Dispensational Federalism

The third and fourth chapters of Galatians sit silently submerged in the waters of biblical truth like a notorious reef that has torn apart the hulls of countless covenantal conceptions throughout the course of human history. They remain unyielding and uncompromising, continuing in our present-day to make shipwreck of any form of covenant theology that attempts to comprehend the mosaic covenant as just another administration of the covenant of grace.

Galatians 3:12 is a key text.

Here we read, “The Law is not of faith; on the contrary, ‘The one who does them shall live by them.’”

This doesn’t describe a covenant of grace. This describes a covenant of works.

WHAT DOES ‘THE LAW’ REFER TO?

The force of this argument rests on the term, ‘The Law’ (ὁ νόμος) being understood as a reference to the Mosaic Covenant. The context, however, makes this undoubtedly evident and locks this first piece of our argument in place.

In Galatians 3:15-17 Paul gives “a human example” of “a man-made covenant” to explain the relationship between two biblical covenants. It is abundantly clear that the ‘The Law’ in this context refers to the Mosaic Covenant as it is described as coming “four hundred and thirty years” after the Abrahamic Covenant. Further, in Galatians 4:21-31, when Paul illustrates this relationship between ‘The Law’ and ‘The Promise’ in his famous analogy, ‘The Law’ is said to come from ‘Mount Sinai’, and it is explicitly described as a covenant when Paul says, “these women are two covenants (δύο διαθήκη)”.

‘The Law’ in this context most certainly refers to the Mosaic Covenant.

To drive the point home, T. David Gordon writes, “Few contributions to Pauline studies in the last several decades are more important than the now widely recognized lexical reality that for Paul, ὁ νόμος means ‘the Sinai covenant’ far more consistently than it means anything else… Paul uses the term very differently than the term later came to be used in Christian theology, ordinarily to denote something like God’s demand… In no place is this distinctive use of nomos more obvious than in Galatians 3:17” [1]

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

Galatians 3:12, therefore, is of critical importance because it directly opposes any form of covenant theology that insists on the Mosaic Covenant being understood as an administration of The Covenant of Grace, as a faith-based covenant that is substantially gracious in nature. This text makes it painfully clear that the Mosaic Covenant is not of faith. This text says that the Mosaic Covenant operates on a contrary principle. Through its use of Leviticus 18:5, this text states emphatically that the Mosaic Covenant is based on works. When you take a step back and consider all that is at stake, this text is crucial because it stands diametrically opposed to some of the most established and respected forms of Reformed Covenant Theology.

HOW DO THEY AVOID THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS TEXT?

To uphold the view that the mosaic covenant is substantially gracious, one must understand this passage to say the exact opposite of what it does. To do this, many make use of the misinterpretation view.[2]

Daniel Fuller, for example, says, “Galatians 3:12 represents the Jewish misinterpretation of the law”. [3]

In similar fashion, Herman Witsius said, “The design of the apostle therefore… is not to teach us, that the covenant of mount Sinai was nothing but a covenant of works, altogether opposite to the gospel-covenant; but only that the gross Israelites misunderstood the mind of God”. [4]

O. Palmer Robertson came to a similar conclusion, “’Law’ and ‘Sinai’ in this context must refer to legalistic misapprehension of God’s purpose in law-giving rather than the proper apprehension of God’s revelation of law.” [5]

T. David Gordon expertly refutes this by saying, “In an effort to diminish these unwelcome contrasts, many in the Reformed tradition have dismissed the contrasts by suggesting that what Paul is contrasting is some first-century legalistic abuse of the Sinai covenant [but] Paul consistently cited Old Testament texts to prove his point. It was not some first-century rabbi who introduced the idea “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the Law, and do them.” Moses introduced this idea in Deuteronomy 27:26. Similarly, it was not some famous (or obscure) first-century Jewish sectarian who said, “The one who does them shall live by them”: it was Moses who said this in Leviticus 18:5.” [6]

But what is the goal of the misinterpretation view?

Obfuscation. Now they can read Paul backwards.

My suggestion, however, is that we simply read Galatians 3:12 forwards rather than fighting against it. This passage says what it means and means what it says. Our covenant theology needs to follow the contours of Scripture.

CONCLUSION

In Galatians 3-4 we see evidence of two contrasting principles that characterize the nature of two biblical covenants, δύο διαθήκη.

The Abrahamic Covenant operates on the principle of faith, “The righteous shall live by faith” (Galatians 3:11/Habakkuk 2:4), while the Mosaic Covenant, “is not of faith; on the contrary, ‘The one who does them shall live by them.’” (Galatians 3:12/Leviticus 18:5).

Scripture is clear.

Don’t let your covenant theology be wrecked on these rocks.

---

[1] The Law is Not of Faith, p249, T. David Gordon, Abraham and Sinai Contrasted in Galatians 3:6-14.

[2] Another approach to avoid the full implications of Galatians 3:12 is to use the substance/administration distinction. I have previously written on this subject and believe this approach still falls short of doing justice to Galatians 3-4 and similar passages of scripture.

[3] Quoted in “Review of Daniel P. Fuller’s “Gospel & Law: Contrast or Continuum?”, Denny Burk, https://www.dennyburk.com/review-of-daniel-p-fullers-gospel-law-contrast-or-continuum/

[4] The Economy of the Divine Covenants Between God and Man, Herman Witsius, 4.4.12, Quoted by Jeffrey Johnson, The Fatal Flaw.

[5] The Christ of the Covenants, O. Palmer Robertson, 181-182, Quoted by Jeffrey Johnson, The Fatal Flaw.

[6] The Law is Not of Faith, p251, T. David Gordon, Abraham and Sinai Contrasted in Galatians 3:6-14.