Sunday, February 26, 2006
Legalist or Mature Christian?
How does a person tell if another is a legalist? A legalist being someone trying to work their way into heaven. Someone who follows a moral code for the sake of salvation? I don't personally know any Christians who are like that. I'm told that there are those. And they're called legalist or moralists.
I think even a cursory reading of the New Testament, both the gospels and the epistles, leaves the reader with the opinion that there is a certain moral standard that we as Christians are expected to pattern our lives after. I mean after we're regenerated. We're commanded to purity etc. So how do we judge when a fellow "Christian" is basing their salvation on that life style instead of a saving faith in Jesus Christ and his righteousness?
I don't know how to do that. I'm generally a little uncomfortable around people who are pure "grace guys". I think it is often a sign of Christian immaturity. My experience is that generally.... mature christians who have spent a lifetime in prayer and in the word, seeking true christian growth..... having gone through the fires of life, and having been taught by the Spirit for many years......... well I think these people tend toward modeling their lives after a moral code. I think it's done out of obedience to our Savior, and a true desire to accept as part of our lives, what is clearly commanded in scripture.
The fence sitters are the ones that get me. The ones that recognize the need to stop sinning. The ones that recognize the destruction of sin, and list sins that need to be stoped. That speak of authentic purity, exercising our christianity, and christian growth. Well, when these same then speak as a grace guy saying that legalists and those moralists are just "full of pride" etc.... it just seems like a contradiction. To on one hand accept the moral code, and on the other critcize those who are trying to follow it.
You know..... I don't get it? Does that make any sense? How do they judge whether a person is following a moral code out of obedience, or out of a need to "work for salvation"??
Anyway..... just random thoughts from a fundamentalist I guess.....
It's time for NASCAR. So gentlemen "START YOUR ENGINES"
I think even a cursory reading of the New Testament, both the gospels and the epistles, leaves the reader with the opinion that there is a certain moral standard that we as Christians are expected to pattern our lives after. I mean after we're regenerated. We're commanded to purity etc. So how do we judge when a fellow "Christian" is basing their salvation on that life style instead of a saving faith in Jesus Christ and his righteousness?
I don't know how to do that. I'm generally a little uncomfortable around people who are pure "grace guys". I think it is often a sign of Christian immaturity. My experience is that generally.... mature christians who have spent a lifetime in prayer and in the word, seeking true christian growth..... having gone through the fires of life, and having been taught by the Spirit for many years......... well I think these people tend toward modeling their lives after a moral code. I think it's done out of obedience to our Savior, and a true desire to accept as part of our lives, what is clearly commanded in scripture.
The fence sitters are the ones that get me. The ones that recognize the need to stop sinning. The ones that recognize the destruction of sin, and list sins that need to be stoped. That speak of authentic purity, exercising our christianity, and christian growth. Well, when these same then speak as a grace guy saying that legalists and those moralists are just "full of pride" etc.... it just seems like a contradiction. To on one hand accept the moral code, and on the other critcize those who are trying to follow it.
You know..... I don't get it? Does that make any sense? How do they judge whether a person is following a moral code out of obedience, or out of a need to "work for salvation"??
Anyway..... just random thoughts from a fundamentalist I guess.....
It's time for NASCAR. So gentlemen "START YOUR ENGINES"
# posted by kjam22 @ 12:24 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
"How does a person tell if another is a legalist?"
To be sure, the legalists of the New Testament times were ones who were adding works to grace for salvation. The Judaizers, for instance, were proponents of adhering to mosaic, ceremonial laws, such as circumcision, as a prerequisite for salvation. Adding works of the law to grace is legalism. It's a man attempt to reach up to God instead of a child-like receiving of His grace gift of Jesus as the satisfying sacrifice and sacrificer.
Paul very crudely expressed his wish that those adding legalistic works to grace for salvation should go ahead and just emasculate themselves. Hey, if circumcision is helpful for salvation...maybe castration's even better. Paul was ticked off!
Now then, what about the attitude and demeanor of legalism? Is it possible that there are those who have come to Christ in salvation by grace but are trying to grow in sanctification by legalistic-ness and moralism...that is, human lists of rules and thou-shalt-nots?
They've received Jesus as God grace for salvation but feel as if they have reach up for sanctification, i.e., growth.
To be sure, if there are such believers, they aren't trying to be saved by works plus grace like a true, historic legalist (those of Paul's day); however, wouldn't they be demonstrating the same attitude of self-dependence?
