Mark Driscoll writes: Packer was clear that those who do not call Christians to repent of homosexual activity are, as Scripture says, “deceived.” He told me that the first of Martin Luther’s 95 Theses was that the whole of a Christian’s life is to be one of repentance of sin. Any Christian who does not practice and promote repentance is denying an aspect of the gospel of Jesus Christ. When I asked how the denial of repentance merited the label of “heretical,” Packer said, “ “‘Heresy’ ought to be used when an aspect of the gospel is being denied.” He further explained that because God through Paul warns the Corinthians that those who practice homosexuality unrepentantly will be damned to hell, “Souls are put at risk every time homosexuality is tolerated.”
Tweet
Jason Robertson is a husband and a father and a pastor. He is dedicated to leading and equipping his the Church with God’s word and biblical theology for life ministry, using a combination of pastoral, church planting and evangelism experience. He holds a Master of Divinity from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. He is experienced in church planting, evangelism, missions, and the training of pastors and Bible teachers.
Jason has been preaching the gospel since 1985, serving the first ten years of ministry as a Southern Baptist itinerant evangelist out of Milldale Baptist Church in Zachary, LA which ordained him in 1993. He has preached in hundreds of churches in over 30 States and 4 countries. He planted churches in Siberia, Russia in the summers of 1993 and 1994. He founded Murrieta Valley Church in California, which he planted in cooperation with the SBC NAMB in 2001. He also teaches ministry students at California Baptist University.
You can hear his sermons and read his manuscripts on sermonaudio.com. Just follow the link to "sermons" at the top of this page.
about homophobia: henry the 8th head of church/state made homosexuality punishable by hanging(1500′s) it remained on the books for 300 years? queen victoria another head of church/state attempted to further the understanding that it was a sin by transposingthe word homosexual into scripture (1800′s). english setllers came into this country carrying the same cultural influence of illegality but with different punishments. so in anglo saxon culture homosexuality has remained illegal for 600 years. to this day homophobia remains indemic in anything christian. given the attitudes of those in africa apparently there is additional homophobia in the african culture itself.
the truth of the matter is that scripture never said homosexuality of itself was a sin. not all prohibitions of lev were of themselves sins or sins under the new covenant. the principles of the new covenant have said over and over that homosexuality is of god. why because the godlove(love one another as i have loved you) as directed thru the 2nd commandment, love your neighbor as yourself is the summation of all new covenant law. love is the fulfillment of the law. being homosexual does not come against this love.
in lev god said that slavery was good, but in the new covenant slavery is an intolerable evil because of its violation of the love of the 2nd commandment.
Feet,
Thank you for your comment. It seems that you believe that homosexuality is not a sin. Obviously I disagree with you, for I believe that the Bible clearly teaches that homosexuality is a sin. But as I read your comment I am more concerned about your complete misunderstanding of the concept of God’s Law. But first let me address your misconception of “homophobia.” You claim that “homophobia remains endemic in anything Christian. Your view is just wrong on so many levels I’m not sure where to start. You quote history from your wikipedia source as some type of authority on this issue but it doesn’t help your position.
Here is a Q&A with Dr. John MacArthur from http://www.gty.org
Maybe it can shed some light for you to understand the actual Biblical teachings regarding homosexuality.
QUESTIONER: Hi, John (MacArthur). (My name is) Jonathan. Does God consider the sin of homosexuality to be worse than the sin of fornication among heterosexuals?
JOHN: Categorically, no, and I’ll tell you why. Because when you have any listing of sins in the Scripture; for example, in 1 Corinthians, Chapter 6, he says in Verse 9, “Do not be deceived,” 1 Corinthians 6:9, “Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor homosexuals nor sodomites nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor revilers nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”
Categorically, you’ve got everything in the same list, and probably, when you compare sodomites to homosexuals, some would say that homosexuals could refer to what were called Catamites; those who are submitted to homosexuals, maybe the younger boy who submits to the pedophile, that kind of thing, so you have two different terms used for homosexual activity.
Some would even use those words to refer to people like transvestites or what are they are called today, transgender people, but when you look at a list like that, you see that they’re are all outside the kingdom, so, categorically, they’re all in the same situation. They’re defined by their sin. Verse 11 then says, “And such were some of you,” so, the point being that those are all sins that are characteristic of people outside the kingdom, but they’re all forgivable, right; because such were some of you.
