What do you think?
Rate this book
From the Finger of God: The Biblical and Theological Basis for the Threefold Division of the Law
This book investigates the biblical and theological basis for the classical division of biblical law into moral, civil, and ceremonial. It highlights some of the implications of this division for the doctrines of sin and atonement, concluding that theologians were right to see it as rooted in Scripture and the Ten Commandments as ever-binding.
426 pages, Paperback
First published November 20, 2010
15 people are currently reading
186 people want to read
About the author
Philip S. Ross
7 books1 followerPhilip S. Ross is minister of Dundee Presbyterian Church in Scotland. He completed his PhD through the University of Wales Lampeter. As a theological editor, he worked extensively on the Christian Heritage editions of The Marrow of Modern Divinity and subtitled five John Owen works – The Glory of Christ, The Holy Spirit, Communion with God, Assurance and The Priesthood of Christ.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
January 31, 2014
An exhaustingly thorough treatment of the threefold division of the OT Law (into categories of moral, civil, and ceremonial). This is a tough read; it is very academic/scholarly at points, and one can easily get bogged down in the details of his argument (the author also assumes that the reader has some working knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, so be warned). But it is the most thorough treatment of the issue that I am aware of. Among other things, he demonstrates how the threefold division was not some 16th century creation as many allege, and that the doctrine isn't based on a simplistic appeal to a particular scripture but on a progressive reading of the OT and NT. Also, he clearly gives preference to defending the perpetuity of the 4th commandment, given how that is often the hot-button issue with this topic. But considering how many today are so quick to challenge and dismiss the threefold division, this is a very important work. I will refer back to this work for many years to come.
February 14, 2016
An excellent resources on the law of God. Philip Ross gives a detailed overview of the law of God starting with a historical overview of the three-fold division refuting the common misconception that the three-fold division was invented by Thomas Aquinas. He alludes to early patristic resources and gives a good overview of the three-fold division in historical theology. Ross also makes clear what is at stake for denying the three-fold division of the law of God, which is the doctrine of Justification since if the law is completely abolished and there is no moral law, then what law was Christ obedient to and what is the legal basis of His righteousness that is imputed to believers? If you deny the three-fold division, there are significant ramifications, which are unfortunately neglected by many modern opponents of the three-fold division from different theological positions such as Dispensationalism, New Covenant Theology, and Progressive Covenantalism. The same is true for the Sabbath since most opponents of the Sabbath have to deny the three-fold division of the law to make their refutation, but this again has ramifications for other key doctrines. Philip Ross gives the following analogy to those who claim to subscribe to the Westminister Confession but take exception to the Sabbath,
"Were the Westminister Confession a garment, you would not want to pull this 'minor' thread, unless you wanted to be altogether defrocked. And perhaps the reason that some people pull at this thread is because they regard the confession as more of a straitjacket than a garment. Unbuckle the Sabbath, and you are well on your way to mastering theological escapology" (pg. 3).
The remaining chapters start with the Pentateuch and discuss the three-fold division in the Old testament, The Gospels, and the New Testament Epistles addressing key exegetical texts and dealing with Hebrew and Greek as needed and responding to contemporary theologians such as D.A. Carson and Greg Bahnsen. The author responds frequently to the book, From Sabbath to the Lord's Day, edited by D.A. Carson, which consists of Dispensational, New Covenant, and Progressive Covenantal authors critiquing the Sabbath and as a result the three-fold division of the law of God. This book is an excellent resource that any serious Bible student, pastor, or Scholar should have to better understand the law of God even if you disagree with the author's conclusions. Rather than just a book on one aspect of the Law of God such as focusing on the Sabbath, this book covers the proper hermeneutical framework for understanding the Law of God and exegetically supports the three-fold division of the Law of God from Scripture.
"Were the Westminister Confession a garment, you would not want to pull this 'minor' thread, unless you wanted to be altogether defrocked. And perhaps the reason that some people pull at this thread is because they regard the confession as more of a straitjacket than a garment. Unbuckle the Sabbath, and you are well on your way to mastering theological escapology" (pg. 3).
The remaining chapters start with the Pentateuch and discuss the three-fold division in the Old testament, The Gospels, and the New Testament Epistles addressing key exegetical texts and dealing with Hebrew and Greek as needed and responding to contemporary theologians such as D.A. Carson and Greg Bahnsen. The author responds frequently to the book, From Sabbath to the Lord's Day, edited by D.A. Carson, which consists of Dispensational, New Covenant, and Progressive Covenantal authors critiquing the Sabbath and as a result the three-fold division of the law of God. This book is an excellent resource that any serious Bible student, pastor, or Scholar should have to better understand the law of God even if you disagree with the author's conclusions. Rather than just a book on one aspect of the Law of God such as focusing on the Sabbath, this book covers the proper hermeneutical framework for understanding the Law of God and exegetically supports the three-fold division of the Law of God from Scripture.
July 2, 2025
Very good.
January 3, 2022
Solid argumentation that lays out and defends the threefold division of the law. There’s a lot of footnotes and engaging with other authors. It is not the easiest read, perhaps someday Ross will make a shorter version for a broader audience. It’s a great scholarly work on the subject, but difficult to read at times.
January 29, 2021
What a thorough treatment of the three-fold division of the law. Ross is quick-witted, detailed, and even funny. He leaves no stone unturned and appeals to evidence of all sorts. Definitely would recommend.