Does God really need a persons well-thought-out list of do's and don'ts?
Consider what Paul had to say to the Colossian believers who were facing this tempation to grow by rules and legalistic moralism:
2:20-23 "If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world [read: man-made religious attempts to please God], why as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, "Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!" (which all refer to things destined to perish with use) - in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence."
In that passage just quoted Paul is teaching to people who already know Jesus as Lord ...but who are struggling with what others have been teaching, namely, that they should seek to please God in growth by having a set of rules and regulations and adhering to a man-made moral code.
Paul tells them that this type of false teaching is very easy to buy into..."these are matters which have to be sure, the appearance of wisdom..."
Paul's solution to legalistic moralism? The beginning of the very next chapter:
3:1-2 "...keep seeking the things above, where Christ is...set your mind on the things that are above, not on the things that are on earth."
He then describes what things as believers that we should put off and what things we should put on (3:5-10)...very similar to what Rick was preaching on yesterday.
It's not that a "grace teacher" doesn't teach "law". It's just that the law has changed. The law we're under is the perfect law of liberty. As James instructed in 2:12, "So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty."
That "law of liberty" realizes that whatever is required of us as believers has been satisfied in Christ and thus we are free to seek our greatest joy in knowing and showing Jesus. This has very practical outcomes. If I'm walking freely recognizing that whatever God requires of me has to be given to me (definition of grace) then I'm free to cry out to God in my weakness and struggles against sin and ask for His grace to help me through.
Think of it like this. Grace says:
God gave thus I'm saved
God gives thus I grow.
Neither are initiated by human will or effort but are divine grace gifts.
Jesus not only died as my atoning sacrifice - grace for salvation...He also lived the righteous life that is required of me.
This means that I approach God as a beggar and a recipient. I come to God as a believer only in the merit of His Son, Jesus.
I don't approach the throne of grace boldly because I've lived up to a man-made, great sounding, legalistic moralistic code of conduct...that's heretical!
I approach God boldly as a believer only in the merits of Christ both for salvation and sanctification.
Incidentally, at some points I might end up standing on the same high ground as the legalistic moralist...such as in the area of drinking alcohol...I just take a different path to get there.
To be sure, the legalists of the New Testament times were ones who were adding works to grace for salvation. The Judaizers, for instance, were proponents of adhering to mosaic, ceremonial laws, such as circumcision, as a prerequisite for salvation. Adding works of the law to grace is legalism. It's a man attempt to reach up to God instead of a child-like receiving of His grace gift of Jesus as the satisfying sacrifice and sacrificer.
Paul very crudely expressed his wish that those adding legalistic works to grace for salvation should go ahead and just emasculate themselves. Hey, if circumcision is helpful for salvation...maybe castration's even better. Paul was ticked off!
Now then, what about the attitude and demeanor of legalism? Is it possible that there are those who have come to Christ in salvation by grace but are trying to grow in sanctification by legalistic-ness and moralism...that is, human lists of rules and thou-shalt-nots?
They've received Jesus as God grace for salvation but feel as if they have reach up for sanctification, i.e., growth.
To be sure, if there are such believers, they aren't trying to be saved by works plus grace like a true, historic legalist (those of Paul's day); however, wouldn't they be demonstrating the same attitude of self-dependence?
Does God really need a persons well-thought-out list of do's and don'ts?
Consider what Paul had to say to the Colossian believers who were facing this tempation to grow by rules and legalistic moralism:
2:20-23 "If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world [read: man-made religious attempts to please God], why as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, "Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!" (which all refer to things destined to perish with use) - in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence."
In that passage just quoted Paul is teaching to people who already know Jesus as Lord ...but who are struggling with what others have been teaching, namely, that they should seek to please God in growth by having a set of rules and regulations and adhering to a man-made moral code.
Paul tells them that this type of false teaching is very easy to buy into..."these are matters which have to be sure, the appearance of wisdom..."
Paul's solution to legalistic moralism? The beginning of the very next chapter:
3:1-2 "...keep seeking the things above, where Christ is...set your mind on the things that are above, not on the things that are on earth."
He then describes what things as believers that we should put off and what things we should put on (3:5-10)...very similar to what Rick was preaching on yesterday.
It's not that a "grace teacher" doesn't teach "law". It's just that the law has changed. The law we're under is the perfect law of liberty. As James instructed in 2:12, "So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty."
