D.A. Carson's take on the tripartite distinction of the law

Not open for further replies.


Puritan Board Freshman
Have any of you heard some of D.A. Carson's expositions of Hebrews and other passages (such as in the sermon on the mount from Matthew) regarding the three distinctions of the law? (moral, ceremonial, civil)

D.A. Carson suggests that one should rethink that distinction and that the whole law has a predictive function.

Have any of you dealt deeply with his arguments and thought on this matter?

It is quite interesting to me.

And also, what does it lead to (if one takes his view over against the three distinctions, what does it change in how we live now?)

Last edited by a moderator:

J. David Kear

Puritan Board Freshman
I recently listened to a lecture series by Carson on the use of the OT in the NT. In it he did not give up the tripartite distinction of the law but rather affirmed it. He seemed to view the moral law as prescriptive as well as predictive.

I, for one, do not see an issue with his view so long as the tripartite distinction is maintained (as presented in the lecture).

I can understand how the Sabbath is both prescribed and yet it predicts our future rest as well. Murder is prohibited and it presupposes a time when murder will be no more, and so on.

Now, this lecture set is my only reference to his views on the subject. So, I don’t know if he has further clarified it elsewhere.
Not open for further replies.