January 18, 2022
An extensive and persuasive case for the classic three-fold division of the law. Also some important insights on hermeneutics.
Hard work to read and not particularly applied - establishes clearly that the confessions are right on this but it doesn't do much else.
Hard work to read and not particularly applied - establishes clearly that the confessions are right on this but it doesn't do much else.
May 9, 2021
This book investigates the biblical and theological basis for the classical division of biblical law into moral, civil, and ceremonial. In From The Finger of God, Phillip Ross highlights some of this division’s implications for sin and atonement doctrines. He makes a compelling argument that theologians were right to see it as rooted in Scripture and the Ten Commandments as ever-binding.
There is absolutely an overabundance of questions that arise when considering the law’s place within a new covenant context. What is the area of the law in the life of the Christian? Does the Mosaic law bind the Christian? Was the law believed to contain any categories of distinction within itself, and does Scripture verify those distinctions? If so, what about those laws that regulated civil or ceremonial practice matters before the new covenant; is the Christian concerned with them in any way? Hasn’t Christ fulfilled the law to allow the believer to be unconcerned with matters of old covenant practice? There was a time when I indeed believed so. These questions are profoundly important in the Christian’s life, and thus they must be responsibly researched and carefully considered.
It seems to me Ross is trying to take the lead in the discussion of the Law’s threefold division from The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 29. Throughout the book, Ross uses a historical review, namely the Reformed tradition, to enlist support for his defense of the law’s threefold division. Several things stand out in Ross’ work that summarizes his reason for this.
I appreciated Ross pointing out the differences between denominations as it related to the catholic doctrine. Ross starts with, “Throughout history, the church’s most prominent theologians expounded, maintained, and defended its teaching.”. (1) Ross mentions many theologians like M.F.Wiles, Douglas J. Moo, Richard N. Longenecker, Gordon Wenham, Greg Bahnsen, Sinclair Ferguson, D.A. Carson, among others. The bulk of chapter one is mostly “an overview of the interpretive frameworks for the Mosaic Law used by a sample of key figures in church history.” (32) (I admittingly chuckled as I recalled Ferguson, Keller, and few others.) Ross shows how this position on the Law can be said to be the “orthodox position.” (33) Then defends the history of supporters for this stance by stating: “Those who first adopted the division as a hermeneutical framework and those who enshrined it in confessions, along with church officers and scholars who sought to uphold it, did so because they believed it was biblical teaching.” (35).
Perhaps most convincing, Ross points out that there is no precursor to the Decalogue as early as Genesis 1-2. This point makes an excellent case for the law’s threefold division, including that the Decalogue stands apart from the rest of the laws given in the OT. For instance, pretend the Ten Commandments preceded the formal giving of the Law at Sinai. In that case, this shows two possible subsequent realities. First, that the possibly Decalogue existed as early as Genesis, secondly that Christ was not annulling its use and contemporary relevance for post-resurrection believers. The question is then asked, “What would Moses think?”
So what is the presupposed source of the Decalogue? It lies in its distinctive nature. Ross argues for a specific disposition to the Decalogue. It is separate from the rest of the Law regarding place and fulfillment. Ross walks through all Ten Commandments to show their precurse before Sinai (61-74). He also notes that Adam & Eve transgressed several of the Ten Commandments when they sinned, and he also shows how the Decalogue would look in the pre-Fall world (79). This pre-Fall existence of the Decalogue draws a contrast between it and the other laws.
People likely knew the Decalogue before God revealed himself and commanded Moses’ documentation of it on the stone at Sinai. Further, “it is impossible to think of the Mosaic Laws outside the Decalogue in the same terms. The law codes of Leviticus and Deuteronomy only make sense in a postlapsarian creation.” (80) I have gathered, Ross’s point is that the Decalogue’s reality before Sinai makes sense, whereas the rest of the laws would not. Ross concludes his argument for the distinctive nature of the Decalogue with the observation that it has no “distinct historical development.” (80) So what would Moses think? Ross believes that “if the Pentateuch represents what Moses thought, then the basic categories of the threefold division would not have left him in severe shock.” (119)
Much of the book deals with the Biblical material in the NT in which Jesus, Paul, and the other NT writers interact with the Law. Making statements like “Jesus’ statement that nothing going into a man could defile him was in harmony with law and reflected the impossibility of acquiring moral impurity from mere contact with food.” (191) I believe what Ross is trying to get across is that though there is never a stated threefold division of the Law anywhere in Scripture, all NT writers, along with Jesus, treated the Law as if it existed and was understood. Referring to Matthew 5:17, “Thus he presents Jesus as holding the same Pentateuchal assumptions about the law, sin, and covenant as the prophets, and a providing eschatological, sociological, and moral fulfillment of the law in his person and teaching.” This understanding is the only way Ross believes one can accurately and fully understand how to interpret the NT discussion and treatment. Jesus and the NT writers treated the civil and ceremonial laws as if they were no longer in effect. They treated and even upheld the Decalogue’s continuation, leaving no doubt that it was not done away or even gone forever.
Chapter V, Jesus Preaches on the law, deals with the law’s role in Christ’s teaching and preaching ministry. I believe this chapter, in particular, provides a great deal of helpful content and study for pastoral preaching. Straightforward teaching on how Christ fulfills the law and prophesizes the fulfillment of the four major new covenant promises. And Christ’s preaching a consistent ethic with old covenant law in his Sermon on the Mount characterizes Ross’ writing in this section.