That "law of liberty" realizes that whatever is required of us as believers has been satisfied in Christ and thus we are free to seek our greatest joy in knowing and showing Jesus. This has very practical outcomes. If I'm walking freely recognizing that whatever God requires of me has to be given to me (definition of grace) then I'm free to cry out to God in my weakness and struggles against sin and ask for His grace to help me through.
Think of it like this. Grace says:
God gave thus I'm saved
God gives thus I grow.
Neither are initiated by human will or effort but are divine grace gifts.
Jesus not only died as my atoning sacrifice - grace for salvation...He also lived the righteous life that is required of me.
This means that I approach God as a beggar and a recipient. I come to God as a believer only in the merit of His Son, Jesus.
I don't approach the throne of grace boldly because I've lived up to a man-made, great sounding, legalistic moralistic code of conduct...that's heretical!
I approach God boldly as a believer only in the merits of Christ both for salvation and sanctification.
Incidentally, at some points I might end up standing on the same high ground as the legalistic moralist...such as in the area of drinking alcohol...I just take a different path to get there.
I hear what you're saying. You know.... I guess we've got some man made moral code today within the church. I'm not sure I know what any of them are.
Paul does tell the Colosians not to worry about "do not handle, do not taste" etc. But Paul still lays down a code of conduct for Christians in other epistles. I think it may be a stretch to compare the requirements that jews were trying to place on early christians in the form of legalism with the legalistic or moral code that christians today willfully accept.
You and I would both agree on a number of things that the new testament clearly teaches to "abstain" from. I mean... here's just one example from :
1Corinthians 6: "9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."
So we're sanctified and made righteous through the work of Christ... yet that list is still something that we are to avoid aren't we? As Paul says in Romans... So do I sin all the more that grace may abound all the more???
James teaches about the evils of the tongue. We're told as Christians to contain that etc.
I would disagree with one thing you've said. I think my Christian growth is initiated by me. I think yours is by you. We both know Christians who never grew. I don't believe the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit forces us to grow. I agree that we can't grow without the Spirit. But I think that's what the scripture is talking about when we're told to "work out our salvation". I think that's talking about working out our "sanctification". Living more holy lives. The Spirit sanctifies us.... but only to the extent that we are willing to learn and grow, and accept that discipleship.
Now I agree... if we're laying down a set of man made laws and saying these are required for your salvation, well that's not right. But aren't we commanded numerous times to seek purity. To live pure lives? To earnestly seek to follow his example after he has saved us?
How do we deterimine if a person is seeking purity as a response to his salvation and his desire to grow and allow the Spirit to sanctify the person..... as compared to someone who is trying to earn thier way into heaven?
Maybe when we talk about legalism and a moral code that we need to define those ways that it's bad and those ways that may just be seeking purity as we're commanded to do?
Honestly.... Between the sermon Sunday morning, and my Sunday School class.... it was like going to a different church for the two. They were completely disjointed. And my Sunday School lesson was pretty much straight from the quarterly.
Paul does tell the Colosians not to worry about "do not handle, do not taste" etc. But Paul still lays down a code of conduct for Christians in other epistles. I think it may be a stretch to compare the requirements that jews were trying to place on early christians in the form of legalism with the legalistic or moral code that christians today willfully accept.
You and I would both agree on a number of things that the new testament clearly teaches to "abstain" from. I mean... here's just one example from :
1Corinthians 6: "9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."
So we're sanctified and made righteous through the work of Christ... yet that list is still something that we are to avoid aren't we? As Paul says in Romans... So do I sin all the more that grace may abound all the more???
James teaches about the evils of the tongue. We're told as Christians to contain that etc.
I would disagree with one thing you've said. I think my Christian growth is initiated by me. I think yours is by you. We both know Christians who never grew. I don't believe the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit forces us to grow. I agree that we can't grow without the Spirit. But I think that's what the scripture is talking about when we're told to "work out our salvation". I think that's talking about working out our "sanctification". Living more holy lives. The Spirit sanctifies us.... but only to the extent that we are willing to learn and grow, and accept that discipleship.
Now I agree... if we're laying down a set of man made laws and saying these are required for your salvation, well that's not right. But aren't we commanded numerous times to seek purity. To live pure lives? To earnestly seek to follow his example after he has saved us?
