Matt 5:17–18 — The Law of Christ

Matthew 5:17–18 is a programmatic statement for the Sermon on the Mount. Everything Jesus has said thus far—from the Beatitudes through the call to be salt and light—leads to this explanation of his relationship to the law and of his disciples’ relationship to the law through him. I have therefore titled this sermon “The Law of Christ.” Christ himself takes up the law and teaches it to the people of God.

The passage has received sharply opposed interpretations. At one extreme, the theonomic reading associated with Greg Bahnsen treats it as teaching strong continuity: unless the New Testament explicitly changes a Mosaic command, the whole law, including Israel’s judicial penalties, remains binding. At the other extreme, dispensationalists and some New Covenant theologians assume that the Mosaic law has been abolished unless a command is explicitly repeated in the New Testament.

Neither extreme adequately accounts for Jesus’ words. He says that he came not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to fulfill them. We must therefore consider this law of Christ in its redemptive-historical context, its mistaken contrast with abolition, and its true significance as law fulfilled and delivered by the Redeemer.

Its Redemptive-Historical Context

And I’ve used that very title or subtitle in sermons before because this is a key thing in Matthew’s gospel. Matthew is always talking about this redemptive historical fulfillment of what is happening in Christ. Remember in the first four chapters of Matthew’s gospel? He starts right off by connecting what he’s, the Gospel of Matthew is about Jesus? About what he taught, what he did, his death and resurrection. But Matthew introduces this Gospel that is all about Jesus by talking about the Old Testament. The very first words of Matthew’s Gospel are to connect what he’s going to talk about about Jesus to the Old Testament.

The book of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham. And you have this genealogy that goes all the way back to Abraham. And you have these fulfillment statements as well. Matthew will say that so and so occurred in the life of Jesus in order to fulfill what was written by the prophet Isaiah, or the prophet Jeremiah, or the prophet Micah, and so on and so forth. And so Matthew is already setting the stage for us by talking about this redemptive historical transition from the Old Covenant to the New. And you see that right here with Jesus himself in Matthew 5, 17.

He says, do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. And so you see two key words that are used there? The one word is I have come. Which implies some movement, some messianic arrival, something is happening here. But then you also have his usage of that very same verb, to fulfill, the same verb that Matthew used in Matthew 1-4 to talk about how Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament and of all that the Law and the Prophets pointed to. This language here of I have come is very significant. It’s used throughout the four Gospels. For example, in Matthew 10, verses 34 and 35, Jesus says, He’s saying that His advent as the Messiah in the fullness of time is this event in which He has come upon the scene.

He’s been revealed to Israel through His public baptism. He has been anointed with the Holy Spirit, and now the Spirit is upon Him as the bearer of the kingdom of God. And He comes to say, look, the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent for the kingdom of heaven. Is at hand. But it’s not just Matthew, Mark, Luke, even the Gospel of John uses this same language of I have come. John 12 verse 27, what shall I say? Father save me from this hour? No, for this purpose I have come to this hour, where John 18, 37, for this purpose I was born, and for this purpose I have come into the world to bear witness to the truth.

This is messianic language, the messianic arrival. The long-awaited messianic king has come, and he has come to accomplish a mission. He has come to bring in the kingdom of God, He has come ultimately to go to the cross and to accomplish redemption and to rise again from the dead and ascend back to the Father. So there’s a redemptive historical significance here to what Jesus is saying in this announcement.

That then helps us to eliminate the view of extreme continuity. The view of extreme continuity, which is that Jesus is simply reiterating, reaffirming, and reestablishing, and just saying, look, I’m not doing anything different. I’m just telling you that the law is still in effect. That’s how Greg Bahnsen, for example, interpreted the verb to fulfill. So he would say, he would translate it this way, do not think I’ve come to abolish the law of the prophets. I’ve come not to abolish them, but to reaffirm them, to reiterate that they are still in force, to reinforce them. But that’s not what the word fulfill means. And so by doing that though, he’s ignoring this key verb that I have come. He’s ignoring the redemptive historical context as something significant is happening here in the history of redemption.