Ross concludes his study with these well-crafted words; No single passage of Scripture clearly states the law’s threefold division. It cannot be demonstrated by simplistic appeal to a particular Scripture, only by a progressive reading of the Old and New Testaments as the coherent source of Christian theology. Theologians, churchmen, and believers who read Scripture in that way were justified in receiving the threefold division of the law as the ‘orthodox’ position. They did not yield blind allegiance to an untested ecclesiastical dogma, but gave thoughtful acceptance to the law’s threefold division with its practical-theological implications. They embraced it as catholic doctrine because it is biblically and theologically valid. They were right to do so. And we are not ashamed to follow. (353)
Furthermore, it is my opinion that Ross is entirely correct in his assessment within this work. As a layperson just starting in my studies in Theology, I found this book very educational yet monotonous. To prove his work, Ross puts forth much time and effort quoting others and explaining his Theory, then sums pages of quotes and his work down into a thorough paragraph or two at the end of each chapter. While I can thoroughly enjoy commentary from the likes of Sinclair, I believe Ross overdid himself handing out accreditations everywhere, or rather using so many examples.
From the Finger of God is a book I absolutely would recommend, with a warning to laypersons like myself, that they take care of their understanding of the Pentateuch. But it will surely deepen one’s appreciation for the revealed majesty of God in the law, the glorious active obedience of Christ in fulfilling it, and bring forth a doxological response in the person who has helplessly received the imputed righteousness of Christ upon believing the good news of the gospel!
There is absolutely an overabundance of questions that arise when considering the law’s place within a new covenant context. What is the area of the law in the life of the Christian? Does the Mosaic law bind the Christian? Was the law believed to contain any categories of distinction within itself, and does Scripture verify those distinctions? If so, what about those laws that regulated civil or ceremonial practice matters before the new covenant; is the Christian concerned with them in any way? Hasn’t Christ fulfilled the law to allow the believer to be unconcerned with matters of old covenant practice? There was a time when I indeed believed so. These questions are profoundly important in the Christian’s life, and thus they must be responsibly researched and carefully considered.
It seems to me Ross is trying to take the lead in the discussion of the Law’s threefold division from The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 29. Throughout the book, Ross uses a historical review, namely the Reformed tradition, to enlist support for his defense of the law’s threefold division. Several things stand out in Ross’ work that summarizes his reason for this.
I appreciated Ross pointing out the differences between denominations as it related to the catholic doctrine. Ross starts with, “Throughout history, the church’s most prominent theologians expounded, maintained, and defended its teaching.”. (1) Ross mentions many theologians like M.F.Wiles, Douglas J. Moo, Richard N. Longenecker, Gordon Wenham, Greg Bahnsen, Sinclair Ferguson, D.A. Carson, among others. The bulk of chapter one is mostly “an overview of the interpretive frameworks for the Mosaic Law used by a sample of key figures in church history.” (32) (I admittingly chuckled as I recalled Ferguson, Keller, and few others.) Ross shows how this position on the Law can be said to be the “orthodox position.” (33) Then defends the history of supporters for this stance by stating: “Those who first adopted the division as a hermeneutical framework and those who enshrined it in confessions, along with church officers and scholars who sought to uphold it, did so because they believed it was biblical teaching.” (35).
Perhaps most convincing, Ross points out that there is no precursor to the Decalogue as early as Genesis 1-2. This point makes an excellent case for the law’s threefold division, including that the Decalogue stands apart from the rest of the laws given in the OT. For instance, pretend the Ten Commandments preceded the formal giving of the Law at Sinai. In that case, this shows two possible subsequent realities. First, that the possibly Decalogue existed as early as Genesis, secondly that Christ was not annulling its use and contemporary relevance for post-resurrection believers. The question is then asked, “What would Moses think?”
So what is the presupposed source of the Decalogue? It lies in its distinctive nature. Ross argues for a specific disposition to the Decalogue. It is separate from the rest of the Law regarding place and fulfillment. Ross walks through all Ten Commandments to show their precurse before Sinai (61-74). He also notes that Adam & Eve transgressed several of the Ten Commandments when they sinned, and he also shows how the Decalogue would look in the pre-Fall world (79). This pre-Fall existence of the Decalogue draws a contrast between it and the other laws.
People likely knew the Decalogue before God revealed himself and commanded Moses’ documentation of it on the stone at Sinai. Further, “it is impossible to think of the Mosaic Laws outside the Decalogue in the same terms. The law codes of Leviticus and Deuteronomy only make sense in a postlapsarian creation.” (80) I have gathered, Ross’s point is that the Decalogue’s reality before Sinai makes sense, whereas the rest of the laws would not. Ross concludes his argument for the distinctive nature of the Decalogue with the observation that it has no “distinct historical development.” (80) So what would Moses think? Ross believes that “if the Pentateuch represents what Moses thought, then the basic categories of the threefold division would not have left him in severe shock.” (119)
Much of the book deals with the Biblical material in the NT in which Jesus, Paul, and the other NT writers interact with the Law. Making statements like “Jesus’ statement that nothing going into a man could defile him was in harmony with law and reflected the impossibility of acquiring moral impurity from mere contact with food.” (191) I believe what Ross is trying to get across is that though there is never a stated threefold division of the Law anywhere in Scripture, all NT writers, along with Jesus, treated the Law as if it existed and was understood. Referring to Matthew 5:17, “Thus he presents Jesus as holding the same Pentateuchal assumptions about the law, sin, and covenant as the prophets, and a providing eschatological, sociological, and moral fulfillment of the law in his person and teaching.” This understanding is the only way Ross believes one can accurately and fully understand how to interpret the NT discussion and treatment. Jesus and the NT writers treated the civil and ceremonial laws as if they were no longer in effect. They treated and even upheld the Decalogue’s continuation, leaving no doubt that it was not done away or even gone forever.