How do we deterimine if a person is seeking purity as a response to his salvation and his desire to grow and allow the Spirit to sanctify the person..... as compared to someone who is trying to earn thier way into heaven?
Maybe when we talk about legalism and a moral code that we need to define those ways that it's bad and those ways that may just be seeking purity as we're commanded to do?
Honestly.... Between the sermon Sunday morning, and my Sunday School class.... it was like going to a different church for the two. They were completely disjointed. And my Sunday School lesson was pretty much straight from the quarterly.
James..... let me ask you one more thing. I'm an ordained deacon. But I'm not an active deacon right now. Recently I received a letter asking me if I would become active, as did several others.
If I were to go through the process of becoming active again, there would be a number of things that I'm asked about my behavior, my lifestyle. My dos and don'ts. And if I were to answer them with "I do some of these but I really love Jesus a lot and I'm leaning on Colosians and avoiding being legalistic and living up to a moral code"... how is that going to play out?
If I were to go through the process of becoming active again, there would be a number of things that I'm asked about my behavior, my lifestyle. My dos and don'ts. And if I were to answer them with "I do some of these but I really love Jesus a lot and I'm leaning on Colosians and avoiding being legalistic and living up to a moral code"... how is that going to play out?
I really do think you missed the Colossians passage's point. He was speaking directly to believers who were being tempted to listen to legalistic moralists. He warned them that though this sounds wise...it's not. It's the same thing on the Christian side as what people do on the pre-Christian side...upward effort to please God.
The point is not that we become licentious, that is, we aren't to view the grace of God as that which gives us license to sin...after all His measure of grace is always greater than our measure of sin. Paul addressed this and said, "God forbid!"
Purity, holiness, sanctification...grace gifts of God.
Someone who's growing in grace can be very disciplined. They should say, "no" to sin and "yes" to the Holy Spirit. That's not the issue.
The issue is what satisfies the Father?
The answer...the sacrifice...and the life of no one else other than Jesus.
And, as we're found in Him complete...complete in righteousness and holiness and purity and godliness. We're in full-right-standing before God...not because of our conformity but because of Christ Jesus'.
The practical out-working of the lavished grace of the Father that He's poured out on us in Jesus...is that we'll desire to live holy, pure lives in accordance with His will and desires...but, the way we'll carry it out practically is by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Our ticket to holiness isn't a man-made legalistic code of righteousness...it starts with a confession of spiritual bankruptcy and a crying out to God for His life to be lived out. "God, what you want out of me...You must put in me."
The deacon thing...hmmm...believe it or not, I don't have a clue what the questionaire asks. I'd love to see it.
And, dude, you're still studying a quarterly??? (smile intended)
Rick preached out of the Word of God...not a quarterly.
I think I'll go with the Word.
Love you Bro.! Enjoy the dialogue.
The point is not that we become licentious, that is, we aren't to view the grace of God as that which gives us license to sin...after all His measure of grace is always greater than our measure of sin. Paul addressed this and said, "God forbid!"
Purity, holiness, sanctification...grace gifts of God.
Someone who's growing in grace can be very disciplined. They should say, "no" to sin and "yes" to the Holy Spirit. That's not the issue.
The issue is what satisfies the Father?
The answer...the sacrifice...and the life of no one else other than Jesus.
And, as we're found in Him complete...complete in righteousness and holiness and purity and godliness. We're in full-right-standing before God...not because of our conformity but because of Christ Jesus'.
The practical out-working of the lavished grace of the Father that He's poured out on us in Jesus...is that we'll desire to live holy, pure lives in accordance with His will and desires...but, the way we'll carry it out practically is by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Our ticket to holiness isn't a man-made legalistic code of righteousness...it starts with a confession of spiritual bankruptcy and a crying out to God for His life to be lived out. "God, what you want out of me...You must put in me."
The deacon thing...hmmm...believe it or not, I don't have a clue what the questionaire asks. I'd love to see it.
And, dude, you're still studying a quarterly??? (smile intended)
Rick preached out of the Word of God...not a quarterly.
I think I'll go with the Word.
Love you Bro.! Enjoy the dialogue.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I disagree with some of it though.
I agree that what satisfies the father is the life of Christ. The sacrifice that only he could make. For salvation and righteousness unto salvation that sacrifice is the only hope.