All that had gone before with Moses and the law and the prophets and David and everything that happened before was preparing for this. And now Jesus is coming on the scene and saying, I have arrived. I am here. I have come. But in what particular way has He come? Of course, we know that He’s come as the Messiah. He’s come as the fulfillment of all the Old Testament prophecies. But there’s a more specific way that we can see the arrival of the Messianic King on the scene. And that is if we just look at what we’re seeing here. Sometimes you have to just stop and look? You’re reading a passage of scripture and you just need to stop and pay attention to your surroundings, so to speak. I mean the surroundings in the text. But just get the picture of what’s going on here in this text. Matthew 5 verse 1, Jesus went up on the mountain and he sat down and his disciples came to him. What does that remind you of?

Someone on a mountain who is teaching God’s will for God’s people. Doesn’t that remind you of Moses on Mount Sinai receiving the law on Mount Sinai and then communicating the law, communicating the will of God to his people? So Jesus here, if you just stop and look at what’s going on, you see Jesus here being pictured as a new Moses on a new mountain who is revealing a new covenant. The covenant that God made with Israel at Mount Sinai was a covenant of law. The focus of that covenant was on the laws that God was giving to Israel through Moses. And so this statement here, that I have come not to abolish the law of the prophets, but to fulfill them. And then Jesus going on and giving his commands and saying, you have heard that it was said, but I say to you, as Jesus gives these commands, he is unfolding the content of the new covenant. A covenant that also has commandments in it, that also has laws and teachings and things that he wants us to follow. And there’s one other additional point as well, which is not only do we see the new Moses on the new mountain giving a new covenant with its commands, but we also see implicitly the new Israel because Jesus calls 12 apostles, which will be fleshed out later as we get into the Gospel of Matthew.

I believe it’s in Matthew chapter 10. When the 12 apostles are explicitly numbered, but why 12 to symbolize that this is the new Israel? Just as there were 12 tribes, 12 sons of Jacob, so Christ is gathering and creating the new Israel. In fact, Jesus himself is the nucleus of the new Israel.

If you recall back in Matthew chapter 2, Remember in Matthew 2, when we looked at that passage at the end of the second half of Matthew chapter 2, when the angel told Joseph to rise, take the child, the baby Jesus, and his mother, and go down to Egypt, and remain there for a time, and wait until Herod dies? And then it says, this was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, here it’s the prophet Hosea, out of Egypt I called my son. In the original context of Hosea, if you can look it up for yourself, Hosea 11 verse 1, that’s talking about Israel. But this passage is applying it to Jesus because he is the new Israel.

He is the nucleus of the new Israel. And then the 12 disciples who are following him are fleshing that out and creating the corporate people of God in union with Christ. So that’s the first thing about the law of Christ in this passage, is to understand the redemptive historical context and significance of what Jesus is saying here. But that leads us then to the second point, it’s mistaken contrast. What is Jesus doing here?

Its Mistaken Contrast

Is he setting aside the law of Moses? Is he setting aside the moral requirements of the old covenant and abolishing the law? And giving completely new commandments that have nothing to do with the old? No, Jesus explicitly says that he’s not doing that. Do not think, he says, that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. He makes it very clear.

Why might some think that he is abolishing the law? If you read the rest of Matthew chapter five, you have these what are called antitheses. You have heard that it was said to those of old, you shall not murder, or you shall not commit adultery, or whoever divorces his wife, et cetera. You’ve heard that it was said, but I say unto you, and so when you first hear that language, it sounds like an abolition. It sounds like he is saying, this is what Moses taught, but now I’m getting rid of that, and instead I’m teaching you something new, something completely to replace it, that has no connection with the old.

To prevent anyone from getting that mistaken idea that’s what he’s doing, he clearly says here at the beginning in this programmatic statement of his view of the law, of his relationship to the law, do not think, do not suppose, do not get the wrong idea as if I have come to abolish the law or the prophets, for I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. Now, one little question that may be arising in your mind is, what does he mean here by the law and the prophets? Why mention the prophets? It would make sense if he just said I think I’ve come to abolish the law. I’ve not come to abolish the law. I’ve come to fulfill it. Why does he add in there the law and the prophets?

I think that we could have a little clue if we turn to Matthew chapter 7. And verse 12. So this is still in the context of the Sermon on the Mount, and here’s another instance where Jesus uses this phrase, the law and the prophets, and notice how he uses it. He says here, so whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the law and the prophets. So notice that in that usage of the phrase, the law and the prophets, he’s not focusing on the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament.