And He’s saying to the Corinthian church, “That list is a list of what you used to be, and some of you were here and some of you were here and some of you were here and some of you were here, so if it is true that that sin, along with many others, defines life outside the kingdom, but that that sin is forgivable, then, in that sense, it’s no worse a sin than any other.
Having said that, I would say; however, that when you look at Romans, Chapter 1, and you have to look at Romans, Chapter 1 to understand this. When the “wrath of God,” in Verse 18, is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness, the wrath of God follows a sequence. In Romans, Chapter 1, you look, first of all, at Verse 24, and here is the defining of God’s wrath. Now, let me kind of sum this up for you. You read Romans 1:18 about the wrath of God, and we say, “Okay, the wrath of God; what are you talking about? Well, there are five kinds of wrath. There is eternal wrath. That’s hell. There is, I guess what we could call eschatological wrath or the wrath of the last days, the wrath described in Revelation 6 to 19, all the Seal Judgments, Trumpet Judgments, Bowl Judgments, the final wrath, so there is eternal wrath; there is eschatological wrath.
There is also what I could call cataclysmic wrath, the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the destruction of the cities of the plain, the destruction of Capernaum, the judgment of God on Korazin, Bethsaida, and in history, God has judged whole civilizations through cataclysms that took unbelieving people and catapulted them into eternity, such as Pompeii, which was a city literally notorious for its vice, so you have eternal wrath; you have eschatological wrath; you have cataclysmic wrath.
Then you have what I would call natural wrath, and that is the wrath of God that comes in a sowing-and-reaping fashion. If you are a drunkard all your life, you may die of cirrhosis of the liver. If you live in sexual sin all your life, you may shorten your life and die of some venereal disease, including AIDS, so there are certain things built in. “Whatever a man sows, he reaps.” That’s another kind of wrath, but the wrath being spoken of here is the fifth kind. It’s the wrath of abandonment.
It is that judicial act of God, whereby He lets the sinner go. In other words, He stops convicting. He stops calling. It’s Genesis 6, where God says, “My Spirit will not always strive with man.” There comes a point when God says, “That’s it. I’m letting you go,” and when God lets a society go, Verse 24 says, “He gives them over to uncleanness.” That’s sexual sin, and then Verse 26, He gives them up to vile passions, and women exchange the natural use for what is against nature, but likewise, the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men, committing what is shameful, so you have lesbianism and homosexuality.
When God gives a society up, they plunge into sexual sin, and then they sink deeper into homosexual sin, so while homosexuality is a forgivable sin, and, categorically, no worse than others, when it happens on a societal level, it is evidence that when a society affirms it; when it becomes normal in a society, that is evidence that God has turned that society over. If you look at America, you could look back to the sexual revolution of the ’60s, which has now become a homosexual revolution of the ’90s, in which the homosexuals have redefined themselves as a minority, like a racial group of people demanding rights.
And so I think, while it is, as far as individual sin goes, no more damning than any other sin and as forgivable as any other sin. When it becomes the pattern of a society, it is evidence that God has turned that society over to that sin. It may be at that point an evidence that many in that society are not redeemable because they have gone past the age of grace. Okay?
And in response to that, we hate the sin of homosexuality because of its baseness and because of its perverseness, but, at the same time, we understand that it is a sin like any other sin, and we have to call that sinner to repentance and offer that individual sinner the grace and the forgiveness of God. We can’t play God, and while God may be turning our society over, God may be no longer striving with us. He may have abandoned us as a society. Still, He is saving individuals who respond to the Gospel.
it is interesting this emphasis on an interpretation of the law,when scripture says “the law is ONLY a shadow of the things to come and not the realities themselves”heb10, and even when we would follow it we receive no righteousness. but there is righteousness in christ’s love, because his love is righteousness. and under the new covenant we no longer have a relationship to god thru regulation as in deut 28 but instead directly(torn curtain) to the spirit of the one who lives in each believer. this is our leading.
