The distinction between the third and first is that in the first it is civil and has no bearing on the heart, whereas in the third use God has written or caused us to love His law. The first may restrain, the third is the true saints passion.
I think that Sanctification and 3rd use of the law are inevitably bound? The perfection of Christ was a perfection in Heart and obedience to the law, so our Sanctification would be a ever more perfect (better) obedience of the moral law in its spiritual form (as revealed by Christ). I dont know what else we would call Sanctification.
Reeves says Luther did not adhere to the third use the law because he said that as a Christian our psyches can’t handle it - our failures to be able to be live up to its demands brings condemnation to the regenerate and so Luther says just rest in the finished work of Christ, and live/ be guided by the spirit. This is what I believe as well, because the law brings with it a curse, and it’s the strength of sin.
Hi Dr. Cooper, thanks for your wonderful videos. They have been a blessing to me and my family. Question: What seems missing in these discussions of the law is how the law is a reflection of God's wisdom. The three uses described here are good and right, but shouldn't they be organized under a "fourth function" (which I would argue, is actually primary): to reveal God's wisdom and perfect the creation as described in Psalm 19? Even without sin, God's law would remain. Thanks again and I hope to hear your thoughts on this. Cheers! Dan
Any specific circles in Lutheranism where the Elert/Forde/Paulson view is taught? Denominations, seminaries, synodical regions, specific teachers/pastors?
Thanks for this video. It's good that I know Luther himself held the same view that the law is still important for a reborn christian as imperative to be holy and pleasing to God, though Luther didnt think the third use is the primary one. I agree that the function of the third use of Law shouldnt be neglected. However, the preaching of it must follow after the preaching of the gospel which means you must also preach the law as a means of revealing our sins. So I think a better name for the third use of the law is the law of Christ(1Cor.9:21), and by doing this we can refrain from mixing the law and the gospel. In Christ, we are completely forgiven and justified, and we have a concrete hope Holy Spirit testifies in our heart, and at the same time we should live a life worthy of the calling by the power of Spirit which is activated mainly from hearing the gospel, believing and meditating on it, and especially seeing God's great love for you from it. The warnings of God's judgement(not condemnation) and discipline are also useful to keep us alert and vigilent to temptations. In all, we need a clear preaching of the gospel, full counsel of God's wisdoms, and the Power of Holy Spirit, the joy in Christ, the warnings of spiritual laziness and eternal fires for unbelievers, and so on... to practice our sanctification which can only be fulfilled by Holy Spirit.
We say the Law is good if it is used for the purposes for which it was designed, to check civil transgression, and to magnify spiritual transgressions. This is the business of the Law, and here the business of the Law ends, and should go no further. ~ luther
If the Third Use is not primary, then it simply doesn't function the way it does in the Reformed tradition. I think that is what Gerhard Forde and Elert are driving at, that the third use is related to the first and second use, it isn't independent of those.
The apostle Paul uses the law in its third use in every one of his letters to prompt believers to do good works. Those that state that the law does not motivate Christians to do good works or the law has no power are completely ignorant people, the law certainly cannot justify us but it can certainly sanctify us and cause us to do good works, to state otherwise is heresy,. As for Luther, if we read his small or large catechism we would immediately realize he uses the law in its third use, to drive believers to do good works.
Three Uses of the Law But God's Law as set forth in Scripture, remains valid. Indeed, the Law has three functions (usi): the political (as a restraint for the wicked), the theological (as "a paidagogos to bring us to Christ"-Gal. 3:24), and the didactic (as a guide for the regenerate, or, in Bonhoeffer's words, "as God's merciful help in the performance of the works which are commanded"). Few Protestants today dispute the first and second uses of the Law; but what about the third or didactic use? Do Christians, filled with the love of Christ and empowered by His Holy Spirit, need the Law to teach them? Are not the Christian existentialists right that love is enough? Indeed, is it not correct that Luther himself taught only the first two uses of the Law and not the tertius usus legis? Whether or not the formulation of a didactic use of the Law first appeared in Melanchthon (Helmut Thielicke [Theologische Ethik] and others have eloquently argued for its existence in Luther's own teaching; cf. Edmund Schlink, Theology of the Lutheran Confessions), there is no doubt that it became an established doctrine both in Reformation Lutheranism and in Reformation Calvinism. One finds it clearly set out in the Lutheran Formula of Concord (Art. VI) and in Calvin's Institutes (II, vii, 12 ff.). It is true that for Luther the pedagogic use of the Law was primary, while for Calvin this third or didactic use was the principal one; yet both the Lutheran and the Reformed traditions maintain the threefold conceptualization. presenttruthmag.com/archive/VII/7-3.htm
James Sheffield I don’t know who you are. But when you mentioned gal 3:24 as a paidagogos I lost it. That’s so crazy and it makes so much sense. Where’s you get this?
The distinction between the third and first is that in the first it is civil and has no bearing on the heart, whereas in the third use God has written or caused us to love His law.