He’s not talking about the entire Old Testament. The Old Testament contains a lot of things? It contains teaching about the Messiah to come. It contains historical teaching about all that God did with Israel throughout their history. But here he’s narrowing it down. He’s narrowing down the Law and the Prophets to the moral sum. What is the moral sum of what the Law and the Prophets are after? Well, the golden rule? Whatever you wish others would do to you, so you also should do to them. This is how you should treat people, the law of love. Love your neighbor as yourself.

It’s just an exposition of that commandment. So the Law and the Prophets then, sometimes there are places in the Bible, especially in Paul, like in Romans 3.21, where Paul says that now the righteousness of God has been revealed apart from the Law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it. There he’s using the Law and the Prophets in a broader sense that includes all of the teaching of the Old Testament concerning the Messiah to come and the Gospel. Even passages like Genesis 15, 6, that Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness, which Paul takes as being a preaching of the gospel ahead of time to Abraham. And so that would all be a part of the law and the prophets in that particular verse. But here, in this context, in the Sermon on the Mount, based on Matthew 7-12 and then bringing that into Matthew 5-17, I think that the Law and the Prophets here has a somewhat more narrow application of focusing on what we would call in theological terms the moral law. The sum of the moral law, which is summarized in the Ten Commandments, but it’s that unchanging standard of what God desires of those who are made in His image. God created man in His own image, and he requires that as image bearers of God, that we imitate God, and that therefore we should do all these things, that we should not worship other gods, that we should not commit murder and adultery, and all these things. This is the sum of the moral law that is rooted in that we are made in the image of God. And Jesus is saying here that the Law and the Prophets are teaching that. He’s not denying that they also have this other aspect of their teaching, the Gospel ahead of time, the Messianic prophecies, but he’s narrowing it down to the moral core of what the Law and the Prophets taught. It’s actually an interesting thing to think about because if you If you read the prophets, for example, in Jeremiah, when you read the prophets, they are holding Israel to account for their failures to keep the Mosaic law? Now, one of the main things, of course, they focus on is the first commandment?

They’re worshiping, Israel is in sin, they become apostate, they’re worshiping other gods. They’ve gone after Baal and so on. And so they are in this state of breaking their covenant relationship with God, like an unfaithful wife breaking the marriage covenant. And so they’re about to go into exile for their sins. But the prophets don’t only focus on that key sin. That is, of course, the main sin. That is the big issue going on in the prophets. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the minor prophets, they’re coming in with this indictment of Israel for their sins and breaking the covenant. But they don’t only focus on that. There are key passages in the prophets, and you can find them sprinkled throughout, where the prophets will also bring up other aspects of what we would call the moral law. And call them to account for their murders, for their sexual immorality, for all the different things that they’re doing that are contrary to God’s law in the moral sense. He’s not indicting them for their failures in the area of worship, for their failures in the area of keeping all the ceremonial details of the law. There seems to be this focus in which the prophets get to the core of what the law is all about in terms of its moral aspect.

They will even say things like, what is the point of all this coming into my courts with all your sacrifices? You’re just trampling my courts. I don’t care about sacrifice. They almost put down the ceremonial law as if it’s like this thing that’s an encumbrance, as if the Jews are getting so focused on all the ceremonial laws, and all the details of how to offer the right sacrifices, that they’ve lost the big picture, and here they are committing all these horrible violations of the moral law.

The prophets have this very interesting role to play in the unfolding development of God’s revelation of the moral law. The moral law is revealed originally at creation, just based on that man is made in the image of God, but it’s not spelled out in the form of Ten Commandments. But then it gets a real boost at Mount Sinai, where we have the Ten Commandments. But even there, the Ten Commandments are surrounded by all kinds of other laws, the judicial laws and the ceremonial laws, and so it’s easy to not be exactly clear on what is the moral law. But it’s in the prophets, I think, that you really see this aspect where the ceremonial law gets somewhat devalued, if you will, and the moral law focusing on the Ten Commandments is strongly emphasized and clarified.

