laws in our own society is often the irresponsibility of many people. For example, the

responsible driver would naturally slow down when traveling through a built up area, but

there were many who did not do so, with the result that a law had to be drawn up

restricting the liberty of the `lawless'. This law was not given for the law-abiding, but for

the law-breaker. Thus those who are `in Christ', are not subject to the law, but this does

not give them license to break the law, nor does it mean that they will do so, for by so

doing they number themselves among those for whom it was given!

What believer is there who willfully breaks the Ten Commandments? Do we know of

any believer who has another god as well as God or who worships a `graven image', who

claims the right to commit adultery or bear false witness? Why then should there be any

who turn from the privilege afforded by our society for one day's rest in seven: an

opportunity to turn from the specific claims of daily living for worship, meditation on the

Word of God, fellowship with other believers, an opportunity for a `day of rest and

gladness'? We are not subject to such a day, we are not obliged to observe one day

above another, nor in our observance of it do we hedge it about with all sorts of

pettifogging restrictions.  But as nine of the Ten Commandments are clearly the

expression of God's desire for us, why should the one (the fourth) not be also His desire

for us?

It seems clear then that in the Ten Commandments we have laid down for us the basic

principles of the Will of God for us and that, while we may not be `under the law', the

members of Christ's Body will delight to do His will with the psalmist of old. For it was

for this reason:

God has placed us as sons in Christ that we should be holy and without blame before

Him in love to the praise of the glory of His grace.