“the sons of god are led by the spirit of god” romans
why cling to values of the old covenant when the old covenant has long since passed away, which hebrews8 describes as being wrong. yes the law is holy. and yes the old covenant was essential in building a faith relationship to make a seperate people. but issues about faith have always been about spirit, a living spirit.
god is love1john
god is spirit john4
godlove is spirit.
under the new covenant the godlove(love one another as i have loved you) of the 2nd commandment, love your neighbor as yourself is the summation of all new covenant law. because love is the fulfillment of the of the law. being homosexual does not come against this love.
again it is the intimate inner relationship with the spirit of christ’s fulfilling love that lives in us that leads us.
in regards to the law christ said the important thing about the law was its faithfulness, mercy, and justice. matt23
where is the love, mercy, faithfulness, and justice in condemning, out of an interpretation of scripture because of an understanding handed down generationally( when antiquity of an interpretation of the law has never been a litmus test for truth), homosexuals, who have never been found wanting in any sector of society compared to heterosexuals(they are not less a father, friend, counselor, doctor, teacher, pastor, soldier, counselor, brother, neighbor,etc), homosexuals, who bond in the same way as heterosexuals, out of mutual love, affection, devotion, trust, respect for a shared committed life together, homosexual believers, whose lives and marriages are filled with the fruit of the spirit of galatians5 in the same way as those of heterosexual believers.
where is the love, justice , mercy, and faithfulness in condemnation that has been made without a schintilla of substantiating 1john1 witness “that which which we have heard, which we have looked at, which we have seen with our eyes and our hands have touched”in fellowship of walking in the light of sharing the oneness of christ’s love.
how can anything be of god that is not of and thru christ.
The Supremacy of the Son of God
col1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
how is it believers can hold their interpretation of the shadow(law) in such high regard over the essence of the light of the shadow itself. when the shadow is a mere reflection of the living essence of the light, and what the light is doing. its christ love that tells us what the law is and what it is saying. not the other way around.
Feet,
Your second comment reveals more vividly your confusion about God’s love and God’s law. So I thought I would post the wise words of Ernest Reisinger as he wrote about this issue:
God’s Law and God’s Love (Part 1)
“If you love Me, keep My commandments.” (John 14:15)
`This is the love of-God, that we keep His commandments.
And His commandments are not burdensome.” (1 John 5:3)
What God Has Joined
In order to serve the Lord faithfully, we must not only distinguish things that differ but also preserve the connection of things God has joined. Law and love are two such things that God has joined. They are inseparable mates.
When Martin Luther said, “Love God and do as you please,” his point was this: If you truly love God, you will do what pleases Him. But that still leaves the question, What is pleasing to God? Thus Luther’s statement needs some explanation, lest the issue be oversimplified or confused.
One of the greatest difficulties in dealing with this subject is the many ways the words themselves, law and love, are used in the Bible. In chapter 6 we discussed the different meanings of the word law. Likewise, in Scripture we read of the love of Christ, love for your wife, love for our neighbor, love for our enemies, and a special and peculiar love for the brethren. Volumes have been written on these two little words, law and love.
Every true Christian wants to know how to please God. This desire comes with the new birth and immediately thrusts us into the Bible, where God’s will is expressed. But how does God express His will? Does He simply say, “Love . . .” or does He express His will by giving us His commandments? The Bible clearly does both, all the while teaching us the proper relationship between law and love.
We must exercise our best efforts to discern what that relationship is. The assortment of books, discussions, and opinions on this subject is vast. Thus sorting through the issues requires prayer and the plentiful work of the Holy Spirit, the only true Teacher. May God give us all discernment to distinguish things that differ and to join things that must be understood together.
“All You Need Is Love”?
Every heresy and cult waves the word love around like a banner of virtue. It is their favorite word, but it is never connected to God’s law. The hippie movement of the sixties also proclaimed this word-painted on vans and placards-often in the form of “free love.” Political liberals continue to speak of love divorced from individual responsibility.
In March of 1965, Time magazine reported a meeting of nine hundred ministers and students at Harvard Divinity School in which they considered the subject of the “new morality.” The title of the article, “Love in Place of Law?” set up an antithesis. Under the heading, “We Are Delivered,” the article said, “Inevitably, the speakers reached no definite conclusion, but they generally agreed, that, in some respects, the new morality is a healthy advance as a genuine effort to take literally St. Paul’s teaching that through Christ we are delivered from the law.”