I think that’s what Jesus has in mind here where he says, do not think I’ve come to abolish the law or the prophets. He’s focusing upon the prophets specifically in this element of their teaching. That was clarifying the moral law that’s rooted in creation and in the image of God and that is distinct from the myriad ceremonial laws that are not moral. They’re not rooted in God’s unchanging nature. They were for that time for Israel as a preparation for the work of Christ. So what is Jesus saying here?

He’s saying, do not think that I have come to abolish the moral law. Do not think I have come to abolish the moral teaching that is summarized in the Decalogue and further explained and highlighted in the prophets in their teaching and preaching. Due to those six antitheses that are to come you’ve heard that it was said, but I say to you, you might think that I’m abolishing the law, but I’m not. In fact, the moral law cannot be abolished because it is rooted in God’s unchanging character.

That’s what Jesus is saying then. So the first point is the law of Christ, its redemptive historical context. The second point is its mistaken contrast. But that brings us then to the third point, its true significance. So if Jesus is not abolishing the moral law, what is he doing? Well, it says there that he is fulfilling it. And then that then raises the question, well, what does that mean? What does it mean to fulfill the law? Well, verse 18 explains that.

Its True Significance

For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Now at first, if you take that as a literal reading, that seems to support the theonomic Greg Bahnsen interpretation that Jesus is literally saying that every single detail of the Mosaic Law, all the way down to the smallest little thing, like the law that you cannot mix two different types of fibers in your garments, or the law that says you shall not mix meat with mother’s milk and so on. All these kinds of laws that are like very detailed and very down to the smallest dot of the law. You might think that’s what Jesus is saying, is that must all still be kept. But notice that what Jesus says in the next sentence.

He says, that not an iota, not a dot will pass from the law until all is accomplished. And now we see what he means by fulfill. When he says that until all is accomplished, that is fleshing out the meaning of the verb to fulfill. Now what does that mean, until all is accomplished? Well, there’s two senses in which the law is fulfilled.

One is through Jesus’ teaching as the final prophet that was prophesied back in Deuteronomy 18, the prophet that would arise from God’s people and be the final revelation of God’s will to the people of God, the prophet like Moses, the new Moses. So it could be fulfilled through Jesus’ teaching as he teaches the law correctly. Contrary to the misunderstandings of the Pharisees, or it could be understood in the sense of his own obedience to the law. Jesus himself, he is the second Adam born under the law in order to perfectly fulfill it in our place. So in that sense, we could say he fulfills the law through his own obedience to the law. He was perfectly obedient to God’s law, not only the moral law in the sense that he never committed any sin, he was without spot, He was a blameless sacrifice, but also even the ceremonial law. He kept all of the laws that were still in force until the veil was torn in two at his death. I think that the verb accomplished helps us to specify which meaning of fulfill is in view here.

I think it is primarily the second meaning, Christ’s own keeping of the law, Christ’s own fulfillment of the law as he does the law through his active and passive obedience. He not only actively obeys the law, keeping all the commands, but he also takes the curse of the law in our place through his passive obedience. And in fact, the two are so intertwined together, you can’t really separate them. It’s not as though the active obedience of Christ is his life up until the cross, and then the passive obedience is the cross, because even the cross is an act of obedience. Jesus wasn’t just accidentally murdered.

He willingly laid down his life? He offered himself as a sacrifice in obedience to his heavenly Father. That’s why in the Garden of Gethsemane, he prayed, Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me, this cup of wrath that he had to drink. And then he says, nevertheless, not my will, but your will be done. And so even going to the cross is an act of obedience. And therefore, the obedience of Christ is one whole. It’s his whole life that culminates in the cross. His obedience unto death, as Paul refers to it in Philippians 2, verse 8. But I think that is primarily what Jesus has in view here. Until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Now, you might be wondering, but it says until heaven and earth pass away. That sounds like way off in the future, not here in the death and resurrection of Christ. Well, I think that Jesus believes, and Jesus has this eschatological perspective, that his death and resurrection is the end. His death and resurrection is the heaven and earth passing away and the fulfillment of the new heavens and the new earth.

It’s still going to be delayed. We’re still waiting for that to be fulfilled, but in principle, it’s already occurred. That’s why when he’s hanging on the cross, there was darkness? Darkness of the day of judgment, the day of the Lord?