Chapter V, Jesus Preaches on the law, deals with the law’s role in Christ’s teaching and preaching ministry. I believe this chapter, in particular, provides a great deal of helpful content and study for pastoral preaching. Straightforward teaching on how Christ fulfills the law and prophesizes the fulfillment of the four major new covenant promises. And Christ’s preaching a consistent ethic with old covenant law in his Sermon on the Mount characterizes Ross’ writing in this section.
Ross concludes his study with these well-crafted words; No single passage of Scripture clearly states the law’s threefold division. It cannot be demonstrated by simplistic appeal to a particular Scripture, only by a progressive reading of the Old and New Testaments as the coherent source of Christian theology. Theologians, churchmen, and believers who read Scripture in that way were justified in receiving the threefold division of the law as the ‘orthodox’ position. They did not yield blind allegiance to an untested ecclesiastical dogma, but gave thoughtful acceptance to the law’s threefold division with its practical-theological implications. They embraced it as catholic doctrine because it is biblically and theologically valid. They were right to do so. And we are not ashamed to follow. (353)
Furthermore, it is my opinion that Ross is entirely correct in his assessment within this work. As a layperson just starting in my studies in Theology, I found this book very educational yet monotonous. To prove his work, Ross puts forth much time and effort quoting others and explaining his Theory, then sums pages of quotes and his work down into a thorough paragraph or two at the end of each chapter. While I can thoroughly enjoy commentary from the likes of Sinclair, I believe Ross overdid himself handing out accreditations everywhere, or rather using so many examples.
From the Finger of God is a book I absolutely would recommend, with a warning to laypersons like myself, that they take care of their understanding of the Pentateuch. But it will surely deepen one’s appreciation for the revealed majesty of God in the law, the glorious active obedience of Christ in fulfilling it, and bring forth a doxological response in the person who has helplessly received the imputed righteousness of Christ upon believing the good news of the gospel!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 18, 2015
This is a difficult, scholarly book on the three-fold division of the law into the moral, ceremonial, and judicial categories. The author has done a tremendous among of reading on this subject, both of exegetical, linguistic, historical, and theological works. In my judgment, he makes an incontrovertible case for the scriptural nature of the Lex Triplex. I was, nevertheless, concerned (and at times confused) by his limitation of the moral law to the Decalogue only, as opposed to seeing the Decalogue as a summary of the law of nature. His discussions of theonomy are somewhat under-nuanced, as he wrongly assumes that all theonomists reject the three-fold division of the law. Having said that, I thought he was right to criticise Greg Bahnsen's insistence that "fulfil" in Matthew 5:17 should be translated as "confirm". Dr Ross correctly points out that Dr Bahnsen's theological case could still have been made without having to resort to such a linguistic stretch.
May 23, 2016
The author is really inspiring in the careful exegesis, respectful interaction with pro and con works and the wide range of his reading. This is a really technical work with a lot of Hebrew (which I don't read) and Greek (which I can read) and interaction with all types of people. The chapters are long and the footnotes are in the hundreds.
He begins by surveying some people from history, but the most interesting is when he gets to the Bible. He shows that there is division even within Moses. He shows the primacy of the Decalogue, the use laws of the Decalogue existing prior to Sinai. The distinction further in the OT with the idea of "mercy and not sacrifice" which to me is very convincing. He further surveys the Gospels, Acts and the Epistles.
This is a really fine work, one which I will certainly go back to for the exegesis of and comments on some important texts. At times it was hard to keep reading because of its technicality, but at the end it was worth it!
He begins by surveying some people from history, but the most interesting is when he gets to the Bible. He shows that there is division even within Moses. He shows the primacy of the Decalogue, the use laws of the Decalogue existing prior to Sinai. The distinction further in the OT with the idea of "mercy and not sacrifice" which to me is very convincing. He further surveys the Gospels, Acts and the Epistles.
This is a really fine work, one which I will certainly go back to for the exegesis of and comments on some important texts. At times it was hard to keep reading because of its technicality, but at the end it was worth it!
March 17, 2020
The Westminster Confession of Faith (ch. 19) divides the Old Testament law into moral, judicial, and ceremonial categories. Over the last several decades, this division has been under almost continuous assault. The assault has come from two disparate directions: the theonomists, who want to apply all of the Mosaic law to the modern state; and the New Covenant theologians, who want to retain only "the law of Christ." Ross's treatment is thoroughly exegetical and theological. There is no significant piece of the relevant literature that he has ignored. He succeeds in showing that such a three-fold division of the law is not distinctive to the WCF but is characteristic of Christian handling of the law up until the 20th century. He also demonstrates that this three-fold division has its origins in the Scriptures themselves. Highly recommended.
