The many negative opinions about the law of God as a standard for Christian obedience in our day represent a setback from the theological insights of past generations of Christian scholarship, notably the tradition of the Puritans and the Westminster Standards. What is taken for granted today as the common and "obvious" answer to whether we should obey the Old Testament in modern civil affairs, for instance, did not always enjoy that status in the eyes of earlier Christians. The winds of common opinion have shifted. Why? Has some radical new turn or discovery in Christian scholarship, some brilliant exegesis and persuasive reasoning, intervened between the Puritan age and our own today so as to account for this shift in widespread sentiment about the use of God's law in the Christian life? If so, it is hard to point to just what it might have been. It is rather changed social circumstances and opinions, not advances in scholarship, which have brought about the difference.