Phil and I have been having a lengthy conversation on whether or not the Decalogue remains valid for Christians now that Christ has come. My latest response made reference to the three uses of the law, which are 1) to promote civil righteousness, 2) to drive us to Christ, and 3) as a rule of life for those who have been redeemed. This is what was still rolling around in my mind when I came across the following:
Actually, in my response, I wasn't even thinking about the first use of the law. Nor am I sure that I agree with it- there doesn't seem to be any connection to Christ. I misidentified it as the means of justification for the two Federal Heads, Adam and Christ. Perhaps this is not what is called the first use of the law, even so, I do take it as a legitimate use of the law. Furthermore, I do not believe it possible to have a clear grasp of what it means for our justification, and thus our salvation, to be by grace through faith unless we recognize that Christ, the bestower of grace and object of our faith, was justified by the works of the law. Jesus did have a specific call as the Messiah, which was to save his people from their sins. This, in turn, was accomplished when he kept the demands of the law and suffered the penalty due us for breaking that law.
I am in full agreement with the concluding sentence in the above quote: "Anything that brings someone closer to Christ can be a useful tool." My cocern is that Wright's answer quite possibly missed the point of the objection from the professors at Regent. Most of the time, the question WWJD is asked in complete abstraction from Jesus' unique role as the Messiah. Instead of Jesus being the one who fulfills the law in our stead, who then unites us with him in his death and resurrection, he becomes our greatest moral example. It is quite possible to follow the example of Jesus without ever putting our trust in him. And where this is the case, no one is being brought closer to Christ. Jesus has been turned into a mental construct whereby we facilitate and act upon the moral dictates of our own conscience.
A desire to be like Christ, to be conformed to his image, is comendable. But this is not achieved by mere imitation, or, what's worse, second guessing what would have been done so as to imitate that. Wherever there may be legitimate grounds for imitation, it will always be connected to the law in its third use. On the other hand, this use of the law covers a lot more territiory than what Jesus may or may not have provided in the way of situational examples.
The thing is, keeping the law isn't nearly as exiting as having a hero. Besides that, it can devolve into legalism. This is where it may be legitimate to ask WWJD. Not as a first step wherein the answer is ruled by our conscience (which in turn subscribes to a faulty conception of who Jesus is), but in subordination to an intentional knowledge of the word and will of God. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 11:1, "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ." Keep the verse in context. Paul is not saying, "Jesus did things that I copy and I'm doing things that you can copy." The emphasis here is on a mindset.
Paul has just finished talking about what to do in the case of meat offered to idols. Should the Corinthians eat it or not? On the one hand, even though idols are nothing, this meat has been offered to demons. "You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons" (10:21). So that settles it. Not quite. The creation is a gift from God intended to be used by man. "The earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof" (10:26). If it is wrong to eat at the table of demons, it is also wrong to cede to them what rightly belongs to God. From two possible options, both of which are wrong, Paul advocates a third. He offeres himself as an example, not of settling with the lesser of two evils, but of glorifying God in either option. "So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offence to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God, just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many that they may be saved. Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ" (10:31-11:1).
Compare this to Philippians 2:3-8. Here, Paul uses the occasion of Jesus fulfilling his messianic role as an example for us. Not that we might be mini-messiahs, but that we might have the mind of Christ. We lack Christ's office and will never be called to do what he did; nevertheless, we are partakers of his image and are both called and able to have the same motivation that he did. Paul did not seek his own advatage because he longed for the salvation of many. Even so, Christ won the salvation of his bride because he loved her more than his own life. What then is our response? I am chagrined that I do not love the people of God as I ought. And yet I rejoice- Jesus loves me.