The Law and Gospel distinction found throughout not only Lutherism but also Calvinism

I was once in a debate with an individual who was and perhaps even still ensnared with the heretical teachings of the Lordship salvation camp. This individual said that the Law and Gospel was not a big definite doctrine in the history of the church besides the Lutheran's and in particular Luther. Here I list several authors and theologians that present this doctrine as most important to know.

"On this subject we call the 'Word of God' (for we know well that the eternal Son of God is also so named) the canonical books of the Old and New Testament; for they proceed from the mouth of God Himself.
We divide this Word into two principal parts or kinds: the one is called the 'Law', the other the ' Gospel'. For, all the rest can be gathered under the one or the other of these two headings." - Theodore Beza, The Christian Faith, pg. 36

"Now, of all doctrines the foremost and most important is the doctrine of justification. However, immediately following upon it, as second in importance, is this, how Law and Gospel are to be divided. The distinction between the Law and the Gospel shall now claim our attention and form the subject of our earnest study." -C. F. W. Walther, The Proper distinction between Law and Gospel, Pg. 5

"By 'the law' here is meant the moral law as a covenant of works, and by 'the gospel' is meant the gospel in its strict and proper sense. To know the difference so as to be able to distinguish aright between the law and the gospel is of every it most importance to the faith, holiness, and comfort of every true Christian. It will be impossible otherwise for a man so to believe as to 'be filled with joy and peace in believing.' If he does not know the difference between the law ...and the gospel he will be apt, especially in affair of justification, to confound the one with the other. The consequence will be that his painful experience, bondage will be mixed with liberty of spirit, fear with hope, sorrow with joy, and death with life. If he cannot so distinguish the gospel from the law as to expect all his salvation from the grace of the gospel, and nothing of it from the works of the law; he will easily be induced to connect his own works with the righteousness of Jesus Christ in the affair of his justification. This was the great error of the Judaizing teachers in the churches of Galatia. They mingled the law with the gospel in the business of justification, and thereby they so corrupted the gospel as to alter the very nature of it and make it another gospel. They taught that unless men were circumcised and kept the law of Moses, they could not be justified or saved (Acts 15:1-5). They informed the people that while the righteousness of Christ received by faith was necessary, their own works of obedience were also requisite in connection with it to entitle them to justification before God. This is a fundamental error, and such a one that if even an angel from heaven would publish it he should be accursed." -John Colquhoun, A Treatise on the Law and Gospel

In his Epistle to the Romans, contrasting the law and the gospel, he says, 'Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, that a man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.' Do you perceive how he thus discriminates between the law and the gospel,  that the former attributes righteousness to works, but the latter bestows it freely, without the assistance of works? -John Calvin,  The Institutes, 3.11.17. Pg. 669

"All Scripture should be divided into these two chief doctrines, the law and the promises. In some places it presents the law. In others it presents the promise of Christ; this it does either when it promises that the Messiah will come and promises forgiveness of sins, justification, and eternal life for his sake, or when, in the New Testament, the Christ who came promises forgiveness of sins, justification, and eternal life. By 'law' in this discussion we mean the commandments of the Decalogue, wherever they appear in the Scriptures. For the present we are saying nothing about the ceremonial and civil laws of Moses." - The Book of Concords, Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article 4 on Justification, Pg. 108. The version I have is edited by Theodore G. Tappert.

Perkins spoke of the law and gospel distinction: "And first of all, the law, showing a man his sin and punishment thereof, which is eternal death: afterward the Gospel, showing salvation by Christ Jesus to such as believe." -William Perkins, A Golden Chain, pg. 171.

"Now in order that we do not open our mouths too wide and marvel at the skill of these false spirits, and thereby abandon the main articles, and thus deceitfully be led off the track (for thereby the devil succeeds through these prophets), I will here briefly recount these articles of the Christian faith to which everyone is above all things to pay attention and hold fast.
The first is the law of God, which is to be preached so that one thereby reveals and teaches how to recognize sin (Rom. 3[:20] and 7[:7]), as we have often shown in our writings. However these  prophets do not understand this correctly, for this means a truly spiritual preaching of the law, as Paul says in  Rom. 7[:14], and a right use of the law, as he says in 1 Tim. 1[:8].
Secondly, when now sin is recognized and the law is so preached that the conscience is alarmed and humbled before God's wrath, we are then to preach the comforting word of the gospel and the forgiveness of sins, so that the conscience again may be comforted and established in the grace of God, etc.
Christ himself teaches these two articles in such an order (Luke 24[:47]. One must preach repentance and the forgiveness of sins in his name. 'And the Spirit (he says in John [16:8]) will convince the world of sin and of righteousness and of judgment.' You do not find either of these two articles in this one or any other of the false prophets. They also do not understand them, and yet these are the most important and necessary articles." - Martin Luther, Against the Heavenly Prophets, Pg. 160