There’s the end of the world has happened through Christ’s death and resurrection. When you see Jesus hanging on the cross, you’re seeing hell, hell being poured out upon Christ in our place so that we might be delivered from the judgment to come.

Christ is saying here, do not think that I have come to abolish the moral law. I have not come to abolish it, but to fulfill it.

For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. And so that means then that even the ceremonial law is still in effect in some way. It’s been fulfilled. It’s been fulfilled. It’s not as though the ceremonial law is simply that Jesus comes and says, now you don’t have to keep it anymore. Now it’s irrelevant and it’s being done away with. Even the ceremonial law is still to be observed by us, at least in this way, by faith in Christ. It’s as we put our faith in Christ that we fulfill all of those ceremonial laws, such as bringing sacrifices and so on.

Even the holiness laws, the clean-unclean distinction? We don’t keep that anymore the way the Jews do. We don’t have to have clean and unclean food. We don’t have to avoid pork and so on and so forth. But we still are keeping that food law in the sense of maintaining that pure life that Christ is calling us to.

We’re called to be saints, we’re called to be holy ones in Christ, and to be separate from the world, and to be set apart as holy unto the Lord. And so even the ceremonial law is still accomplished, it is still fulfilled, and it is still in force in that theological sense. Not in force in the sense that we have to observe it in exhaustive detail.

I mentioned that I think that there are these two ways that you can interpret what Jesus is saying when he says, I’ve come not to abolish the law and the prophets, but to fulfill. Fulfill in sense one is through Jesus’s own teaching. Sense two is through his own active and passive obedience. And I said, I think that verse 18 clarifies that it’s talking about his own obedience, that he fulfills the law by his own obedience. But let’s go back and think about how that meaning is also in view here, because it’s precisely because Jesus has kept the law perfectly, because he has fulfilled it by his own obedience to the Father, to the point of death on the cross, It’s precisely because of that he is able then to communicate the moral law to his redeemed people. And this is why I refer to this as the law of Christ.

When Jesus says, you have heard that it was said, but I say unto you, he is now using that word I, not in the sense of I as an individual rabbi. You’ve heard that these other rabbis over there Rabbi Hillel and Rabbi Shammai, whoever, they said this, that’s how they interpreted the law. But I, Rabbi Yeshua, say this. As another interpreter. No, he’s saying, I as the messianic fulfiller of the law, I as the one who has come in the fullness of time in this whole redemptive historical context, I who have fulfilled it in my own life by my own obedience to the point of death on the cross, now I as your redeemer, he’s speaking to his disciples, to the redeemed, I now say unto you that this is how I desire you to live.

This is the will of God for you. And so we see then this key idea that both meanings of fulfill are in view. He fulfills the law by his own obedience, but he also fulfills the law by his teaching. And he’s able to do that precisely because of his obedience, precisely because he is the Savior and the Redeemer.

We receive these teachings, these moral teachings, which is the moral law, but now from Christ as our Redeemer. We receive them not as an impossible standard that none of us can keep, not as this absolute covenant of works where if we make one mistake we’re under a curse, but we receive these commands from the hand of our Savior, from the hand of Christ himself who died for our sins, who loves you, who is now in heaven interceding for you, and who is calling you to live in accordance with these commands.

The Law from the Hand of Christ

In the year 1645, there was a book written called The Marrow of Modern Divinity. I know you think modern, that sounds old, but back then it was modern, I guess. The title uses “marrow” to mean the heart or essence of the subject. And this book was written in the form of a dialogue that was specifically dealing with this question of how do we deal with the law? And the writer, he has these interesting names for the different people in the dialogue. So the name of one guy is Nomista, and that means legalist, right, from the Greek word namos, which is law. So one guy is named Nomista. And then there’s another guy in the dialogue named Anti-Nomista, so he’s the anti-Nomian, he’s the against law guy, who thinks that the law’s been abolished and we’re free to live as we please. And then there’s another guy named Evangelista, who is actually the voice of the author himself, Evangelista, that is the gospel preacher, who’s saying, no, both of these people are wrong.