But that's not the only issue when you're talking about christian growth. That's the goal. That's our prayer that we be made like Christ. That's our example. Paul tells Timothy to "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth." Why this statement? Why not tell Timothy... don't worry about it.... just love Jesus and you'll be an approved workman who doesn't need to be ashamed?
I agree that our ticket to righteousness isn't following a man-made set of rules. But whose advocating that? I'm not. I'm advocating for Christians, that we pattern our life after Christ's example and that we accept the the "code" the "legalism" that is clearly laid out in the New Testament.
There is a part in Christian growth that we're suppose to do. Obviously Paul thought there was something he was suppose to do. Some part he was to play in it. And he wrote about his struggle in Romans 7.
Our ticket to holiness isn't a man-made legalistic code of righteousness...it starts with a confession of spiritual bankruptcy and a crying out to God for His life to be lived out. "God, what you want out of me...You must put in me."
I agree that's where it starts. But that's not the end all. The bible teaches that God has put in each Christian what he wants out of them. Paul would say we already have in us what it takes to win the battle against sin. And we're to use that . We are to DO something. That's concurrent through out the bible. Whether you're talking about Jesus' parables, or the instructions from Paul, Peter, James, and John.
You know James, about that quarterly :) .....The Baptists have been writing that quarterly for a long time. I don't know that I've ever read anything in it that I really disagree with, or that I think is a misunderstanding of God's word.
Incidently.... the deacon questionair for CRBC..... it requires a code that is written by man. I opted not to become active again for that very reason (many are sighing a sigh of relief) :):)....but this isn't really the forum to discuss that. You can feel free to call me sometime if you'd like to discuss that more.
Hope you have a good week! I'm in town this week.... and back to Houston next week.
Talk to you later.
I agree that what satisfies the father is the life of Christ. The sacrifice that only he could make. For salvation and righteousness unto salvation that sacrifice is the only hope.
But that's not the only issue when you're talking about christian growth. That's the goal. That's our prayer that we be made like Christ. That's our example. Paul tells Timothy to "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth." Why this statement? Why not tell Timothy... don't worry about it.... just love Jesus and you'll be an approved workman who doesn't need to be ashamed?
I agree that our ticket to righteousness isn't following a man-made set of rules. But whose advocating that? I'm not. I'm advocating for Christians, that we pattern our life after Christ's example and that we accept the the "code" the "legalism" that is clearly laid out in the New Testament.
There is a part in Christian growth that we're suppose to do. Obviously Paul thought there was something he was suppose to do. Some part he was to play in it. And he wrote about his struggle in Romans 7.
Our ticket to holiness isn't a man-made legalistic code of righteousness...it starts with a confession of spiritual bankruptcy and a crying out to God for His life to be lived out. "God, what you want out of me...You must put in me."
I agree that's where it starts. But that's not the end all. The bible teaches that God has put in each Christian what he wants out of them. Paul would say we already have in us what it takes to win the battle against sin. And we're to use that . We are to DO something. That's concurrent through out the bible. Whether you're talking about Jesus' parables, or the instructions from Paul, Peter, James, and John.
You know James, about that quarterly :) .....The Baptists have been writing that quarterly for a long time. I don't know that I've ever read anything in it that I really disagree with, or that I think is a misunderstanding of God's word.
Incidently.... the deacon questionair for CRBC..... it requires a code that is written by man. I opted not to become active again for that very reason (many are sighing a sigh of relief) :):)....but this isn't really the forum to discuss that. You can feel free to call me sometime if you'd like to discuss that more.
Hope you have a good week! I'm in town this week.... and back to Houston next week.
Talk to you later.
Jesus' death - paid our sin debt and satisfied the wrath of the Father. Jesus is our atoning, substitutionary sacrifice.
Jesus' life - paid our righteousness debt and satisfied all the requirements of the law. The whole OT can be viewed as that which demonstrated man's inability and the need for something more.
That more is Jesus...for our sin and our need for righteousness.
We may be mixing up terms and concepts here. I recognize that we are to live holy lives...and, I've acknowledged the need for discipline (to be read as an agreement that we have a responsibility and human will involved), however, I can assure you that legalism, legalistic-ness, moralism are things smashed into tiny little bits and thrown out with the garbage by Paul.
Legalism, legalistic-ness, and moralism are all human attemps to satisfy God by a man-made list of rules and regulations.
Some engage in this man-centered behavior prior to coming to Christ...while some engage in it as a believer.