Though these words do come from the New Testament, they certainly do not teach what the Harvard speakers implied. Some questions need to be asked about the context of Paul’s words: In what respect are we delivered from the law, and, from what laws are we delivered? People who are motivated by genuine love are certainly not lawless. They love the moral and ethical standard that Christ loved and kept, contrary to the words of Princeton president, Paul Ramsey, who said in the same article, “Lists of cans and cannots are meaningless.”
Now, we are not surprised at this dangerous, destructive ignorance when we find it among cults, liberals, and agnostics. But when Bible-believing preachers set up a false antithesis between law and love, we should be shocked, appalled, saddened, and greatly pained.
Setting up a false antithesis between law and love (as if they are conflicting, opposing ideas) is one of the most subtle ways to undermine the Ten Commandments, biblical morality, and true Christianity. Granted there is a difference between law and love; but there is also an immutable connection. The failure to see this unchangeable relationship has led people into countless errors, heresies, and spiritual shipwrecks.
An Immutable Connection
Let us consider a few passages that show the immutable connection between law and love. Notice how love is joined to the Ten Commandments in the following teaching of Paul:
Owe no one anything except to love one another, for he who loves another has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. (Rom. 13:8-10)
Moreover, what better definition of love could we give than the biblical one we have from John, the great apostle of love himself? “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3).
Observe, also, our Lord’s conversation with the lawyer in Matthew 22:35-40. When asked in verse 36, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” our Lord immediately connected God’s commandments and God’s love. Jesus always connected law and love. What could be plainer than the following examples?
He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him. . . . If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father’s who sent Me.” (John 14:21,23-24)
If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love. . . . This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. . . . You are My friends if you do whatever I command you.” John 15:10,12,14)
These statements should settle forever the fact that there is an eternal relationship between God’s law and God’s love.
To emphasize that love itself is a command is consistent with many New Testament passages: “Love your neighbor” (Matt. 5:43); “love your enemies” (Luke 6:27,35); “love one another” (Rom. .13:8); “love your wives” (Eph. 5:25); “love the brotherhood” (1 Peter 2:17).
These passages are sufficiently clear to show that there is a vital connection between law and love. They should cause us to renounce any teaching-whether packaged in clever illustrations or dispensed via subtle implications-that would separate law and love. If ever the biblical teaching about the commandments was needed in the home, the church, and the nation, it is now! With lawlessness rampant, we certainly do not need preachers and teachers who separate what God has joined together.
The “love only” doctrine is the enemy of true Christianity, of the Bible, and of the souls of men. It is not biblical love at all. Nor is lawless love Christlike.
The gospel of Christ breathes the Spirit of holy love, namely:
Love is the fulfilling of all gospel precepts.
Love is the pledge of all gospel joys.
Love is the evidence of gospel power.
Love is the ripe fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23).
The Spirit of genuine love is never, never, at the expense of law and truth. Nor is love ever separated from the biblical directives for holy living that are objectively and eternally set out in the Ten Commandments. This is underscored in that great love chapter in the Bible, where Paul says that “love rejoices in the truth” (1 Cor. 13:6).
The connection between law and love is deeply embedded in the Old Testament, , as well as the New. This is illustrated in Exodus 20, where God gave the Decalogue at Sinai. Before giving the Ten Commandments, God reminded the Israelites of His redemptive love. `I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt” (v. 2). That was a loving redemptive act. Not only does the prologue to the Ten Commandments speak of God’s redeeming love, but later, in reference to the second commandment, verse 6 speaks of God’s “showing mercy” to His people. Love and mercy are harmoniously tied to the Decalogue.
Jesus reaffirmed that connection in John 14:15: “If you love Me, keep My commandments.” His summary of the law in Matthew 22:37-40-the law of love for God and neighbor-echoes the love command given with the law in Deuteronomy 6:5. Not only our Lord and His apostle, but the whole Bible joins God’s law and God’s love.
Love as Motive
Love has no eyes except the holy law of God, no direction apart from God’s commands. Paul spoke of the love of Christ constraining us. It moves us to duty. Love is the only true motive for all worship and duty, but by itself it does not define either. Therefore, we may not put love “in place of law.” They belong together. Christian behavior springs from love to God and our neighbor. If we loved them perfectly, our character and behavior would be perfect because it would conform to God’s will. Love is a motive for and expresses itself in obedient action.