The Heidelberg Catechism with the commentary of Dr. Zacharias Ursinus teaches us from the start what is the doctrine of the Church.

It says, "The doctrine of the church is the entire and uncorrupted doctrine of the law and gospel concerning the true God, together with his will, works, and worship; divinely revealed, and comprehended in the writings of the prophets and apostles, and confirmed by man miracles and divine testimonies; through which the Holy Spirit works effectually in the hearts of the elect, and gathers from the whole human race an everlasting church, in which God is glorified, both in this, and in the life to come." - Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism by Dr. Zacharias Ursinus, Pg. 1

Then on Pg. 2 of the Commentary, it says, "The doctrine of the church consists of two parts: the Law, and the Gospel; in which we have comprehended the sum and substance of the sacred Scriptures. The law is called the Decalogue, and the gospel is the doctrine concerning Christ the mediator, and the free remission of sins, through faith. This division of the doctrine of the church is established by these plain and forcible arguments." 

Also Tyndale says,

"The keys whereof they greatly boast are no carnal things but spiritual, and nothing else save knowledge of the law and of the promises or gospel: if any man for lack of spiritual feeling desire authority of men, let him read the old doctors. If any man desire authority of scripture, Christ saith ( Luke 11): woe be to you lawyers for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye enter not in yourselves and they that come in ye forbid. That is, they had blindes the scripture whose knowledge (as it were a key) letteth into God, with glosses and tradition." -William Tyndale, The Obedience of a Christian Man, pg. 65 - 66

Here Tyndale shows us that the key of heaven is nothing but the law and gospel rightly divided.

Also Joseph Hussey says, "But I must not go and propose the mysteries of the Gospel to men in that way, making them tenders of Salvation, as if it were a mere creature's business that rested only between them and me! For proposals imply in a manner, equal terms on both sides; but in Effectual Grace God can and doth sovereignly impose Himself by the Gospel on his own, II Tim. 2:19; and yet in that imposing act they are made a willing people. He puts his own Gospel on them, as afterwards Christ's yoke, Matt. 11:30, but he puts not on them another Gospel, nor confounds the Law with the Gospel, but keeps them both distinct. He puts his Gospel on them, before they take any clear evangelical impression, {'that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in oldness of the letter,' Rom. 7:6,} or serve in any evangelical duty." - God's Operations of Grace, Pg. 191


Robert Traill says "Let us carefully keep the bounds clear betwixt the law and gospel; which 'whosoever doth, is a right perfect divine,' saith blessed Luther, in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians: a book that hath more plain sound gospel, than many volumes of some other divines. Let us keep the law as far from the business of justification, as we would keep condemnation, its contrary. For the law and condemnation are inseparable, but by the intervention of Jesus Christ our surety, Gal. 3. 10, - 14. But in the practice of holiness, the fulfilled law given by Jesus Christ to believers as a rule, is of great and good use to them; as hath been declared." - The Doctrine of Justification vindicated from the Charge of Antinomianism, Pg. 287

God is above the law by Clark and Perkins

It is interesting to read theology through history, for by doing so one can see the history of a position. This is not to say that theology depends on history. Theology depends on God's word alone the Bible.

Gordon Clark believed that God is Ex Lex. I agree as well. But Clark wasn't the first theologian to affirm this doctrine. William Perkins also believed this to be the case too.


