all of Scripture is useful for ethical instruction (Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11; 2 Tim 3:16–17), every single word (Deut 8:3; Matt 4:4).
19. Other passages used are 2 Cor 3; Phil 3:7–9.
20. Grudem, Politics, 84; cf. 27, 66, 192. See my review of Grudem’s book at www.annodomini.co.
21. Strickland, Five Views, 163; cf. 276.
22. Moo, Five Views, 343; cf. 346.
23. Morey, Relate, 144.
24. Moo, Five Views, 376; cf. 172.
25. Morey, Relate, 42.
26. Bahnsen, By This Standard, 299. “This form of antinomianism is called ‘dispensational’ because it stands opposed to the law of the previous dispensation (the Old Covenant law of Moses),” 299–300.
27. Bahnsen, By This Standard, 301. Though the word “antinomian” sometimes carries a pejorative connotation, nothing accusatory is meant here; it is simply a con-venient label for these schools of thought. I suppose Calvin and I would be “antinomian” to Orthodox Jews for not holding to Old Covenant ceremonial laws (according to Col 2:17; Heb 10:1 et al.).
28. Murray, Principles of Conduct, 15.
29. Murray, Principles of Conduct, 118; cf. 54, 119 and Collected Writings, 1:211–212.
30. Murray, Collected Writings, 1:211–212.
31. Willem A. VanGemeren, Five Views, 37.
32. Murray, Collected Writings, 1:211–212; cf. VanGemeren, Five Views, 53, 148.
33. Murray, Collected Writings, 1:212. Principles of Conduct, 118.
34. Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Five Views, 189–190. VanGemeren, Five Views, 148.
35. Kaiser, Five Views, 190.
36. Moo, Five Views, 370.
37. For a convincing critique of Dispensationalism, see The Bahnsen/Feinberg Debate—The Place of O.T. Law on the Life of the N.T. Believer, available from Covenant Media Foundation (mp3 audio), http://www.cmfnow.com/search.aspx?find=Bahnsen%2fFeinberg+Debate.
38. Moo, Five Views, 369. Moo is approvingly quoting Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians (Dallas: Word, 1990), 275–276, where Longenecker is quoting from one of his (Longenecker’s) own previous books.
39. Though at the birth of Jesus, he was declared a king (Matt 2:2; cf. Isa 9:6–7), and though his preaching was of a kingdom “at hand” (Matt 4:17; 10:7; Mark 1:14–15), and though he forcefully proclaimed that by exorcizing demons “the kingdom of God has come upon you” (Matt 12:28), these were but anticipatory of Jesus’ actual inauguration. They crescendoed the loud clash of his glorious resurrection. Christ occupied his throne when death could no longer hold him (Acts 2:30–31). And at his ascension, thereafter, when in the flesh beholding his Father, he was given his everlasting kingdom (Dan 7:13–14). From that enthronement he rules in the midst of his enemies, progressively making them his footstool (Ps 110:1–2; Eph 1:20–23; Heb 10:12–13).
40. Symington, Messiah the Prince, 67.
41. This verse even runs together “the kingdom of Christ and God.”
42. This verse actually interchanges the “Spirit of God” and the “Spirit of Christ.”
43. Symington, Messiah the Prince, 17.
44. This verse actually equates the “law of God” and the “law of Christ.”
45. Kaiser, Five Views, 189–190.
46. Kaiser’s position involves another difficulty when he says that “the civil and ceremonial laws functioned only as further illustrations of the moral law” (Five Views, 190). Does he really believe that the ceremonial laws were of a like kind (“illustrations”) with the moral laws? Or that the civil laws functioned similarly to the ceremonial laws?
47. Murray, Principles of Conduct, 118–122.
48. Murray, Principles of Conduct, 120.
49. Being moral, then, the civil laws apply to all peoples throughout all times. Recognizing this truth answers the teaching that the Mosaic civil laws were uniquely applicable to ancient Israel. Cf. Murray, Collected Writings, 1:211–212 and VanGemeren, Five Views, 53, 148.
50. Some of the passages Paul probably has in mind are Exod 21:12, 15, 16; 22:19; Lev 20:10, 13, 15–16; 24:17; Deut 19:15–21; 22:13–24; 24:7.
51. The phrase “deserving of death” in Scripture always refers to capital punishment by the State (e.g., Deut 17:6; 19:6; 21:22; Luke 23:15; Acts 23:29); it is this “righteous judgment of God” to which Paul refers. Additionally, the “such things” of Romans 1:32 refer to the homosexual practices listed back in vv. 26–27. The sins listed in the intermediary verses (vv. 28–31) are those that so often attend a society that openly embraces homosexual practices. Bahnsen nicely summarizes the syntax of the passage: “‘Being filled with’ in Rom 1:29 modifies ‘them’ in Rom 1:28, which is to say, the homosexuals of Rom 1:26, 27” (Homosexuality, 59n.113). Frame writes similarly: “Afterward [after Romans 1:24–27], Paul lists other sins that result from unbelief (vv. 28–32). But among all the sins listed in the chapter, homosexuality has a place of prominence” (DCL, 758).
