Was the Mosaic Covenant Legalistic?

by Matthew Barrett

This is the second of forty questions Thomas Schreiner asks in his new book, 40 Questions about Christians and Biblical Law (Kregel). First, says Schreiner, we must define “legalism.” Legalism is the “idea that human beings can earn or merit right standing with God.” Based on this definition, the answer to the above question must be “no,” the Mosaic covenant was not legalistic, but rather was a covenant where God’s grace was apparent. Think back with me to the beginning chapters of Exodus where we learn that Israel is in bondage to Egypt. Remember, the Mosaic law has not yet been given. What comes first then is not the law but redemption. God delivers his people and redeems them, setting them apart. “Their redemption,” says Schreiner, “is an act of divine grace and cannot be ascribed to the obedience of Israel. The Lord did not choose Israel because of her righteousness, for nothing inherent in Israel commended her as a nation before the Lord” (25). All of this, of course, is obvious when one reads Deuteronomy 9:4-5 where Yahweh specifically says it is NOT because of Israel’s righteousness and uprightness of heart that they are redeemed. Israel is warned that they are not to think that their redemption and election was due to their own righteousness. Schreiner concludes, “Since the Lord did not bring Israel into the land because of her accomplishments but despite them, it is clear that Israel was saved by virtue of God’s mercy” (25). A second text which demonstrates Schreiner’s point well is Deuteronomy 7:6-8. Again we read that Yahweh chose his people out of all the peoples of the earth not because they were more in number (in fact they were the smallest!), but rather because “the Lord loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery.” Israel, in other words is chosen and elected purely because of God’s love. The “reason given for the Lord’s love is his love.” Stated otherwise, “no quality in Israel endeared the nation to the Lord. The Lord set his sovereign love upon Israel because it was his good pleasure to do so” (26).

Once Israel is redeemed from the hand of her oppressor, she is led into the wilderness where Moses meets with Yahweh and is given the Law. Yahweh declares himself Israel’s redeemer and on this basis gives his people the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:2).Therefore, “the Ten Commandments did not constitute the basis upon which Israel would gain life.” Schreiner explains, “The giving of the law followed the salvation of Israel, and hence such obedience signified Israel’s grateful response to the redemption accomplished by the Lord. There is no basis in the text for the idea that Israel’s obedience established a relationship with the Lord. The Lord took the initiative in rescuing his people, and they were called upon to respond with faithful obedience” (26).

Therefore, Israel entered into a covenant with Yahweh. Schreiner, leaning on Meredith Kline (see The Structure of Biblical Authority), points us toward the similarity the Mosaic covenant has with ancient suzerain-vassal treaties in this regard. Yahweh is the almighty suzerain and Israel serves as the vassal. He explains,

“In such treaties the historical prologue, which recounts what the suzerain has done to benefit his vassals, precedes the covenant stipulations and the covenant curses. In the same way, the Lord recounts in the covenant structure what he has done for Israel (historical prologue) in delivering them from Egypt and preserving them from their enemies before he gives them covenant stipulations (the law). The Lord also promises them covenant blessings if they obey or threatens them with covenantal curses if they disobey” (26).

This redemption-then-obedience formula can be seen in the New Testament also. First sinners are redeemed by Christ and then they respond in grateful obedience. “Such grateful obedience,” says Schreiner, “is not legalistic, for there is no idea that such obedience earns or merits salvation under either the old covenant or the new. The obedience of believers flows from faith and is a thankful response to God’s saving work in Christ” (27). However, this does not mean that the Mosaic covenant and the new covenant are the same. Not at all, for there are important and significant differences, differences that will be spelled out in a future blog post. The point of this post is simple: the Mosaic covenant is not legalistic.

In my next post on this topic of the Law we shall pursue Schreiner’s third question, “Does the Old Testament Teach That Salvation Is by Works?”

Matthew Barrett received his Ph.D. from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in systematic theology (2011). He is the founder and executive editor of Credo Magazine. Barrett has contributed book reviews and articles to various academic journals and he also writes at Blogmatics. He is married to Elizabeth and they have two daughters, Cassandra and Georgia. He is a member of Clifton Baptist Church in Louisville, KY.