The Royal Law of Love

“If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture… you are doing well.”  (Jas 2:8; ESV)

Greetings again my brethren and friends!

Recent events in my life have me thinking about the matter of laws, how denominations and sects go beyond the scripture in the matter of what the scripture teaches on the matter by imposing unwieldy canon law, etc., on their flocks which God hasn’t imposed on the flock because he set in motion something better, the Royal Law of Love because it is superior to all of the “laws” men impose.

In the first century there was a controversy in the Church which centered on law, what law were the Gentile Christians to follow.  Certain brethren argued that Christianity was really a part of Judaism which meant that Gentiles were required to get circumcised as proselytes into the law covenant with Israel and observe the Law of Moses as many Jewish Christians continued to do (Acts 15: 1,2a).  Paul strenuously opposed that teaching and it was finally decided by the brethren and it was decided among the brethren in Antioch to send Paul and a few others to Jerusalem where the rest of the Apostles were and get a determination as to whether Gentile Christians had to come under Jewish law (Acts 15: 2b).  After the decision was made the following letter was sent to all of the ecclesias along the way Paul travelled back to Antioch:

"The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell."

(Act 15:23-29; ESV)

Both Christian and Jewish commentators have commented that the items listed in the letters have their origin in God’s covenant with mankind after the flood of Noah’s day and are incumbent on all.  So they have nothing to do with the Royal Law Christians are commanded to follow, though, Christians follow them as well.

So what is the Royal Law James wrote about and how is it superior to God’s law to the Jews?  It’s really a three-part law Jesus laid down to his disciples to follow.  The first two parts came out of the Law of Moses, God’s covenant with Israel.  We know we’re to follow it because Jesus added the third law, calling it a “new command,” or law, thus linking it to the first two, which he taught those who listened to him to follow.

As we all know, Jesus was very controversial though in what way is still debated to this day.  In his day, though, more than once some of the most learned men in Israel were sent to try and catch him in some sort of impropriety where his teaching was concerned and certain folks in the crowds were primed to be offended at his words.  So Jesus was very careful with his words at times.  On one such occasion Jesus was approached by a lawyer who asked him what the greatest law within the Law of Moses was.  Jesus’ answer was:

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment.” 

(Mat 22:37-38; ESV)

Jesus’ quoted from what is known as the Shema which is recited by devout Jews to this day at Deuteronomy 6:4.  For Christians it certainly places our priorities in their proper places.  But there is more to that simple statement than meets the eye.  Simply put a true Christian led by God’s Holy Spirit will need no rules or law to follow in that respect since he or she will be pointed in the right direction in any situation by the Spirit because they love Jehovah so much that they would desire not to displease him ever.  Sure, we have the Old Testament and I’m not saying that it would be of no use to a true Christian in this or any other regard.  The Law does help us in gaining insight, but following the first command will give us the ability to move beyond the law code and know what to do in situations not mentioned therein.  Thus we know how to please him and make our sacrifices a pleasing odor to him.

The second part of the Royal Law is much like it and James connected it directly to the Royal Law:  “And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’” (Mat 22:39; ESV) “If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well” James, Jesus' half brother would note many years later in expounding on what Jesus was saying (Jas 2:8).  Both quote from Lev. 19:18, which in Jesus shows the breadth and genius of his knowledge that he was able to draw from two different books of the Torah and connect them together in that way.

Once again this is something of an open-ended law, more like a statement of principle like the first one.  And once again it is superior enough that Jesus could say “On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets" (Mat 22:40).  If we really love our neighbor as ourselves, then we need no set of laws or rules to know how to treat our neighbor in any situation which could conceivably occur.  We just do the same for them as we would want done to us.  Of course if we love our neighbors in the same way that Jesus taught in his parable of the Good Samaritan at Luke 10:30-35 we would also be proactive and live our lives in such a way that we would not only live our lives in such a way that we would bring no harm to anybody if at all possible, but like the Samaritan we would be ready to do good to our neighbor, which includes strangers as in the case of the parable.  So what we learn from this consideration is that the Royal Law of love is really a law based on principles instead of rules and will guide us in all situations.

On the night before Jesus died John recorded the last of the three parts of Royal Law of Love:

“A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

(Joh 13:34-35; ESV)

Think for a moment on the implications of this law.  How did Jesus show his love for his disciples as well as all of mankind?  He died for them, didn’t he?  And he also left them an example for them, and all true Christians to follow in the way he dealt with them under all circumstances, including the times they were quite trying.  But this law is also a statement of principle as well and if we grasp its essence we will also know how to deal with our brethren in Christ with love in any and all situations.

In ancient times not only were Christians willing to die for Christ, but they were also willing to die for their brethren as well, that no harm might come to them.  In fact there are plenty of examples of both throughout the entire Gospel age to this point.  If we follow that last law we certainly wouldn’t want to impose power or a multiplicity of “laws” or rules on our brethren.  We would speak evil of none of them.  We would readily help them is it is within our power to do so, including helping them monetarily   if we can.  Yes, loving our brethren as Jesus did would move us to put up with the flaws in their characters and if me must readjust them, as “spiritual” Christians are told to do it would be tactfully, in the spirit of Galatians 6:1, where the next verse tells us that we will fulfill the Royal Law of Love if we do.  And that is the point of this discussion, isn’t it?