Grace is scandalous. We're undeserving...but grace says, "so what?" Isn't that the point of grace? Isn't that the issue itself? We are and do nothing that has enough merit to earn favor with God before salvation...and, we are and do nothing that gains a better standing for us as a believer.
On both sides of the issue it's the scandalous grace of God in Christ that gives to the undeserving all that is needed...for payment of sin and for righteousness in life.
I think what you're "hearing" "grace" teachers say is not what we're really saying at all.
We're NOT saying that sin is okay or that their are not practical effects of grace...that is, holy living, do's and don'ts.
There is most definately to be holy living and do's and don'ts. The question is why?
Why do we live holy lives? Why do we not do some things and do others?
Because, we have received His grace. We seek to be conformed to the image of Jesus...not in order to gain merit with God the Father...but as a reaction of gratitude and love.
It's not a reaching up to God through our performance...rather, it's a working out the life of Christ that is within.
God is already satisfied in Jesus.
I'm in Jesus.
God is fully satisfied with me.
This frees me to live a holy life and grow in sanctification...knowing that I'm free to live to abundance...not with my nose to a code.
By the way...be careful what you assume to be true about a grace teacher. A grace teacher may be living a holier, more separated life than the legalistic moralist...he's just having a good time doing it.
Jesus' life - paid our righteousness debt and satisfied all the requirements of the law. The whole OT can be viewed as that which demonstrated man's inability and the need for something more.
That more is Jesus...for our sin and our need for righteousness.
We may be mixing up terms and concepts here. I recognize that we are to live holy lives...and, I've acknowledged the need for discipline (to be read as an agreement that we have a responsibility and human will involved), however, I can assure you that legalism, legalistic-ness, moralism are things smashed into tiny little bits and thrown out with the garbage by Paul.
Legalism, legalistic-ness, and moralism are all human attemps to satisfy God by a man-made list of rules and regulations.
Some engage in this man-centered behavior prior to coming to Christ...while some engage in it as a believer.
Grace is scandalous. We're undeserving...but grace says, "so what?" Isn't that the point of grace? Isn't that the issue itself? We are and do nothing that has enough merit to earn favor with God before salvation...and, we are and do nothing that gains a better standing for us as a believer.
On both sides of the issue it's the scandalous grace of God in Christ that gives to the undeserving all that is needed...for payment of sin and for righteousness in life.
I think what you're "hearing" "grace" teachers say is not what we're really saying at all.
We're NOT saying that sin is okay or that their are not practical effects of grace...that is, holy living, do's and don'ts.
There is most definately to be holy living and do's and don'ts. The question is why?
Why do we live holy lives? Why do we not do some things and do others?
Because, we have received His grace. We seek to be conformed to the image of Jesus...not in order to gain merit with God the Father...but as a reaction of gratitude and love.
It's not a reaching up to God through our performance...rather, it's a working out the life of Christ that is within.
God is already satisfied in Jesus.
I'm in Jesus.
God is fully satisfied with me.
This frees me to live a holy life and grow in sanctification...knowing that I'm free to live to abundance...not with my nose to a code.
By the way...be careful what you assume to be true about a grace teacher. A grace teacher may be living a holier, more separated life than the legalistic moralist...he's just having a good time doing it.
Hey James.... I appreciate this response.
I can assure you that legalism, legalistic-ness, moralism are things smashed into tiny little bits and thrown out with the garbage by Paul.
I guess that depends on how you define legalistic-ness, and moralism. Some people would say that the text I quoted from earlier in Corinthians where Paul lists things that are unholy.... well they might say that text is legalsim. We would be called legalists by some for accepting those things as sin. What you and I might call sin is a set of legalistic moral code to some people who reject certain aspects of that list. These same people will explain thier love for Christ, and his acceptance of them exactly as they are. And they will call you and I legalists for recognizing that list as SIN.
So I think a definition of terms might draw you and I closer.
I think Paul reiterated a moral code and a legalistic expectation for Christian behavior that encompases God's law. I think he did that in a way that left out the Pharisees law. Absolutely he smashed the Pharisaical law into bits. But I don't know any Christians who try to live to the Pharisaical law.
God is already satisfied in Jesus.
I'm in Jesus.
God is fully satisfied with me.
