One might argue that Paul’s opponents misunderstood the law (Gal ), but this admission is a far cry from saying that law in Galatians three equals misunderstanding of the law. Finally, a word needs to be said about the confessional implications of Fuller’s doctrine of Justification.
He writes, “there [can] no longer be any antithesis in biblical theology between the law and the gospel.Given Fuller’s definition, one wonders how Fuller would explain the biblical injunction to “obey the Gospel” (2 Thes 1:8; 1 Pet ).Fuller also fails to distinguish the way Paul uses the term law ( as the Mosaic administration) and the way law is commonly used in theological circles (law as everything that commands and condemns a person). These definitions are precisely what have emerged as major points of dispute in the wider debate.When Fuller asserts the “inseparable connection between faith and resulting works,” he speaks as if his view is a new position (p. Yet covenant theology has always maintained an inseparable connection between the two.The distinction between Law and Gospel in covenant theology is not absolute; the distinction only holds with reference to Justification.The Law cannot justify; only the Gospel offers righteousness.Yet with respect to sanctification, covenant theology has always insisted upon the “resulting works” that flow from faith.One can imagine at least three books that would be needed to address adequately the subjects Fuller wants to engage: a critique of dispensationalism, a historical comparison of dispensationalism and covenant theology with reference to the law-gospel question, and a biblical and theological analysis of the Law-Gospel problem.Because Fuller addresses all of these issues in such short order, a certain superficiality is inevitable.To the extent that Fuller’s thesis builds upon a definition of these terms, to that extent Fuller’s argument will not stand.Fuller argues for a novel view of Galatians -12, “Galatians -12 affirms that the law and the gospel are one and the same, and the antithesis stated in Galatians represents the Jewish misinterpretation of the law” (p. Fuller’s exposition of Paul’s discussion of the law in Galatians three completely misunderstands the salvation-historical context of Paul’s remarks. Paul could not be clearer that the law that he is referring to is the Mosaic law.