"God is neither responsible nor sinful, even though he is the only ultimate cause of everything. He is not sinful because in the first place whatever God does is just and right. It is just and right simply by virtue of the fact that he does it. Justice or righteousness is not a standard external to God to which God is obligated to submit. Righteousness is what God does. Since God caused Judas to bestray Christ, this causal act is righteous and not sinful. By definition God cannot sin. At this point it must be particularly pointed out that God's causing a man to sin is not sin. There is no law, superior to God, which forbids him to decree sinful acts. Sin presupposes a law, for sin is lawlessness. Sin is any want of conformity unto or transgression of the law of God. But God is 'Ex-lex.'" - Gordon H Clark, Religion, Reason, and Revelation, pg. 175


"We must understand every commandment of the law so, as that we annex this condition: unless God command otherwise. For God being an absolute Lord, and so above the law, may command that which his law forbiddeth. So he commanded Isaac to be offered, the Egyptians to be spoiled, the brazen serpent to be erected, which was a figure of Christ." - William Perkins, A Golden Chain, pg. 55

God is simple or one in essence

"Therefore, let such as love sobriety, and will be contented with the measure of faith, briefly attend to what is useful to be known, which is, that, when we profess to believe in one God, the word God denotes a single and simple essence, in which we comprehend three Persons, or hypostases; and that, therefore, whenever the word God is used indefinitely, the Son and Spirit are intended as much as the Father; but when the Son is associated with the Father, that introduces the reciprocal relation of one to the other; and thus we distinguish between the Persons." - John Calvin, The Institutes, 1. 8. 20. Pg. 136

"The nature of God is his most lively and most perfect essence. The perfection of the nature of God is his absolute constitution by the which he is wholly complete within himself. (Exodus 3:14) . . . . (Acts 17:24,25) . . . . The perfection of his nature is either simpleness, or the infiniteness thereof. The simpleness of his nature is that by which he is void of all logical relation. He hath not in him subject or adjunct. (John 5:26) . . . . Conferred with John 14:6 . . . . (1 John 1:7) . . . . Conferred with 1 John 1:5 . . . . Hence it is manifest that to have life and to be life, to be in light and to be light, in God are all one. Neither is God subject to generality or speciality, whole or parts, matter or that which is made of matter, for so there should be in God divera things, and one more perfect than another. Therefore, whatsoever is in God is his essence, and all that he is, he is by essence. The saying of Augustine in his sixth book and fourth chapter of The Trinity, is fit to prove this, 'In God (saith he) to be, and to be just and mighty are all one: but in the mind of man it is not all one to be, and to be mighty or just: for the mind may be destitute of these virtues, and yet a mind.' Hence it is manifest that the nature of God is immutable and spiritual." - William Perkins, The Golden Chain, pg. 2

William Perkins against the Lordshiper today

"Actual members of Christ are either living or dying members. An actual living member of Christ is every one elected, which being engrafted by faith and Spirit into Christ, doth feel and show forth the power of Christ in him.

An actual dying or decaying member is every one truly engrafted into Christ, and yet hath no feeling of the power and efficacy of the quickening Spirit in him. He is like unto a benumbed leg without sense, which indeed is a part of man's body, and yet receiveth no nourishment: such are those faithful ones, who for a time do faint and are overcome under the heavy burden of temptations and their sins: such are also those excommunicate persons, who in regard of their engrafting are true members, howsoever in regard of the external communion with the Church and efficacy of the Spirit, they are not members till such time as they, being touched with repentance, do begin as it were, to live again" - William Perkins, a golden chain, Pg. 170-171

William Perkins don't you know that Macarthur would have your hide if you said this in his church? He would say if a professing Christian is caught in sin he is no Christian at all.

William Perkins on the Law and the Gospel

Perkins spoke of the law and gospel distinction: "And first of all, the law, showing a man his sin and punishment thereof, which is eternal death: afterward the Gospel, showing salvation by Christ Jesus to such as believe." -William Perkins, A Golden Chain, pg. 171.

God ordains all things whatsoever happens

"God's decree, in as much as it concerneth man, is called predestination: which is the decree of God by the which he hath ordained all men to a certain and everlasting estate, that is either to salvation or condemnation, for his own glory. (1 Thessalonians 5:9) 'For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ.' (Romans 9:13) 'As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.' (Romans 9:22, 23) 'What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make  known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory.'
The means of accomplishing God's predestination are twofold:
The Creation and the fall." - William Perkins, A Golden Chain

