The WCF divides the Law into three portions, the moral law, the ceremonial law, and the judicial law.

The way I understand this--and correct me if I'm wrong here--is as follows:

The moral law is binding to all men universally at all times, and is unchanging because it reflects God's character.

The ceremonial law, under the Old Covenant, was given specifically to those in covenant with God(i.e. Israel) and was fulfilled in Christ(no longer binding under the New Covenant). It covers how man was to worship God.

The civil law, under the Old Covenant, was again given to the kingdom of Israel and was fulfilled in Christ. It covers how God's kingdom was to be ruled.

Question: I know there's a division between the moral law and the other laws given in the New Testament, in that the one is still binding and the other is not. But of those Old Testament laws which were fulfilled in Christ, must they all be either ceremonial or civil? What I'm getting at is, is it hypothetically possible to have a law which does not fit in the category of either ceremonial or civil, yet was fulfilled in Christ's death and is therefore no longer binding?

I realize that it's entirely possible that my categories may be off. I've been trying to listen to the sermon series Joshua provided links for, but they're so quiet I can't hear them. I've been trying to amplify them but haven't gotten that finished yet. I'm trying.

__________________
Jonathan
Audio Engineer
Reformed Anabaptist
Ohio

Moroni's magical glasses of proper interpretation:

Perhaps you could provide us with a hypothetical example of one of these hypothetical categories, so as to help us understand your question more accurately?

__________________
Paul Korte
OPC
Flint, MI

They who perceive in themselves discoveries of the divine goodness, so full and absolutely perfect, and who make them the subject of earnest meditation, will never embrace new doctrines, by which the very grace they feel so powerfully in themselves is thrown into the shade. --John Calvin

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

FWIW, two of the Westminster divines among a handful that wrote anything of length on the subject recognized it was often difficult to categorize something strictly ceremonial or strictly judicial.

__________________
Chris Coldwell, Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Dallas, Texas.
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• Westminster Letter Press
• The Confessional Presbyterian Journal
• The Blue Banner Archive

The Regulative Principle: The Scriptures are the “only infallible rule of faith and practice, no rite or ceremony ought to have a place in the public worship of God, which is not warranted in Scripture, either by direct precept or example, or by good and sufficient inference” (Samuel Miller).

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? Joining PB's Politics & Government Forum

Generally, the way I understand the Westminster standards to summarize the doctrine of Scripture on this, is as you say. It is very helpful in understanding this in the context of the whole of Scripture.

A couple more notes on this below:

__________________
Scott
PCA
North Carolina


"Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised)"
Hebrews 10:23

The divisions are helpful but not watertight.

Even the 10C are ceremonial, in that they were written on stone and laid in the ark, which they are no longer. This affects their application (see e.g. II Corimthians 6:3-18)

Re the 4th C there is a change of particuar day from last to first. I know some say that the particular day the Sabbath is to be celebrated isn't given in the 10C itself, but it would have been understood to be the last day of the week.

Re the 5thC the promise attached moves for having long days in the Land of Israel to having long days on the Earth.

Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise; ) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.(Ephesians 6:1-3)

Even the motivation for keeping the 10C in the preamble is typical of Christ's deliverance by the Cross. So we are not so much motivated by the fact that our Covenant ancestors, Israel, were taken out of Egypt, by God under Moses hand, but by the fact that Christ has died for us.

__________________
Richard
communicant member, FCoS
Perth, Scotland UK

His Name forever shall endure;
last like the sun it shall:
Men shall be blessed in Him,
and blessed all nations shall Him call (Ps. 72:17)

Sorry the audio's not working out for ya, Jonathan.

__________________
Josh Hicks, Chloë's Dad
Christ Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church, RPCGA
Facebook - The Calvinist Vent
Board Rules - Signature Rules - Suggestion Box

It is God that multiplies our sorrows.... God, as a righteous Judge, does it, which ought to silence us under all our sorrows; as many as they are, we have deserved them all, and more: nay, God, as a tender Father, does it for our necessary correction, that we may be humbled for sin, and weaned from the world by all our sorrows; and the good we get by them, with the comfort we have under them, will abundantly balance our sorrows, how greatly soever they are multiplied. - Matthew Henry

I am trying to see if the divisions can be used to disprove pacifism. The doctrine of pacifism was clearly not taught in the Old Testament, so it can't be part of the moral law; if the rest of the law is cleanly divisible into ceremonial and civil, and the doctrine of pacifism is neither, then it follows that the doctrine of pacifism is not Biblical. If, as it seems, though, the rest of the law isn't that cleanly divisible, the objection fails.

I've been thinking again.

Is the Law divided into covenant laws and general laws? Covenant laws being those given as part of a specific covenant(Old or New) and general being those given to all mankind? Or is that division blurry as well?

There's a helpful section on this here:

Christian Ethics at Reformed.org

__________________
R. Scott Clark, D.Phil
Westminster Seminary California
Associate Pastor, Oceanside URC
The Heidelcast Podcast
The Heidelblog

John Frame and others also mention:

(a) Creation Ordinances from the time of Adam and also Noah. Which abide.

(b) The 10C . Which abide.

(c)Mosaic Case Laws. Often indicated by the words "If....then...." Frame advises contra Dispensationalists and contra Theonomists that these have to be gone through one by one by scholars and ordinary Christians to see if and how their moral equity applies today.

We also have, as I'm sure you're aware:-

The Two Great Commandments:

The First Great Commandment summarises 10C, 1-4.

The Second Great Commandment summarises 10C, 5-10.

The New Commandment (John 13:34) which is really a new motive for love. In a sense it augments the Introduction to the 10C for New Covenant believers.

Most of the sources I know on this are in Latin (e.g. Beza's treatise on the Triplex Divisio Legis). Have you checked Berkhof, Hodge, and the usual sources?

Found it:

Lex Dei, moralis, ceremonialis, et politica, ex libris Mosis excerpta, & in certas classes distributa (Geneva: Apud Petrum Santandreanum, 1577).

Here's another good one from Reformed.org.

__________________
Adam B., Wine Country, California, PCA

"I fear not to hold with Junius, de Politia Mosis cap. 6, that he who was punishable by death under that Judicial law, is punishable by death still; and he who was not punished by death then, is not to be punished by death now."