The topic of the law often attracts significant criticism within the context of Adventist theology. Many former Adventists are surprised to discover that the tripartite, or threefold, division of the law is not an Adventist innovation. The classification of the law into moral, ceremonial, and judicial components has been a widely recognized framework within Christian theology, predating the emergence of the Seventh-day Adventist movement by centuries. This understanding, rooted in Scripture, has been embraced by Christians across various traditions and has historically played a key role in interpreting the function and purpose of God’s law.
English reformer, William Perkins, for example, writes:
The law in general, is that part of God’s Word, which commands things just, honest, and godly, and being thus conceived, it is threefold: ceremonial, judicial, and moral.
The ceremonial law, is that part of God’s Word, which prescribed to the Jews, ceremonies, rites, and orders, to be performed in the worship of God. This law is laid down in the books of Moses, especially in Leviticus.
The judicial law, is that part of God’s Word, which prescribed ordinances for the government of the Jews’ commonwealth, and the civil punishment of offenders. The ceremonial law concerned the Jews only. The judicial law did indeed principally concern them, but yet so far forth as it tends to the establishing of the moral law, having in it common equity, it concerns all people, in all times and places.
What the moral law is, I will describe in three points:
1. It is that part of God’s Word, concerning righteousness and godliness, which was written in Adam’s mind by the gift of creation; and the remnants of it be in every man by the light of nature, in regard whereof, it binds all men.
2. It commands perfect obedience, both inward in thought and affection, and outward in speech and action.
3. It binds to the curse and punishment everyone that fails in the least duty thereof, though but once, and that in thought only: ‘Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the law to do them’ (Gal. 3:10).
The sum of the moral law is propound in the Decalogue or Ten Commandments, which many can repeat, but few do understand. That we may further conceive aright the moral law, we must make a difference between it and the gospel, for the gospel is that part of the Word which promises righteousness and life everlasting to all that believe in Christ.
William Perkins, The Works of William Perkins, 1:243-44
What Perkins notes was not unique to him but is an understanding of scripture in a long line of theologians preceding him. And the key to this discussion is found in the final sentence of his quote. In order to properly understand this subject, one must understand the distinction between the law and the gospel—something the Seventh-day Adventist system of theology does not understand.
Francis Turretin, another Protestant reformer, in his Institutes of Elenctic Theology, writes:
The law given by Moses is usually distinguished into three species: moral (treating of morals or of perpetual duties towards God and our neighbor); ceremonial (of the ceremonies or rites about the sacred things to be observed under the Old Testament); and civil, constituting the civil government of the Israelite people. The first is the foundation upon which rests the obligation of the others and these are its appendices and determinations. Ceremonial has respect to the first table determining its circumstances, especially as to external worship. Civil has respect to the second table in judicial things, although it lays down punishments for crimes committed against the first table.
Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, pg. 145
While Adventists did not innovate the threefold division of the law, they have filtered this framework through their distinctive extra-biblical Great Controversy worldview, a lens that significantly distorts the biblical truth of the law’s purpose and application. This reinterpretation has led to serious theological errors and problematic practical applications that diverge from historic, biblical Christian orthodoxy.
Understanding this dynamic is crucial for Christians seeking to engage with Adventist theology. The core issue is not the framework itself but the way Adventists have redefined and misapplied it within their broader theological system. Without this awareness, one risks misunderstanding the underlying theological tensions and the implications for doctrine and practice.
The Biblical Case for the Tripartite Division
The division of the law into moral, ceremonial, and judicial categories is derived from the various terms used in Scripture to describe the different aspects of the law. The moral law is frequently referred to as “precepts,” the ceremonial law as “statutes,” and the judicial or civil law as “judgments.” For instance, terms such as these can be found in passages like Deuteronomy 5:31, 6:1, 6:20, 7:11, and Leviticus 26:46. This distinction is not to suggest that the entire body of 613 commandments should not be considered God’s law, but rather that within this body of law, there are clear distinctions that serve to categorize its various functions and applications.
As Francis Turretin also writes:
The distinction appears principally from the nature of the thing and the office of the law (whose it is to settle the order according to which man is joined to God and his neighbor). Now man is joined to God first by a certain internal and external likeness—in love and justice, holiness and truth, whose rule the moral law delivers. Again by the external signification and testification of those acts of divine worship (marks and symbols being employed) whose use the ceremonial law prescribes. Finally, what duty man owes to man, the civil law (applied more distinctly to the Israelites) explains. The moral law regards the Israelite people as men; the ceremonial as the church of the Old Testament expecting the promised Messiah; the civil regards them as a peculiar people who in the land of Canaan ought to have a republic suiting their genius and disposition.
Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, pg. 145-6
To put it another way, the civil law was specific to national Israel and was not intended to apply to surrounding nations. These laws were given to Israel as a vital component of their theocratic system. However, certain moral principles, such as the prohibition against murder, were universally applicable to all people, in all places, at all times. This universality is evident in the story of Cain in Genesis 4, which predates the establishment of national Israel. The reason for this universal applicability is that the moral law of God is inscribed upon the conscience of all human beings, as Paul explains in Romans 2:14-16. Murder, as a violation of the moral law, is included within this universal moral code. In contrast, the ceremonial and civil laws are not part of natural law and, therefore, are not written on the conscience of humanity.
A key distinction, however, is that the Israelites, as a covenant people, were obligated to observe the entire law, including the civil and ceremonial aspects, which formed a unique part of their covenant relationship with God. This set Israel apart from the surrounding nations and brought with it specific covenantal stipulations and penalties.
As previously noted, William Perkins emphasized the importance of understanding the distinction between the law and the gospel in this context. The issue that Answering Adventism would raise with Seventh-day Adventism is not the tripartite division of the law, which has been a nearly universal understanding in Christian theology prior to the 19th century, but rather the improper use of the law. Specifically, the problem lies in the Adventist failure to distinguish between the law and the gospel, which results in theological misapplications that undermine the true nature of salvation.
The law of the Lord our God that was handed down to His people through Moses is partly ethical, partly sacrificial, and partly political. The ethical portion shows in what way each person must be disposed of both toward God most of all, then toward his neighbor. And so, as it stands in judgment upon us for condemnation in our own persons because of the accompanying threatenings joined to it that are against those who have transgressed the law even at the smallest point, so in Christ, who has been made our righteousness by most abundantly fulfilling the law for us at the same time as has he has also satisfied the penalties we owed, the law is so far from harming us that, on the contrary, in Christ, who is laid hold of by faith, we are absolved from its condemnation, we gain the crown which the law promises to those who keep it, and the law itself shows to us who are sanctified by the Spirit of the gospel the path of the good and straight road.
Theodore Beza, A Clear and Simple Treatise on the Lord’s Supper, pg. 171
All of humanity has sinned against God and violated His law, as stated in Romans 3:23 and 1 John 3:4. This violation is what leads to our condemnation as sinners. It is not merely the breach of the civil or sacrificial laws of Israel, but rather the moral imperatives that God expects us to uphold as His image-bearers in the world. This is why Paul affirms in Galatians 3:13 that Jesus has freed believers from the curse of the law. There is a dimension of the law under which all of humanity is bound and stands condemned apart from Christ. However, Christ perfectly fulfilled the entirety of the law, thereby freeing believers from its condemnation. By being “in Him,” we are considered by God as if we have kept the law as perfectly as Christ did.
In this regard, we acknowledge that the Adventist system contains elements of truth, but has distorted these truths, leading to erroneous conclusions—particularly concerning the role of the law in the Christian life.