The Decree of God is first in order and time

"The decree of God is that by which God in himself hath necessarily, and yet freely, from all eternity determined all things. . . . The same decree of God is the first and principal working cause of all things, which also is in order and time before all other causes. For with God's decree is always his will annexed, by the which he can willingly effect that he hath decreed. And it were a sign of impotency to decree anything which he could not willingly compass. And with God's will is conjoined an effectual power by which the Lord can bring to pass whatsoever he hath freely decreed.
The first and principal cause, howbeit in itself it be necessary, yet it doth not take away freedom of will in election, or the nature and property of second causes, but only brings them into a certain order; that is, it directeth them to the determinate end, whereupon the effects and events of things are contingent or necessary, as the nature of the second cause is. So Christ according to his Father's decree died necessarily, (Acts 17:3) but yet willingly (John 10:18); and if we respect the temperature of Christ's body, he might have prolonged his life; and therefore in this respect may he said to have died contingently." - William Perkins, A Golden Chain

To know God is to have life eternal

"The body of Scripture is a doctrine sufficient to live well. It comprehendeth many holy sciences, whereof one is principal, others are handmaids or retainers.
The principal science is Theology.
Theology is the science of living blessedly forever. Blessed life consisteth in the knowledge of God. (John 17:3) 'And this is life eternal that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.' (Isaiah 53:11) . . .'by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many.' And therefore it consisteth likewise in the knowledge of ourselves, because we know God by looking into ourselves.
Theology hath two parts: the first of God, the second of His works."

- William Perkins, A Golden Chain, or The Description of Theology

Zanchius sadly is not a Supralapsarian but is still a good infralapsarian

"Jerome Zanchi is a reformer well known for his scholasticism and his Aristotelianism. As previously mentioned, he along with Peter Martyr Vermigli, were trained in the Thomist school of thought prior to joining the Reformation. In fact, regarding his scholasticism Richard Muller writes:

Zanchi presents the picture of a Reformer of the era just following that of Calvin, Vermigli, and Musculus, whose views had much of the same foundation as theirs, but who, because of his immersion in the system, rechniques, and philosophy of late medieval scholasticism, was able to add another dimension to Reformed theology in the sixteenth century - the dimension of detail and of clear continuity with the medieval theological tradition. 

Hence, given the fact that Zanchi's thought was entrenched in scholasticism and Aristotelianism, one might therefore conclude that he should be a supralapsarian. Yet, it might be of some surprise that Zanchi was not a supralapsarian despite his use of the scholastic metho. Zanchi writes:

Consider predestination relating to the elect only, and it is 'that eternal, unconditional, particular and irreversible act of the Divine will whereby, in matchless love and adorable sovereignty, God determined with Himself to deliver a certain number of Adam's degenerate offspring out of that sinful and miserable estate into which, by his primitive transgression, they were to fall,' and in which sad condition they were equally involved, with those who were not chosen, but, being pitched upon and singled out by God the Father to be vessels of grace and salvation.

One should take note that Zanchi identifies the object of predestination as the infralapsarian homo creatus et lapsus by the phrase: 'God determined with Himself to deliver a certain number of Adam's degenerate offspring out of that sinful and miserable estate.' What is even more interesting is that Zanchi's definition of reprobation is moderate in comparison with Calvin's. For example, Zanchi writes: 'Predestination, as it regards the reprobate, is 'that eternal, most holy, sovereign and immutable act of God's will, whereby He hath determined to leave some men to perish in their sins, and to be justly punished for them.'' Zanchi does not define reprobation as an absolute act of God as does Calvin. On the contrary, Zanchi defines reprobation in Augustinian terms of preterition. For these reasons Muller concludes that 'Zanchi defines the decree in relation to man creatus et lapsus and views election as remedy to the end that his doctrine will be soteriologically and christologically oriented.'
Hence, Zanchi, an Aristotelian, Thomist, and scholastic, is an infralapsarian, and William Perkins, a Ramist, is a supralapsarian. Along these lines, Lynne Boughton comments: 'Perkins, although he admired Beza and cited him as an authority, had arrived at a supralapsarian position based on his own philosophical and theological inquiry. The English Puritan's philosophical Scotism and Ramism led to the same conclusions in theology as had Beza's post-Renaissance Aristotelianism.' This evidence points to the fact that philosophical and methodological commitments do not serve as indicators to the lapsarian position of a theologian. What, then, do the two competing methodologies show in the work of the various theologians?" - J.V. Fesko, Diversity Within The Reformed Tradition: Supra- and Infralapsarianism in Calvin, Dort, and Westminster