Apologetica Christos: 5th Disputation

Greetings most excellent Theophilus. As relating to the previous treatise, a good law is shored up by just punishment for its violation, and, any government that fails to enforce punishment for violation of its laws thereby runs the risk of having its authority diminished. For example, a man is apprehended as a murderer and found guilty at court. If the government at this point should fail to enforce the lawful punishment for murder what will this convey concerning the authority of that law? It would invariably teach men that they can “continue in sin, that grace may abound” (Romans 6:1) And would this be just to any of the family members of the deceased? Most certainly not. Forgiving the guilty shows dishonor both to the broken law and to the lawmaker.

Now dear friend, I will introduce you to the core of the dilemma that our heavenly Father faced in all this. Man was truly guilty of sin, and the broken law demanded the life of the sinner. To do otherwise would be to undermine and dishonor His own authority. Yet still God loved man and would not simply let Him perish. So how would the God of heaven 'kill two birds with one stone'? It was pertinent that Jehovah find a way to vindicate His own law and at the same time deliver man from its penalty. Allow me to take a pause here and say that those who teach men to believe that the law of God was not in existence until it was delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai are unfortunately and completely confused. They retain no idea of what the gospel is and why it is. If sin is the transgression of the law, "Sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4) and the gospel is the remedy for sin "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23) how can both the gospel and sin exist before the law? There are many things which are mysterious in the word of God, indeed, and difficult to understand at first, but we may safely presume the Lord never calls upon us to believe impossibilities. Though creeds and the doctrines of men often do.

In pardoning the guilty, God would be undermining His own law and authority. There was no question He was going to pardon the guilty, for it is written “Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.” (Jeremiah 31:3) Thus therefore the divine plan was to pardon man and at the same time vindicate the honor of God's law by carrying out the punishment for the broken law. The penalty for sin still had to be carried out. But, on who? Not just anyone could be man’s vicarious sufferer. Since pardoning the guilty was equivalent to killing the law, only one equal to the law could die on man’s behalf thereby typifying the very death of the law without actually dishonoring or killing the law. Think on that for now. The peace of God and the joy of our Lord His Son be with you.