Nomista is wrong, Antinomista is wrong. And then there’s a fourth person in the dialogue named Neophytus. He’s a neophyte. He’s a new believer. And he’s sitting there watching this debate. He doesn’t know who to believe. Wow, Nomista guy sounds really good. And then I hear Antinomista guy. Oh, he sounds really good. And then he eventually comes around to understanding the true way. From Evangelista, from the gospel preacher. And in this book, this dialogue, this author makes a very helpful distinction between receiving the law from the hand of God as creator versus receiving the law from the hand of Christ as our Redeemer. Remember I mentioned before that the moral law is rooted in our creation in the image of God. And so all of us, we are made in God’s image, whether we’re Christians or not, whether we’re believers or not, and we’re all under this obligation to obey God, to obey his moral law, his moral will. And that was summarized most clearly in the covenant of works that God made with Adam in the garden. And that law demands perfect obedience.

James 2.10, whoever fails in one point is guilty of all.

If we receive the law from the hand of God as a creator outside of Christ, it only condemns you. It only shows you how far you fall short. It only shows you that you’re a sinner and that you’re going to hell and that you don’t deserve God’s favor. But evangelists says, no, we need to listen to and receive the law, not from the hand of God as creator outside of Christ as a covenant of works, but the law from the hand of Christ. And I think that’s exactly what Jesus is teaching here in this passage. The author of the Marrow says this, the one, that is the law from the hand of God the creator, is to be delivered by God as he is creator out of Christ, only to such as are out of Christ. The other, that is the law from Christ, is to be delivered by God as he is a redeemer in Christ, only to those who are in Christ. Wherefore, seeing that you are now in Christ, oh, Neophytus, he’s talking to the new believer. Wherefore, seeing that you are now in Christ, beware that you receive not the Ten Commandments at the hand of God out of Christ, nor yet at the hands of Moses, but only at the hands of Christ. And so you shall be sure to receive them as the law of Christ. This understanding of the law and how it relates to us as believers is what Jesus is teaching here. And there’s a couple of things we need to keep in mind. First, this understanding of the law, the law in the hand of Christ, the law of Christ, assumes that the moral law is rooted in God’s eternal, unchanging nature.

It doesn’t change. The moral law doesn’t change. It’s not as though in one epoch of redemptive history, let’s say in the time of the old covenant, it was okay to commit murder or okay to bear false witness. But now in Christ, it’s different. No. There’s one unchanging law because God himself is unchanging. And yet, that law comes to us in different covenantal contexts, in different covenantal forms. Another key point is that the law from the hand of the Creator is a covenant of works that pronounces a curse on all who do not keep it perfectly.

Galatians 3.10, cursed is the one who does not abide, does not continue in all the things written in the book of the law to do them. You have to abide forever, you have to continue in perpetuity, and it’s in all of the things. And if you don’t, then you are under a curse. But disciples of Christ are delivered from the law as a covenant of works. We’ve been delivered from the tyranny of the devil, and we are now under Christ’s reign. Go back to Matthew chapter four, when Jesus announced that the kingdom is at hand, and then he called the disciples and said, come, follow me. He’s taking them out of the tyranny of the kingdom of the devil and bringing them now into the kingdom of salvation under Christ’s reign. And now he’s sitting down upon the mountain as the new Moses on the new mountain. Giving the new law to the people of God.

The moral law, which itself has not changed, comes to believers, comes to disciples, comes to those who are in Christ’s gracious reign and in his kingdom as the law from the hand of Christ. This is what in theology we also refer to as the third use of the law. The first use of the law is the law that drives you to Christ, it shows you your sin, it pronounces judgment upon you. But the third use of the law is as those who have been redeemed, as those who have been forgiven, as those who are now in Christ, the law still has a role to play in our lives to be a gracious rule of life and a guide for the Christian life.

Does this entail a change in the content of the moral law? No. The moral law cannot change because God cannot change. What changes is the covenantal context in which the law comes to us. We are no longer under the covenant of works but under the covenant of grace. Christ has fulfilled the law in our place, not only to justify us but also to sanctify us and conform us to his image.

The commands therefore come from the hand of our Savior, who paid for all our sins with his precious blood. He does not give them to condemn or exclude us, but as a gracious rule for the Christian life. We receive them with gratitude and a desire to serve him.

We still fail and fall short, but we continually repent and strive by God’s Spirit to walk in ways that please him. Christ’s yoke is easy and his burden is light because his commands come from the hands pierced for us. They encourage us to grow in fellowship with him.