Page 64 - Laying Down the Law

His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the
rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.

The Scriptures reveal that there is a very great difference between servants and
sons. It is necessary to grasp this distinction that we might recognize the temporal
nature of the Law.
I mentioned previously that there is a mystery contained in the fact that the
people of God in the wilderness were called “the CHILDREN of Israel.” What we see
in the life of Moses and the covenant at Sinai is God’s dealing with immature
humanity. Although the children were called to become sons, they were treated no
differently than slaves while they were minors.

Galatians 4:1-5
Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a
slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the
time appointed by the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in
bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of the
time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born
under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we
might receive the adoption as sons.

Do you see a transition in God’s dealing with His people in the passage above?
When we were children we were kept under the Law. “But when the fulness
of time had come...” God redeemed those under the Law that they might enter into
sonship.
One argument I have often encountered from those who argue for a continuance
of the Law is that God does not change, therefore the Law must still retain its role as
moral guardian to the people of God. Such arguments are predicated upon very poor
logic. God’s character and nature do not change, but His dealings with mankind have
often changed. Man existed for 2,500 years on this earth PRIOR to the Law being
given. Abraham was called of God to be the patriarch of a people who would be
Yahweh’s unique possession 430 years BEFORE the Law was given.
Did not God alter His dealings with man when He chose one nation to be His
own people? Did He not change again when He gave this people the Law at Sinai?
Previously they had only a covenant of promise. How then can one argue for a
perpetual continuance of the Law based upon an argument that God does not change?
People of God, understand me clearly. I am not teaching a position of
lawlessness. In Christ we have died to the Law so that we might bear fruit unto God.
The Law, like Hagar, could not produce fruit acceptable unto God.

Romans 7:4
Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the
body of Christ, that you may be married to another - to Him who was raised