Such action fulfills the law: “Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law” (Rom. 13:10). Motive and action cannot be more tightly joined than they are in this passage. If love does not constrain us to fulfill the moral law, it is not the love of which the Bible speaks. The apostle Paul made this very clear when he said that “the love of Christ constrains us” (2 Cor. 5:14). It is the love of God that puts the law of God into effect.
Genuine love for God is intensely preoccupied with Him as the Supreme Object of love. It is, therefore, intrinsically active in doing His will. Love itself is commanded in the Old Testament as well as the New. Jesus said, “These things I command you, that you love one another” (John 15:17). Love is also described as a command in Deuteronomy 6:5-7: “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might. And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart; you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up.”
We must be very clear that the command to love will not create love or generate love. This command, like every other, cannot create the disposition or will to obey. But the mere fact that love is a command should silence those who argue for an antithesis between law and love. Moses, Jesus, and Paul all connected law and love, as does John in 1 John 5:3: “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.”
Woe to anyone who separates what Moses, Christ, and the apostles have said belong together! What God has joined let no man put asunder.
Feet, here is part 2 of “God’s Law and God’s Love.” Enjoy.
Law Defines Love
The full content and direction of the law is not defined by love. When the Bible speaks of the “law of love,” it cannot mean that love stands by itself as a definition of righteousness. Love is a principle of action, just as Paul, speaking of our remaining sin, describes that sin as a law or principle of action: “I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. . . . But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to, the law of sin which is in my members” (Rom. 7:21, 23 KJV). As a principle of action, law directs us in the true expression of love. Love does not spontaneously follow its own way. It is the fulfilling of the law. The law is love’s eyes, without which love is blind.
Realizing this proper connection between law and love will drive us to all of Scripture to discover the behavior that God clearly defines as loving obedience. Nowhere in the Scriptures will we find that love dictates its own standard of conduct. We hear our Lord say, “If you love Me, keep My commandments,” not, “If you love me, love me in any way you feel.”
He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he, who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him. (John 14:21)
If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love. (John 15:10)
Our Lord’s commandments in respect to morality are no different from His Father’s commands. Otherwise there would be war in the Trinity. (Our difficulties in understanding the Trinity are immense enough without our suggesting a division in the Trinity!) There are not two moral standards of righteousness in the Bible-Christ’s and the Father’s. Nor is the Bible divided against itself, such that Old Testament believers were directed by law, but New Testament believers are directed by love.
Biblical love is never an autonomous, self-directing force capable of defining its own norms or standards of behavior. It is the fulfilling of God’s commandments. We must not subtract love from the whole context of biblical revelation. Love does not stand alone or act alone. It has many biblical relatives, and the law is one of them.
A Heart for the Law
Likewise, the true Christian does not let his own heart-even though it is a renewed heart-spontaneously decide what is right. That heart must be directed by God’s law. Indeed, the Spirit writes the law on the hearts and minds of all who are born again (Heb. 8:10; 10:16).
Does that mean that we come to know the law simply by reading an inscription on our hearts? No. The teaching of Hebrews 8:10 and 10:16 is that the renewed heart has an affinity with, and love for, the law of God, resulting in cheerful, loving obedience. “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3). “I delight in the law of God” (Rom. 7:22). Here again we see an important bond between God’s law and love.
If fallen man has the work of the law written on his heart so that he does by nature the things of the law (Rom. 2:14-15), how much clearer it must have been written on Adam’s heart in his original state! And if the renewed man has the law written upon his heart, surely it cannot be different in principle from what was first written on Adam’s heart and later written on tables of stone at Sinai.
Scripture dispels that ignorant, erroneous idea that love is its own law and the renewed conscience its own monitor. And yet, this wicked fancy continues to abound among Bible teachers, despite the clear testimony of Scriptures to the contrary.