May 7, 2014
Highly recommend this book. Thoroughly addresses the three fold division of the law from an exegetical and a theological perspective and establishes the eternal validity of the moral law. Does a good job of addressing and answering objections.
March 8, 2015
A comprehensive answer to modern attacks against the old doctrine of the threefold division of the Law.
Scholarly written.
Scholarly written.
December 30, 2013
Very insightful.
March 15, 2023
Many have assumed that Reformed Covenant Theology is a system that imposed itself on the biblical text artificially without any grounds of proper exegesis and biblical theology. This is where I beg to differ. Covenant Theology is thoroughly exegetical and biblical, and in this book, the threefold division of the law will be looked at.
This threefold division, categorizing the Laws in the Old Testament to be Moral, Civil, and Ceremonial, wasn’t invented by Reformed Theologians. John Calvin said that this threefold division was well-known and adopted by the ancients before his time.
This doctrine is the heritage of Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians, 1689 Baptists, Lutherans, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox too. Hence this doctrine is a universal catholic doctrine affirmed by all denominations in the past. Glad to say that there is some unity among these denominations due to this doctrine.
For those who are familiar with this topic, many prominent bible scholars today were quick to question the biblical basis for the threefold division before giving a fair chance of hearing. Thus Philip S. Ross wrote this book to defend this doctrine.
Reading this book isn’t easy because it’s a highly technical book, which not only engages with exegesis, biblical theology, but also the original languages, textual variants, historical theology, ancient near east sources, legal studies, and a huge amount of scholarship work from evangelical and critical scholars. It’s probably the most technical book that I have ever read up to today.
During the initial period of my theological studies, I was actually convinced that this threefold division thing is wrong. But as I continued with my studies, I became increasingly convinced that this doctrine is biblically sound before picking up this book. This book helps me to solidify my conviction even though there are some minor issues I don’t necessarily agree with the author.
To those who are skeptical of the doctrine of threefold division, I appeal to you to give a fair chance of hearing this position out before outrightly dismissing it.
As for those who want to learn about Reformed Theology’s understanding of the Law, do check out what are the threefold division and three uses of the Law. Reformed Theology is not just all about expounding predestination only. There is so much more to Reformed Theology besides TULIP.
Why I gave this book 4 instead of 5 stars is due to the readability. There was a bit too much engagement with the other scholars on issues that are not too essential which makes it quite a chore to read this book. In addition, the author was using a maximalist approach -> using as many arguments as he could to make his case, some of them are very clear and compelling, and some of them are speculative or if not esoteric to those who don’t know the original biblical languages. I felt that he should just stick with the ones that are clear. Hopefully the author will consider writing an abridged version for the average Christian using a minimalist approach-> by using arguments that are clear and concise, arguments that can be obtained from a standard English translation of the Bible, and only bring out the original languages and textual variants minimally.
This threefold division, categorizing the Laws in the Old Testament to be Moral, Civil, and Ceremonial, wasn’t invented by Reformed Theologians. John Calvin said that this threefold division was well-known and adopted by the ancients before his time.
This doctrine is the heritage of Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians, 1689 Baptists, Lutherans, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox too. Hence this doctrine is a universal catholic doctrine affirmed by all denominations in the past. Glad to say that there is some unity among these denominations due to this doctrine.
For those who are familiar with this topic, many prominent bible scholars today were quick to question the biblical basis for the threefold division before giving a fair chance of hearing. Thus Philip S. Ross wrote this book to defend this doctrine.
Reading this book isn’t easy because it’s a highly technical book, which not only engages with exegesis, biblical theology, but also the original languages, textual variants, historical theology, ancient near east sources, legal studies, and a huge amount of scholarship work from evangelical and critical scholars. It’s probably the most technical book that I have ever read up to today.
During the initial period of my theological studies, I was actually convinced that this threefold division thing is wrong. But as I continued with my studies, I became increasingly convinced that this doctrine is biblically sound before picking up this book. This book helps me to solidify my conviction even though there are some minor issues I don’t necessarily agree with the author.
To those who are skeptical of the doctrine of threefold division, I appeal to you to give a fair chance of hearing this position out before outrightly dismissing it.
As for those who want to learn about Reformed Theology’s understanding of the Law, do check out what are the threefold division and three uses of the Law. Reformed Theology is not just all about expounding predestination only. There is so much more to Reformed Theology besides TULIP.
Why I gave this book 4 instead of 5 stars is due to the readability. There was a bit too much engagement with the other scholars on issues that are not too essential which makes it quite a chore to read this book. In addition, the author was using a maximalist approach -> using as many arguments as he could to make his case, some of them are very clear and compelling, and some of them are speculative or if not esoteric to those who don’t know the original biblical languages. I felt that he should just stick with the ones that are clear. Hopefully the author will consider writing an abridged version for the average Christian using a minimalist approach-> by using arguments that are clear and concise, arguments that can be obtained from a standard English translation of the Bible, and only bring out the original languages and textual variants minimally.
January 14, 2012
For centuries Christians from various theological and denominational traditions have debated about the role of the Old Testament Law in the life of the believer today. While there are many secondary sources of contention, the root of the division among well meaning Christians is the significance of the 10 Commandments.
