, The Christology of the New Testament  (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963), p. 4.

2)  K.R. Hagenbach, A Text-Bock of the History of Doctrine , I (New York: Sheldon and Co., 1864), pp. 124, 117.

3) Louis Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrine  (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1978), p. 87; Ronald Hanko, "The Arian Controversy," Protestant Reformed Theological Journal , March 1981, pp. 51, 60.

4) Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren  (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1980), pp. 16, 17, 38.

5) Abraham Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology  (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1980), p. 646.

6) John W. Montgomery, The Shapina of America (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 19'16), op. 44-45.

7) Warner Elert, Law and Gospel  (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), p. 47.

8) Richard Detweiler, "Luther and Menno," Mennonite Quarterly Review , July 1969, p. 212.

9) F.F. Bruce, "The Grace of God and the Law of Christ: Study in Pauline Ethics," God and the Good , Lewis Smedes, ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publish,.ng Co., 1975), pp. 2234.

10) Steve Carpenter, "Paul, The Law, and Redemptive History," unpublished paper delivered at The 1981 Council on Baptist Theology, Dallas, Texas, Mav 1981, p. 14. The five approaches given above were outlined in this paper.

11) Richard Gaffin, Westminster Theological Journal , XXXII:I, November 1969, p. 128.

12) Oscar Cullmann, Salvation in History  (London: SCM Press, 1967), p. 329.

13) Richard Gaffin, "Contemporary Hermeneutics in the Study of the New Testament," Studying the New Testament Today , I, John H. Skilton, ed. (Nutley: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1976), pp. 15, 16.

14) Robert D. Brinsmead, Judged by the Gospel  (Fallbrook, Calif.: Verdict Publishing Co., 1980), pp. 209, 213.

15) Rudolf Stier, The Words of the Lord Jesus , VI (Edinburgh: T and T Clark, 1868), p. 166.

16) Francis Goode, The Better Covenant  (London: J. Hatchard and Son, 1837), p. 11; p. 322ff.

17)  Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology  (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975), pp. 285, 286 , 284 .

18) Henlee H. Barnette, "The New Ethics: "Love Alone,"' The Situation Ethics Debate , Harvev Cox, ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972), pp. 138-139.

19) Richard N. Longnecker, Paul, Apostle of Liberty (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1976), pp. 194, 195; Russ Ross, "The Redemptive Model and the Holy Spirit's Work in Ethics," Searching Together, 11:2, 1982, pp. 28-42.

20) Brinsmead, pp. 214-215, 291-292.

21) Richard N. Longnecker, The Ministry and Message of Paul  (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), pp. 100, 101.