I recently read an article by a brilliant young author who was busily sowing the seeds of antinomianism. In the article he raised a question about sexual purity: “What perspective does Paul press on the Corinthians to dissuade them from sexual morality?” (The author was referring to 1 Cor. 6:18-20, where the apostle tells the Corinthians to “flee fornication.”) The young writer answered his own question: “The death of Christ by which they were purchased.” What the author failed to consider, however, was how Paul or the Corinthians knew what sexual immorality was. How did they know-and how can we know-what constituted sexually immorality?
It is one thing to use the death of Christ, whereby they were purchased, as a motive for obedience to flee fornication. It is another thing to know and understand our duty to be chaste. The duty is not found in the word love. It is found in the seventh commandment.
The same author noted that “obedience flows from the redemptive work of Christ.” Surely a proper motive for obedience is our gratitude for Jesus’ redeeming work. But there must also be an objective standard for obedience before we can understand how to obey. Motive is one thing-specific duty is another. They are different, though vitally related.
Shouting “Love!” (the motive) tells us nothing specifically about our moral duties. The proper expressions of love are defined by the commandments of God. Though the Christian life is not initiated or sustained by commandment or law, Christian duty has no definition or direction without divine law.
When Paul says in Romans 13:9-10 that the commandments are summarized by the law of love, his point is not that love replaces law or is exempt from it. Law is not abrogated by love; it is fulfilled. Love neither supersedes law nor releases us from obedience. It enables us to obey. Love does not make stealing or coveting, or any breach of the law, something other than sin for the Christian (though some would give this passage that meaning). Love so penetrates and so constrains us that (not reluctantly or through fear, but joyfully) we act toward our neighbor in all things, great and small, as the law bids us. Yes, Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, but not from the law itself. That would be to redeem us from a divine rule and guide, from that which is “holy, and just, and good.”
Love as `a New Commandment’-John 13:34
An often misused text of Scripture is John 13:34, where Jesus says: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.” Does this verse imply that a new law-the law of love-has replaced the older Ten Commandments? Is that what Jesus meant when He spoke of “a new commandment”?
To understand this verse, or any verse, we must first examine it in its immediate context and in its remote context. But before doing that, it would be helpful to remind ourselves of some principles for interpreting Scripture.
Interpreting Scripture
In the very first chapter of The Westminster Confession of Faith, we have a rule of interpretation.
The infallible rule of interpretation of scripture is the scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture, (which is not manifold, but one) it may be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly. (1.10)
This rule has been called the “analogy of Scripture” or the “analogy of faith.” Its meaning and importance have been well stated by Charles Hodge.
If the Scriptures be what they claim to be, the word of God, they are the work of one mind, and that mind divine. From this it follows that Scripture cannot contradict Scripture. God cannot teach in one place anything which is inconsistent with what He teaches in another. Hence Scripture must explain Scripture. (Systematic Theology [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 19521,187)
No doctrine concerning Scripture is of more importance to the Bible student than that which affirms its unity and harmony. From that principle flow the following rules for interpreting Scripture:
When the plain sense of Scripture is clear, seek no other sense; therefore, take every work at its usual, literal, primary meaning unless the context dictates otherwise.
Subordinate passages must always be interpreted in the light of leading truths.
What is obscure must be interpreted by the light of what is plain. Peripheral ambiguities must be interpreted in harmony with fundamental certainties. No interpretation of any text, therefore, is right which does not agree with the principles of religion, the Apostles’ Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments.
In addition, if you have only one passage of Scripture on which to form some important doctrine, you will probably find, on closer examination, that you have none.
With these reminders before us, let us examine John 13:34: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another.”
The Context of John 13:34
John 13:34 is part of our Lord’s lesson on servanthood. He illustrates this concept by washing the disciples’ feet (13:3-16). Nowhere in this entire chapter is our Lord giving a code of moral conduct or an objective standard of righteousness. That is not His subject in John 13. Therefore, we must be careful not to ask of this verse, What is the biblical standard of moral conduct? Love is the answer, but not to that question; which is to say, that is not the question raised here. To answer “love” to that question may sound very pious, but we would still need to define “love.” How does Christian love act? In what direction does love go? How does love manifest itself toward God and man?
John 13 does not tell us those things. It does not teach us that we are to worship God; or that we are not to steal, murder, or commit adultery; or that we are to honor our father and mother. Our Lord’s subject instead is “servanthood,” and the key to verse 34 is found in the words, “as I have loved you.” These words take us to the supreme example-the suffering servant-and that takes us to the cross.