There are basically two sides to the issue: those who believe that Christ, as the fulfillment of the Law, has done away with the Law and that we are now under the Law of Christ, and those who believe that the Law is broken into a threefold structure (civil, ceremonial and moral) and that while Christ has fulfilled the civil and ceremonial laws, He has upheld the moral laws (10 Commandments) such that they are still binding and applicable for us today.
As the title indicates, Ross defends the later view in his new book From the Finger of God: The Biblical and Theological Basis for the Threefold Division of the Law. Another way of looking at the threefold division is to see “one part of the Law as non-binding, another binding it its underlying principles, and another ever-bindng (p. 2).”
At the front Ross is clear that he is taking the lead for his discussion on the threefold division of the Law from The Westminster Confession of Faith. In fact, throughout the book Ross continually looks to history, namely the Reformed tradition, to marshall support for his defense of the threefold division of the Law.
There are a number of things that stand out in Ross’ work that summarize his defense of the threefold division of the Law.
First, Ross is quick to point out that this position is undeniably a catholic doctrine. That is, this is a doctrine that cuts across denominational and theological lines and unites men from many places. “Throughout history, the churches most prominent theologians expounded maintained, and defended its teaching (p. 1).” While Ross does devote time to fairly let the voice of his opponents speak (p. 12-17), the bulk of chapter one is given to a sweeping history of ardent defenders of the threefold division of the Law (p. 19-32). Ross shows how this position on the Law can be said to be the ‘orthodox position’ (p. 33) and defends the history of supporters for the position by stating:
Those who first adopted the division as a hermeneutical framework and those who enshrined it in confessions, along with church officers and scholars who sought to uphold it, did so because they believed it was biblical teaching (p. 35).
Second, and perhaps most convincing, is that Ross argues for an antecedent to the Decalogue as early as Genesis 1-2. It is this point that really makes a compelling case for the threefold division of the Law and thus that the Decalogue stands apart from the rest of the laws given in the OT. If the Ten Commandments preceded the formal giving of the Law at Sinai then this shows two possible subsequent realities: (1) that the possibly Decalogue existed as early as Genesis and therefore (2) that Christ was not abrogating its use and contemporary relevance for post resurrection believers. The question is then asked, “What would Moses think?”
So what is the antecedent source of the Decalogue?
It lies in its distinctive nature. Ross argues for a distinctive nature to the Decalogue such that is is separate from the rest of the Law when it comes to place and fulfillment. Ross walks through all Ten Commandments to show their antecedents before Sinai (p. 61-74). Ross points out that Adam & Eve transgressed again several of the Ten Commandments when they sinned and he also shows how the Decalogue would look in the pre-Fall world (p. 79). This pre-Fall existence of the Decalogue draws a contrast between it and the other laws.
It is very likely that the Decalogue was known by people prior to its formal giving at Sinai. Further, “it is impossible to think of the Mosaic Laws outside the Decalogue in the same terms. The law codes of Leviticus and Deuteronomy only make sense in a postlapsarian creation (p. 80).” Ross’ point is that the reality of the Decalogue before Sinai makes sense where as the rest of the laws would not. Ross concludes his argument for the distinctive nature of the Decalogue by pointing to the observation that it has no “distinct historical development (p. 80).” So what would Moses think? Ross believes that “if the Pentateuch represents what Moses thought, then the basic categories of the threefold division would not have left him in severe shock (p. 119).”
Third, much of the book deals with the Biblical material in the NT in which Jesus, Paul and the other NT writers interact with the Law. Ross essentially believes that though there is never a stated threefold division of the Law anywhere in Scripture, all of the NT writers, including Jesus, treated the Law as if it existed and was understood. This understanding is the only way Ross believes one can properly understand how to interpret the NT discussion and treatment of the Law. Jesus and the NT writers treated the civil and ceremonial laws as if they were no longer in effect. In turn, they treated and even upheld the continuation of the Decalogue leaving no doubt that it was not done away with.
Ross concludes his study with these well crafted words:
No single passage of Scripture clearly states the threefold division of the law. It cannot be demonstrated by simplistic appeal to a particular Scripture, only by a progressive reading of the Old and New Testaments as the coherent source of Christian theology. Theologians, churchmen, and believers who read Scripture in that way were justified in receiving the threefold division of the law as the ‘orthodox’ position. They did not yield blind allegiance to an untested ecclesiastical dogma, but gave thoughtful acceptance to the threefold division of the law with its practical-theological implications. They embraced it as catholic doctrine because it is biblically and theologically valid. They were right to do so. And we are not ashamed to follow (p. 353).
Ross interacts throughout the book a lot with recent critics of the threefold position. Namely, Douglas Moo and D.A. Carson and his edited book From Sabbath to the Lord’s Day. A common thread throughout some of the disagreement is that the threefold division is ‘too neat’ (Meyer – 9, M00 – 12, Wenham – 15, Poythress – 16, and Carson – 17). I personally do not find this counter argument very persuasive. Are our contemporary formulations and expressions of the trinity and hypostatic union of Christ too neat to then say that they are unbiblical? Of course not.
Readers will find From the Finger of God to be intellectually stretching. At times it is hard to wade through especially in the longer chapters. Much appeal is made to historical figures who similarly held the threefold position which may unnecessarily weaken the position in the minds of some. More exegesis of certain passages could be beneficial but that was not the single aim of the book thought it was in part. In this vein Ross does provide a helpful appendix of a more detailed exegesis of the verb “to fulfill” in Matt. 5:17-19 (p. 357-70).