The first may restrain, the third is the true saints passion.
I think that Sanctification and 3rd use of the law are inevitably bound? The perfection of Christ was a perfection in Heart and obedience to the law, so our Sanctification would be a ever more perfect (better) obedience of the moral law in its spiritual form (as revealed by Christ). I dont know what else we would call Sanctification.
Reeves says Luther did not adhere to the third use the law because he said that as a Christian our psyches can’t handle it - our failures to be able to be live up to its demands brings condemnation to the regenerate and so Luther says just rest in the finished work of Christ, and live/ be guided by the spirit. This is what I believe as well, because the law brings with it a curse, and it’s the strength of sin.
Hi Dr. Cooper, thanks for your wonderful videos. They have been a blessing to me and my family.
Question: What seems missing in these discussions of the law is how the law is a reflection of God's wisdom. The three uses described here are good and right, but shouldn't they be organized under a "fourth function" (which I would argue, is actually primary): to reveal God's wisdom and perfect the creation as described in Psalm 19? Even without sin, God's law would remain.
Thanks again and I hope to hear your thoughts on this.
Cheers!
Dan
Any specific circles in Lutheranism where the Elert/Forde/Paulson view is taught? Denominations, seminaries, synodical regions, specific teachers/pastors?
Thanks for this video. It's good that I know Luther himself held the same view that the law is still important for a reborn christian as imperative to be holy and pleasing to God, though Luther didnt think the third use is the primary one. I agree that the function of the third use of Law shouldnt be neglected. However, the preaching of it must follow after the preaching of the gospel which means you must also preach the law as a means of revealing our sins. So I think a better name for the third use of the law is the law of Christ(1Cor.9:21), and by doing this we can refrain from mixing the law and the gospel. In Christ, we are completely forgiven and justified, and we have a concrete hope Holy Spirit testifies in our heart, and at the same time we should live a life worthy of the calling by the power of Spirit which is activated mainly from hearing the gospel, believing and meditating on it, and especially seeing God's great love for you from it. The warnings of God's judgement(not condemnation) and discipline are also useful to keep us alert and vigilent to temptations. In all, we need a clear preaching of the gospel, full counsel of God's wisdoms, and the Power of Holy Spirit, the joy in Christ, the warnings of spiritual laziness and eternal fires for unbelievers, and so on... to practice our sanctification which can only be fulfilled by Holy Spirit.
We say the Law is good if it is used for the purposes for which it was designed, to check civil transgression, and to magnify spiritual transgressions. This is the business of the Law, and here the business of the Law ends, and should go no further. ~ luther
If the Third Use is not primary, then it simply doesn't function the way it does in the Reformed tradition. I think that is what Gerhard Forde and Elert are driving at, that the third use is related to the first and second use, it isn't independent of those.
The apostle Paul uses the law in its third use in every one of his letters to prompt believers to do good works. Those that state that the law does not motivate Christians to do good works or the law has no power are completely ignorant people, the law certainly cannot justify us but it can certainly sanctify us and cause us to do good works, to state otherwise is heresy,. As for Luther, if we read his small or large catechism we would immediately realize he uses the law in its third use, to drive believers to do good works.
Three Uses of the Law But God's Law as set forth in Scripture, remains valid. Indeed, the Law has three functions (usi): the political (as a restraint for the wicked), the theological (as "a paidagogos to bring us to Christ"-Gal. 3:24), and the didactic (as a guide for the regenerate, or, in Bonhoeffer's words, "as God's merciful help in the performance of the works which are commanded"). Few Protestants today dispute the first and second uses of the Law; but what about the third or didactic use? Do Christians, filled with the love of Christ and empowered by His Holy Spirit, need the Law to teach them? Are not the Christian existentialists right that love is enough? Indeed, is it not correct that Luther himself taught only the first two uses of the Law and not the tertius usus legis?
Whether or not the formulation of a didactic use of the Law first appeared in Melanchthon (Helmut Thielicke [Theologische Ethik] and others have eloquently argued for its existence in Luther's own teaching; cf. Edmund Schlink, Theology of the Lutheran Confessions), there is no doubt that it became an established doctrine both in Reformation Lutheranism and in Reformation Calvinism. One finds it clearly set out in the Lutheran Formula of Concord (Art. VI) and in Calvin's Institutes (II, vii, 12 ff.). It is true that for Luther the pedagogic use of the Law was primary, while for Calvin this third or didactic use was the principal one; yet both the Lutheran and the Reformed traditions maintain the threefold conceptualization. presenttruthmag.com/archive/VII/7-3.htm
James Sheffield I don’t know who you are. But when you mentioned gal 3:24 as a paidagogos I lost it. That’s so crazy and it makes so much sense. Where’s you get this?
@@reformedcatholic8689On the Third Use of the Law www.presenttruthmag.com/archive/XIII/13-7.htm
How do Psycho/Sociopaths fit into the law?
Also I find the way “Atheists,” Psyco/Sociopaths, and Christians view and use the law to be interesting.