A cross without a broken law is a cross without sin. Without law and sin, the cross is a jig-saw puzzle with the key pieces missing. Basic to the cross is Christ’s satisfying divine justice, thereby upholding the law. The spirit of the cross is His manifesting saving love. The cross affirms law and love together. Verse 35 says, “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” Does this mean that all men know that we are His disciples if we march around holding up “Love” signs, or singing “Love, love, love”? Of course not! They will know that we follow Christ if they see Christlike love in our actions-holy deeds of mercy as defined by the Father’s commands.
To follow Jesus’ example is to love what Jesus loved, and to hate what Jesus hated, conforming our conduct to the same standard that He perfectly obeyed. He could say, “I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me” (John 5:30). Where is the Father’s will expressed in respect to morals? In the holy commands of Scripture. Jesus was indeed a law-keeping Savior.
Was the Command to Love New?
Was the command in John 13:34-to “love one another”-new? No, the law of love for God and man is the summary of all the commandments, and has been from the giving of the law to Moses.
Hear, 0 Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one! You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might. And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart; you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. (Deut. 6:4-9)
You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD. (Lev. 19:18)
Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” Jesus said to him, “`You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matt. 22:35-40)
These passages, and many more, prove conclusively that to love is not a new obligation. Nor is it a new, different standard of right conduct. There. already was a perfect, eternal standard of morality in the Ten Commandments, which has always been summarized by the law of love.
What Was New About the Command to Love?
What was new about our Lord’s command in John 13:34? The answer is in the words `as I have loved you.” The text offers a living demonstration of servanthood. In the person and work of Jesus, love was manifested, yes, personified, as never before!
Our Lord displayed:
a love superior to its objects.
a love that never varied.
a love that deemed no sacrifice too great. He gave Himself. “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends” (John 15:13).
a love that did not subordinate, abrogate, or mitigate the law.
The love that Christ explained and manifested had always been commanded but never so pointedly demonstrated or personified. Such a demonstration was new! This commandment was also new in respect to its objects. God’s new commandment was brotherly love, “that you love one another.” Brotherly love is a special kind of love, going beyond love for one’s neighbor. It is intended for a special people-the people of God.
Brethren, I write no new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which you heard from the beginning. Again, a new commandment I write to you . . . because the darkness is passing away, and the true light is already shining. He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in the darkness until now. He who loves his brother, abides in the light, and there is no cause for stumbling in him. But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes. (1 John 2:7-11)
Brotherly love regarding the family of God is a new dimension to an old commandment. The commandment is new in respect to its manifestation of servanthood and new in respect to the objects of this love. Not only are we to have kind affections toward all men-that is just plain Christian benevolence. And genuine love to neighbors is extended to all according to their circumstances. We are even instructed to love our enemies. But this is not “brotherly love.”
Brotherly love-the love of godly men and women for their godliness-is peculiar to the household of faith. An affection directed toward the excellency of true religion, it delights in holiness and truth. It loves the image of God reflected in God’s true sons and daughters. This love attracts the eye and wins the heart because it embraces that divine nature of born-again men and women.
God imparts to His own a portion of His own loveliness. He made them new creatures of His free and distinguishing grace. Christ loves them as His own, calling them “My sheep.” The Holy Spirit loves them, and they love each other. To love Christ is to love those who are like Him. Among His people, all divisions vanish: name and nation, rank and party, race and gender. All are lost in the common name Christian. Jew and Gentile, bond and free, rich and poor, male and female are one in Christ. We have one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph. 4:5).
It is by the mark of brotherly love that Jesus’ disciples are to judge themselves. “We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren” (1 John 3:14). This is also the criterion by which Christ would have the world judge the sincerity of His religion and the truth of His gospel. “By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).
THIS NEW BROTHERLY LOVE does, not negate the objective standard of the Ten Commandments. It applies the commandments in a fresh and compelling way to the communion of the saints. Love and law, working together, give us clear guidance in how to please God and know His will. The law shows us our sin and thrusts us to the cross and the Savior for mercy and grace. Love constrains us to walk a path of righteousness defined by the commandments and marked by joy and humble servanthood. That is the right relationship between law and love.