This is not a book on the subject for a beginner and may fly over the heads of too many laypeople. Overall, Ross makes a compelling case for the threefold division of the law and I welcome this contribution.
There are basically two sides to the issue: those who believe that Christ, as the fulfillment of the Law, has done away with the Law and that we are now under the Law of Christ, and those who believe that the Law is broken into a threefold structure (civil, ceremonial and moral) and that while Christ has fulfilled the civil and ceremonial laws, He has upheld the moral laws (10 Commandments) such that they are still binding and applicable for us today.
As the title indicates, Ross defends the later view in his new book From the Finger of God: The Biblical and Theological Basis for the Threefold Division of the Law. Another way of looking at the threefold division is to see “one part of the Law as non-binding, another binding it its underlying principles, and another ever-bindng (p. 2).”
At the front Ross is clear that he is taking the lead for his discussion on the threefold division of the Law from The Westminster Confession of Faith. In fact, throughout the book Ross continually looks to history, namely the Reformed tradition, to marshall support for his defense of the threefold division of the Law.
There are a number of things that stand out in Ross’ work that summarize his defense of the threefold division of the Law.
First, Ross is quick to point out that this position is undeniably a catholic doctrine. That is, this is a doctrine that cuts across denominational and theological lines and unites men from many places. “Throughout history, the churches most prominent theologians expounded maintained, and defended its teaching (p. 1).” While Ross does devote time to fairly let the voice of his opponents speak (p. 12-17), the bulk of chapter one is given to a sweeping history of ardent defenders of the threefold division of the Law (p. 19-32). Ross shows how this position on the Law can be said to be the ‘orthodox position’ (p. 33) and defends the history of supporters for the position by stating:
Those who first adopted the division as a hermeneutical framework and those who enshrined it in confessions, along with church officers and scholars who sought to uphold it, did so because they believed it was biblical teaching (p. 35).
Second, and perhaps most convincing, is that Ross argues for an antecedent to the Decalogue as early as Genesis 1-2. It is this point that really makes a compelling case for the threefold division of the Law and thus that the Decalogue stands apart from the rest of the laws given in the OT. If the Ten Commandments preceded the formal giving of the Law at Sinai then this shows two possible subsequent realities: (1) that the possibly Decalogue existed as early as Genesis and therefore (2) that Christ was not abrogating its use and contemporary relevance for post resurrection believers. The question is then asked, “What would Moses think?”
So what is the antecedent source of the Decalogue?
It lies in its distinctive nature. Ross argues for a distinctive nature to the Decalogue such that is is separate from the rest of the Law when it comes to place and fulfillment. Ross walks through all Ten Commandments to show their antecedents before Sinai (p. 61-74). Ross points out that Adam & Eve transgressed again several of the Ten Commandments when they sinned and he also shows how the Decalogue would look in the pre-Fall world (p. 79). This pre-Fall existence of the Decalogue draws a contrast between it and the other laws.
It is very likely that the Decalogue was known by people prior to its formal giving at Sinai. Further, “it is impossible to think of the Mosaic Laws outside the Decalogue in the same terms. The law codes of Leviticus and Deuteronomy only make sense in a postlapsarian creation (p. 80).” Ross’ point is that the reality of the Decalogue before Sinai makes sense where as the rest of the laws would not. Ross concludes his argument for the distinctive nature of the Decalogue by pointing to the observation that it has no “distinct historical development (p. 80).” So what would Moses think? Ross believes that “if the Pentateuch represents what Moses thought, then the basic categories of the threefold division would not have left him in severe shock (p. 119).”
Third, much of the book deals with the Biblical material in the NT in which Jesus, Paul and the other NT writers interact with the Law. Ross essentially believes that though there is never a stated threefold division of the Law anywhere in Scripture, all of the NT writers, including Jesus, treated the Law as if it existed and was understood. This understanding is the only way Ross believes one can properly understand how to interpret the NT discussion and treatment of the Law. Jesus and the NT writers treated the civil and ceremonial laws as if they were no longer in effect. In turn, they treated and even upheld the continuation of the Decalogue leaving no doubt that it was not done away with.
Ross concludes his study with these well crafted words:
No single passage of Scripture clearly states the threefold division of the law. It cannot be demonstrated by simplistic appeal to a particular Scripture, only by a progressive reading of the Old and New Testaments as the coherent source of Christian theology. Theologians, churchmen, and believers who read Scripture in that way were justified in receiving the threefold division of the law as the ‘orthodox’ position. They did not yield blind allegiance to an untested ecclesiastical dogma, but gave thoughtful acceptance to the threefold division of the law with its practical-theological implications. They embraced it as catholic doctrine because it is biblically and theologically valid. They were right to do so. And we are not ashamed to follow (p. 353).
Ross interacts throughout the book a lot with recent critics of the threefold position. Namely, Douglas Moo and D.A. Carson and his edited book From Sabbath to the Lord’s Day. A common thread throughout some of the disagreement is that the threefold division is ‘too neat’ (Meyer – 9, M00 – 12, Wenham – 15, Poythress – 16, and Carson – 17). I personally do not find this counter argument very persuasive. Are our contemporary formulations and expressions of the trinity and hypostatic union of Christ too neat to then say that they are unbiblical? Of course not.