The Law: Are We Under Law?

By “Law” I mean the Law of Moses.  From time to time we see a video by a preacher, who will remain nameless, who teaches that we are under the Ten Commandments.  He is hardly the only one we see who pick and choose features of the Law and teach that such laws apply to us.  So the question arises as to whether we are under the law, or any feature thereof and must keep it.

This post was inspired by something we read today.  It was a post on HuffPo of all things where an “expert” on God’s word posted a screed against those who consider homosexuality immoral, which we do, and contrary to God’s commands to Christians, which we also do, though not for the reasons most of the critics of “gay rights” do.  As far as we are concerned Christian’s are commanded to “abstain” from fornication, the Greek word for which includes homosexuality among other sexual sins (Act 15:28-29).  We really need no other authority for teaching Christians that it is sinful and needs to be avoided like the plague.

After the usual arguments based on defining Greek words used in Bible passages in a way modern “scholars” developed in modern times to undermine the teaching that the Bible condemns homosexual conduct the writer stumbles onto the only viable argument there is for refuting critic’s arguments:

“But again, if anyone chooses to accept the Bible's denunciations, even prescriptions of death for "a man lies with a male," then what about other biblical commandments that prescribe murder for disobedient children, for those who have sex during a woman's menstrual cycle? What about the commandments to stone to death adulterers (although a man could only commit adultery against the wife of another, never against his own), and the execution by stoning of women raped in the city, with the logic that if their rape was "legitimate" (shades of Rep. Todd Akins!), they would have been sure to scream loudly enough to be rescued? There is no leeway for picking and choosing. Again, either you are a biblical literalist or not.” (Hendricks)

I can’t help but wonder if he realized he just proposed the same argument the Apostle Paul did to the Gentile Christians of his day who wanted to observe certain aspects of the Law:

“For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.”

(Gal 5:1-4; ESV)

Get the part we underlined?  Paul was making the same point the author of the article I quoted from made, that one cannot keep only those parts of the law they agree with and reject those they don’t.  In the case mentioned by Paul, to take on circumcisions was to take on the sign that one placed one’s self under the Law of Moses.  They were then obligated to keep it all, something impossible to do for imperfect people.  We don’t believe it a false equivalency to say the same applies to those who would keep any part of the law.

So what are we under, what replaces the Law for us as Christians?  Paul gave us a glimpse with a simple statement after spending most of the first part of his letter to the Romans laying the groundwork for it by showing why we needed Christ and the futility of following the Law, which can give nobody life in this world, “For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.” (Rom 6:14)  Now what did he mean by that?

The Greek word for “grace” is χάρις (G5485).  Thayer’s Lexicon defines the word thusly, “From G5463; graciousness (as gratifying), of manner or act (abstract or concrete; literal, figurative or spiritual; especially the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life; including gratitude): - acceptable, benefit, favour, gift, grace (-ious), joy liberality, pleasure, thank (-s, -worthy).”  In the context of this verse what is meant is that true Christians are the recipients of a gracious act on God’s part, they are treated as if their sins were wiped out, and they have righteousness imputed to them much as Abraham had (Rom. 4:1-9).

But does this mean we, the Church, are under no obligation to do anything?  By no means!   Jesus taught his disciples to live by principle instead of law.  In the Gospels he was recorded summarizing the law with two commands.  One was to love God with all of one’s heart, soul and being, the other was to love one’s neighbor as one’s self (Matt. 22:36-40).   On the night before his crucifixion Christ added another “command,” that the disciples were to love one another as he loved them, and for emphasis he stated it twice (John 13:34-35 and 15:12).  This is what is known as the Law of Love.  

 Time and again the Apostles emphasize how important it is for us.  In his first letter to the Corinthians Paul tells his readers that without love all his works are useless (1 cor. 13:1-3).   James expounds on the importance of having works consistent with the Law of Love in the second chapter of his letter.  And practically John’s entire first letter is an exposition on the need for Christians to love others, but especially their brethren in Christ.  John also tells that if we love one another, then God’s love is perfected in us (1 John 4:12), that leads to our gaining the prize.

When the question of whether Gentile Christians were obligated to be under the law was brought before the Apostles in Jerusalem (Acts 15:1-4), the Holy Spirit guided the Apostles and elders to come to a decision which only required a few things for Christians to follow, or keep (vss. 5-29).  Those things were to “abstain from things offered to idols, blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality” (Acts 15:29; NKJV).  God saw fit to add no further burden comparable to Law to Christians after that.

Hendricks, Obery M. Jr.,  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/obery-m-hendricks-jr-phd/dont-blame-it-on-the-bible_b_2884094.html