A Biblicist View of Law and Gospel

by Lester L. Stephenson

"A Biblicist View of Law and Gospel treats a most controversial theological subject thoroughly and scripturally. It underscores the value of Old Testament Law as a gracious revealer of divine character and an expose of human depravity as prerequisite to the gospel. The work provides a helpful critique of the two extremes that have plagued Christendom legalism and antinomianism."—Gerald Priest, Ph.D. Former professor of historical theology, Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary

Paul told the Romans “the Law is holy and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” Yet four times in three epistles he wrote, “We are not under law but under grace.” Christians read these seemingly conflicting statements and are easily confused. They wonder if anyone can understand how the law and the Old Testament relates to their faith.

Some take the easy way out and all but ignore the Old Testament calling it legalism. They prefer to concentrate on and enjoy the magnificent grace of God that comes with salvation. This limits their understanding of the Scriptures and indeed, restricts spiritual growth. Confusion further abounds because just about every denomination has a different interpretation of the law and the relationship between the testaments.

Lester Stephenson proposes a different approach rooted in Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:17-18, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” Those two verses call for Christians to look anew at the law and the rest of the Old Testament. Not one part of the law or what the prophets wrote will pass away until Jesus has completely fulfilled it. Stephenson stresses that Christians must recognize the importance of the Bible that Jesus and the apostles used. Each time Jesus and the apostles used the phrase, “it is written” they were using an Old Testament passage to illustrate a New Testament principle.

In A Biblicist View of Law and Gospel , Stephenson advocates a biblicist view based on careful Bible study to explain how Christians are to view the law and the way the testaments fit together as an inspired whole.

226 pages, Kindle Edition

Published June 8, 2017

Reviews

[Debbie Chatley · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this book to be a complete and thorough review of the role of the Law and the Old Testament in the Church Age (today). Too many Christians dismiss the Law and the Old Testament as antiquated and not relevant to today. Yet as the author so clearly points out in this book, there is such meaning and richness that a thorough understanding of the Law and the Old Testaments adds to our reading of the New Testament. After all, it was this very law that was the Scriptures Jesus and his disciples read and preached from.

I really liked how the author in the 1st chapter set down some prerequisites for interpreting Scripture. And those are: desire for the truth, dedication to the truth, diligence in ascertaining the truth and discernment. And you can tell throughout this book that the author practiced these principles in presenting this study to us. The author is very careful to seek and share the truth in his review and in his presentation.

In fact, there were quite a few practical tips to be gleaned from this book to use in our personal study of the Scriptures. The author highlights the facts that a careful study of the Scriptures pays close attention to context and culture in which words are written and used. Additionally, the author points out that a Biblicist uses the literal interpretation of the text. Thereby not only will you gain an exhaustive understanding of the Old Testament Law and how it helps us better understand and interpret the New Testament, you as the reader will also pick up basic Bible study tips as well.

Here is one of my favorite quotes. The author says in Chapter 5, the Law does not save, but shows the need for salvation. The Law does not make men holy. It reveals the holiness of God and reveals how men fall short of His perfection.

So if you are seeking to grow in your Bible study skills, want to better understand how the Old Testament helps us interpret the New Testament, or just want to understand the relation of the Law to today (Church Age), get a copy of this book and prepare to have your knowledge expanded. I highly recommend this book.

[John Waldrip · Rating 1 out of 5]

My impression while reading the book was that the author did not have as complete a grasp of the subject matter as he thought he had. The book seemed to me to be the result of theological confusion and a desire to distinguish himself from Reformed theology without embracing Arminian theology. The problems I have with the book are essentially three: First, throughout the book, the author insists on the place of the Mosaic Law in the Christian life without addressing who the Mosaic Law was given to (Deut. 5.2-3: "The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day"). Thus, the Law of Moses was not even given to all of the Jewish people who ever lived, much less to Gentiles (Romans 3.19). Second, the author mentions the three uses of the Law of Moses without seeming to know that for many centuries such an approach to the Law was unknown until it was contrived by Thomas Aquinas and subsequently dragged into Protestantism by the early Reformers. Third, the author does not insist on adherence to the ceremonial portions of the Law, but only the moral aspects of the Law, without ever addressing the indivisible unity of the Law, according to James 2.10 ("For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."). Over the years I have been aware of those who suggested that they were neither of the Arminian persuasion or the Reformed persuasion, but were instead Biblicists. This is the only book I have ever seen that argued for a so-called Biblicist position, and it does so unpersuasively.