Readers will find From the Finger of God to be intellectually stretching. At times it is hard to wade through especially in the longer chapters. Much appeal is made to historical figures who similarly held the threefold position which may unnecessarily weaken the position in the minds of some. More exegesis of certain passages could be beneficial but that was not the single aim of the book thought it was in part. In this vein Ross does provide a helpful appendix of a more detailed exegesis of the verb “to fulfill” in Matt. 5:17-19 (p. 357-70).
This is not a book on the subject for a beginner and may fly over the heads of too many laypeople. Overall, Ross makes a compelling case for the threefold division of the law and I welcome this contribution.
November 7, 2022
The purpose of this book is to exegetically defend the confessional standards use of the three-fold decision of the law. Ross essentially does a biblical theology on the divisions of law and traces the theme that is broad in the Pentateuch but more defined and clear in Jesus and the apostles teaching.
This book is rather technical and Ross is often interacting with writers of several interpretations. The interactions make Ross able to defend his view but can also be rather confusing at times. Because of the technicality of this book along with reference to some of the original Hebrew and Greek in his defense, I would recommend this to the learned lay person, Bible college student, seminary student, or pastor; not the average lay person. There was a lot that I learned but also a lot that went over my head. If Ross could make a more accessible abridged version of this book, it would be of much use and I would be more prone to recommend it to others.
This book is rather technical and Ross is often interacting with writers of several interpretations. The interactions make Ross able to defend his view but can also be rather confusing at times. Because of the technicality of this book along with reference to some of the original Hebrew and Greek in his defense, I would recommend this to the learned lay person, Bible college student, seminary student, or pastor; not the average lay person. There was a lot that I learned but also a lot that went over my head. If Ross could make a more accessible abridged version of this book, it would be of much use and I would be more prone to recommend it to others.
May 24, 2024
Very thorough book regarding the Threefold Division of the Law. Book published by Christian Focus Publications under their Mentor series.
To quote “ Mentor/ Books written at a level for Bible College and seminary students, pastors, and other serious readers. The imprint includes commentaries, doctrinal studies, examinations of current issues and church history “
This book definitely falls under the Mentor imprint. A technical read especially for those of us who are layman and serious readers.
The book is worth the effort to read through and will definitely go back and read through sections again.
It is a serious work explaining the author’s explanation of the threefold division of the Law.
To quote “ Mentor/ Books written at a level for Bible College and seminary students, pastors, and other serious readers. The imprint includes commentaries, doctrinal studies, examinations of current issues and church history “
This book definitely falls under the Mentor imprint. A technical read especially for those of us who are layman and serious readers.
The book is worth the effort to read through and will definitely go back and read through sections again.
It is a serious work explaining the author’s explanation of the threefold division of the Law.
January 10, 2023
Exhaustive and convincing. Yet the author could have used a better editor. Because he interacts with so much scholarship it can be easy to get lost in the weeds.
Regardless, tradition and exegesis seem to warrant the threefold division of the law. However I would take issue with the term "division" as I think it is a barrier to entry. Such a term could imply disunity among sections rather than aspects of a whole unit (as it was originally meant with Aquinas).
Regardless, tradition and exegesis seem to warrant the threefold division of the law. However I would take issue with the term "division" as I think it is a barrier to entry. Such a term could imply disunity among sections rather than aspects of a whole unit (as it was originally meant with Aquinas).
February 14, 2021
Although I am still wrestling through the issues, he makes a good case for his position and interacts well with alternative viewpoints. I wish he had spent more time talking about the Apostle Paul's view in particular as his remarks about Christ being the "end of the law" (Rom. 10:4; Rom. 7:4; etc.) are of no little significance.
February 16, 2023
I read this book to answer some questions I have had and I would say it did a pretty good job answering them. That being said, this book was pretty tough to read and is UBER academic. I feel like sometimes the author gets lost in all the arguments and things become messy and confusing. Still a good resource though if you have questions about laws in the Bible.
February 7, 2024
Belíssimo livro. Uma obra prima de erudição bíblica, teológica e histórica. Domina muito bem as fontes e argumenta a partir de todas as partes da bíblia que a divisão tríplice da lei pode ser encontrada nos textos (tanto diretamente como por dedução). Uma obra que com certeza deveria ser traduzida.
March 2, 2024
An impressive and almost overwhelming study of the threefold division of the law, against detractors of it.
Ross follows the confessional distinctions, interacts with historical thought, and modern biblical scholarship.
Probably too much for laymen, but well worth studying for teachers/preachers.
Ross follows the confessional distinctions, interacts with historical thought, and modern biblical scholarship.
Probably too much for laymen, but well worth studying for teachers/preachers.
September 2, 2022
Thorough and convincing explanation and defense of the threefold division of the law.
October 26, 2022
Good content and well researched but read like a lit review for most of it.
January 21, 2014
Pick this much needed book up, now!
Ross does the best job on the topic so far.
He has a very scholarly understanding of the topic, knows all the positions and digs deep into the subject for thorough answers.
Will add some quotes once I'm home
Ross does the best job on the topic so far.
He has a very scholarly understanding of the topic, knows all the positions and digs deep into the subject for thorough answers.
Will add some quotes once I'm home
September 20, 2017
Very thorough defense of the classic threefold division of the law. It was sometimes hard for me to stick through it as a layman.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews