The Rule of Love: Broken, Fulfilled, and Applied
Sep 23rd, 2009 by Nathan White
I’ve read a lot of treatments/books on the 10 commandments, but J. V. Fesko’s The Rule of Love surpasses them all. It’s wonderfully Christ-centered; it continually views each commandment through the the gospel –through the lens of Christ’s fulfillment of the Law on our behalf; it’s precise yet broad in its application; and it’s even concise in its length (132 small pages).
First, Fesko begins by examining the Prologue to the 10 Commandments (Ex 20:1-2), brilliantly demonstrating how this introduction is absolutely vital to a proper understanding of what follows –specifically because the prologue and a proper understanding of what it refers to in Israel’s history is a proclamation of the gospel before the Law is ever administrated. If we miss the prologue, we miss the gospel, we miss Christ, and we will misinterpret the Law that follows. Moralism/Phariseeism/antinomianism abounds because this prologue is neglected and ignored when so many come to interpret the 10 commandments.
From there Fesko breaks down each commandment in its historical, covenantal, and redemptive context, as well as its vertical dimension. Regarding this last perspective, Fesko stresses that although we may loosely identify the ‘two tables’ of the law as the first 4 being our duty to God and the last 6 being our duty to man, he rightly identifies that each one of the commandments has both vertical and horizontal dimensions. The 4th commandment, for example, is directed towards God but also has specific application towards man and animals. Another example would be the 5th and the 7th commandment, which David upon committing declares to God that “Against you, you only, have I sinned”.
But the redemptive context perspective is what makes this book so special. Christ is the focus from beginning to end. The believer’s trajectory of interpretation for each commandment must be through the lens of Christ’s accomplished work. We are not to look at Law-Application, but rather Law-Christ’s Work-Application to our lives.
God has saved us to reflect His image as His chosen and beloved people. Our looking into the law, in addition to it serving as a constant reminder and goad to see our need and fix our eyes upon Christ, is for us to reflect the righteousness of Jesus Christ in all our obedience, as He is the exact impersonation of the Law of God.
This is a very special book. It’s concise, easy to read, and its application reaches far and wide. It will make both the antinomian and the legalist sqirm with discomfort, which what makes it such a special treatment of this subject. Not only that, but this book will continually point people to the cross and to Jesus Christ, on every page and with every point made. The gospel-centered approach makes this book really a book about the gospel, even an expounding of the gospel at that, as the Christ-centeredness transcends and even swallows up at times the book’s main subject matter, the 10 commandments.
Also see:
- How Jesus Transforms the Ten Commandments, by the great Ed Clowney
- Law of Perfect Freedom: Relating to God and Others Through the Ten Commandments, by Mike Horton
Update:
I made a comment in the meta below that I thought would be a beneficial part of this post. My thoughts here are related to the book recommendation only in that it’s a little of my own thinking on the subject. The author never explicitly comes to the conclusions I do below.
Let me give a further example of the love and Christ-centeredness of the Law:
The New Testament teaches that there is no greater love than laying down our lives for a friend. Pure love, as it were, is absolutely selfless, up to the point of death if necessary. And in the NT Jesus Christ is given as our supreme example in this sacrificial love. But when we look at His act of love, we understand first that He came to earth to ‘do the will of His father’. That is, His sacrificial death was in obedience to His father’s will, even as He wrestled in the garden with following through with it.
Thus, the 5th commandment commands us to honor and obey our parents. Jesus, in the greatest act of love in the history of the world, was actually obeying His Father’s will first and foremost (obeying the 5th commandment) in laying down His life. So if we look at the 5th commandment isolated from the rest of scripture, we will see nothing different than what pagan nations since the beginning of time have agreed with, and we will undoubtedly setup this command in a moralistic/legalistic/secularistic manner. But if we look at this commandment in light of Christ and how He fulfilled it, only then can we truly understand the ‘love’ that is at its root. In other words, Christ obeyed His father first and foremost, but it was through this obedience He subsequently performed the greatest act of love towards us as well. Therefore, the purest form of love always has obedience to God’s law (the Ten) at its root; and the purest act of obedience to God’s law always has love towards God/others at its root. The two are interchangeable, and cannot ever be separated, otherwise we will become legalists.
The issue of love and its relation to both God and man is explicit when we come to the 4th commandment (and even the 10th). For we not only obey our God in keeping the Sabbath holy, but we obey as an act of love towards our neighbors, family, foreigners, and even animals. This is one reason why the notion that the 4th is ceremonial cannot be biblically supported. Foreigners and animals don’t have anything to do with Jewish ceremonies/the covenant, and violating the command, per the text, is sinning against both God AND man. In other words, it is a failure to love God and a failure to love our fellow man when we break the 4th commandment. It’s not one or the other. Breaking the 4th commandment always results in a failure to love. And it is only when we throw out the notion that the Law=love do we then misunderstand and misapply (annul or legalize) the 4th commandment.
Thus, the Law serves as an explanation of the perfect life of Christ, as a demonstration of perfect love towards God and man. We don’t jump directly from the Law to application to our lives; we look at the Law, look at it in relation to Christ as an expression of love, and only then do we move towards application in our own lives.
I’m sure you’ll get lots of discussion on this. I do like your last statement “the Christ-centeredness transcends and even swallows up at times the book’s main subject matter, the 10 commandments.” I also think that a more accurate portrayal of the tablets of stone is to consider each one as a complete portrayal of the Mosaic covenant. Each tablet containing all 10 commandments, one tablet representing God’s side and one representing man’s. I agree that all of the commandments ultimately portray our love toward God and thus following our love toward one another.
Yeah, a lack of Christ/gospel-centeredness when looking at the Law has led so many astray on this issue. Again, this author is more balanced than any treatment I have read. Our relation to the 10 cannot be properly understood or applied outside of Christ and what He has done.
But I wouldn’t have any serious qualms about how you speak of the two tables. We believe of course that we do not stand in the exact same relation to the 10 as Israel did. But what we would say is that in some ways we do. That’s why the prologue is important. It is only after redemption that the Law is given. In other words, the 10 is the essence of the Law of Christ, the Law given and comanded to those who have already been redeemed out of bondage and slavery. There is no merit/mere duty or fulfilling of any covenant involved.
Thus, though the 10 do in some way form the basis for Israel’s stay in the land, they come only after God has delivered them from bondage and fulfilled His unconditional promises to their forefathers (the Abrahamic Covenant). And of course, we’d see this same sort of imagery in the NT, as the 10 form the basis for all true Christian obedience, from the heart, in response to the great things God has already done for us, unconditionally through His grace. As Paul in Rom 13 points out, the 10 are the purest expression of true love.
And as this author continually points out, the 10 are a God’s ‘rule of love’ with His special people. It is love that led to the giving of them, love that fulfilled them in our place, and love that now empowers us to obey them as we seek to imitate the righteousness of Christ in its purest expression, as His chosen and special people.
I love the title of the book, because it really captures the quintessential reality of the Mosaic Law.
(This comment is an addition to the post; it is not a reply to any one person)
Let me give an example of the love and Christ-centeredness of the Law:
The New Testament teaches that there is no greater love than laying down our lives for a friend. Pure love, as it were, is absolutely selfless, up to the point of death if necessary. And in the NT Christ is given as our supreme example in this sacrificial love. But when we look at His act of love, we understand first that He came to earth to ‘do the will of His father’. That is, His sacrificial death was in obedience to His father’s will, even as He wrestled in the garden with following through with it.
Thus, the 5th commandment commands us to honor and obey our parents. Jesus, in the greatest act of love in the history of the world, was actually obeying His Father’s will first and foremost (obeying the 5th commandment). So if we look at the 5th commandment isolated from the rest of scripture, we will see nothing different than what pagan nations since the beginning of time have agreed with, and we will undoubtedly setup this command in a moralistic/legalistic/secularistic manner. But if we look at this commandment in light of Christ and how He fulfilled it, only then can we truly understand the ‘love’ that is at its root. In other words, Christ obeyed His father first and foremost, but it was through this obedience He subsequently performed the greatest act of love towards us as well. Therefore, the purest form of love always has obedience to God’s law (the Ten) at its root; and the purest act of obedience to God’s law always has love towards others at its root. The two are interchangeable, and cannot ever be separated, otherwise we will become legalists.
The issue of love and its relation to both God and man is explicit when we come to the 4th commandment (and even the 10th). For we not only obey our God in keeping the Sabbath holy, but we obey as an act of love towards our neighbors, family, foreigners, and even animals as well. This is one reason why the notion that the 4th is ceremonial cannot be biblically supported. Foreigners and animals don’t have anything to do with Jewish ceremonies, and violating the command, per the text, is sinning against both God AND man. In other words, it is a failure to love God and a failure to love our fellow man when we break the 4th commandment. It’s not one or the other. Breaking the 4th commandment always results in a failure to love. And it is only when we throw out the notion that the Law=love do we then misunderstand and misapply (annul) the 4th commandment.
Thus, the Law serves as an explanation of the perfect life of Christ, as a demonstration of perfect love towards God and man. We don’t jump directly from the Law to application to our lives; we look at the Law, look at it in relation to Christ as an expression of love, and only then do we move towards application in our own lives.
Hi Nathan,
Thanks for the review. May I ask 2 questions?
1. Does the author believe that “redemption” in Ex. 20:2 has the same definition as in the NT? IOW, does he believe that ALL Israelites at that time were redeemed from slavery to Egypt or slavery to sin?
2. Also, I’m curious, how did the author interpret…
“IF you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you SHALL BE (in the future) my treasured possession among all peoples…and you SHALL BE (in the future) to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” (Ex. 19:5-6)
compared to…
“But you ARE (already) a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession” (1 Pet. 2:9)?
Hi Greg,
Before I get to your questions, neither the author nor myself is saying that Israel is a one-to-one picture of the church, or that our relation to God/the Law/Redemption is exactly the same as theirs was. There are a lot of similarities, but certainly things are much different under the New Covenant. This is what makes his book so refreshing. He looks at it all Christologically, from the perspective of us being under the New Covenant, not the Mosaic, and from the perspective that those were types and shadows of the fulfillment we now live in.
You asked,
The author doesn’t explain this in detail. What he does point out is that the prologue makes it clear that the Ten words are directly to the people from God as opposed to the rest of the Law of Moses (Ex 24:4), that He and He alone redeemed them from Egypt because of the covenant promise He made to Abraham, and that because of such the Law was not revealed to God’s people as the means by which they should earn their redemption, but rather to show them how they can be conformed to the image of their loving, covenant Lord.
You asked,
The author states in relation to Ex 19:5-6, “The Law was the tool to show Israel what it meant to be a holy nation as well as to reveal God’s character and attributes…Israel was to continually remember her redeemed state in her reflection upon the Law. That is evident from God’s own instructions to Israel” (the author then quotes Deut 6:20-23, emphasizing the direct connection between the Law and redemption from Egypt.
The author then argues that we must interpret the Law in the light of the revelation of Christ, considering our own covenant context in that we are not the recipients of the Mosaic covenant, but are instead the recipients of the fulfillment of the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants.”When we read the Law, we must always be mindful of our redemption through Christ. At the same time we must realize that we are reading about the image and perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.”
A good summary of his thesis, though it could be explained at length: “The Law is not merely a legal bond; it is also the rule of love between God and His people…breaking God’s Law is violating that bond of love.”
Somewhat related to this subject…
Al Mohler’s lectures (turned into a book) on the Ten Commandments. I certainly don’t agree with every point, but this is nevertheless a very good treatment of the subject:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2009/09/23/mohler-on-the-10-commandments/
This must be his most recent work? I have, I am told by him, purchased all his other written works!
This literary work should be as you claim though I have not read it, just purchased it today, by virtue of all his other works I have read!
Dr. Fesko is one of a few contemporary Theologians, brothers all, whose spirit has His Spirit as the resident Host working out through written form, the Wisdom and Knowledge of God!