So if I sin this afternoon... should I repent of that sin, confess it to God, ask forgiveness and for his help in keeping me from this sin in the future.... or do I just not worry about it... and move on, knowing that God is fully satisfied with me? Is God fully satisfied with me right now or does he expect me to mature and do the works that he has planned for me? I believe God is fully satisfied with the sacrifice that Christ made for me. And that my salvation is secure because of that. But I also think that God has a plan that includes growth for me.... and me accepting that plan is part of his satisfaction level :) Clearly God has been unsatisfied with me and some of the things I've done in my lifetime, and has disciplined me for those. Just as the bible promises the will reprove those he loves.
Grace is scandalous? That's an interesting choice of words. Scandal typically leads us to think negatively about something. If you are involved in a scandal... well.... you don't really want that on the front page. Scandal is not a good thing. So I personally think it's a redefinining of terms to say Grace is Scandalous. And really... I'd have to ask more questions to nail down exactly what you're trying to say here. (or I guess I could just read the lastest book from a top seller list)??? :):)
Legalism, legalistic-ness, and moralism are all human attemps to satisfy God by a man-made list of rules and regulations.
The 10 commandments are part of "legalism"... yet I don't think Paul smashed those to tiny bits. I think it's tempting to focus on Paul's hatred for the man-made parts of the law, and miss the countless times that Paul called us to holiness in the way we live our lives.
Again... it probably all comes down to how we choose to define legalism and moral code.
Because, we have received His grace. We seek to be conformed to the image of Jesus...not in order to gain merit with God the Father...but as a reaction of gratitude and love.
It's not a reaching up to God through our performance...rather, it's a working out the life of Christ that is within.
I agree with this.... to an extent. I don't consider it reaching up to God through our performance when the mindset is that it's not possible without the work of the Spirit. I think most Christians recognize that they can't even get close without the Spirit bridging that gap. Maybe not... I certainly don't intend to speak for all Christians. I'm just basing my opinion on my experience with others. So while you and I may express it differently... I think we're close on belief here.
You know.... I've thought about this a little and I need to buy the CD from Sunday. I'm not sure that I interpreted the remarks made to or about legalists correctly. I do know that others in my Sunday School class the met right after the service heard it pretty much the way I did. But... maybe the intent was to correct some who would hold others to a biblical standard. Maybe the remarks weren't intended to be about Christian growth at all?? I need to re-listen to it.
What did you feel the context was?
Thanks for the dialogue James. I appreciate your time. I'm out this afternoon.... but I'll be around tomorrow and Friday.
See you Sunday!
I can assure you that legalism, legalistic-ness, moralism are things smashed into tiny little bits and thrown out with the garbage by Paul.
I guess that depends on how you define legalistic-ness, and moralism. Some people would say that the text I quoted from earlier in Corinthians where Paul lists things that are unholy.... well they might say that text is legalsim. We would be called legalists by some for accepting those things as sin. What you and I might call sin is a set of legalistic moral code to some people who reject certain aspects of that list. These same people will explain thier love for Christ, and his acceptance of them exactly as they are. And they will call you and I legalists for recognizing that list as SIN.
So I think a definition of terms might draw you and I closer.
I think Paul reiterated a moral code and a legalistic expectation for Christian behavior that encompases God's law. I think he did that in a way that left out the Pharisees law. Absolutely he smashed the Pharisaical law into bits. But I don't know any Christians who try to live to the Pharisaical law.
God is already satisfied in Jesus.
I'm in Jesus.
God is fully satisfied with me.
So if I sin this afternoon... should I repent of that sin, confess it to God, ask forgiveness and for his help in keeping me from this sin in the future.... or do I just not worry about it... and move on, knowing that God is fully satisfied with me? Is God fully satisfied with me right now or does he expect me to mature and do the works that he has planned for me? I believe God is fully satisfied with the sacrifice that Christ made for me. And that my salvation is secure because of that. But I also think that God has a plan that includes growth for me.... and me accepting that plan is part of his satisfaction level :) Clearly God has been unsatisfied with me and some of the things I've done in my lifetime, and has disciplined me for those. Just as the bible promises the will reprove those he loves.
Grace is scandalous? That's an interesting choice of words. Scandal typically leads us to think negatively about something. If you are involved in a scandal... well.... you don't really want that on the front page. Scandal is not a good thing. So I personally think it's a redefinining of terms to say Grace is Scandalous. And really... I'd have to ask more questions to nail down exactly what you're trying to say here. (or I guess I could just read the lastest book from a top seller list)??? :):)
Legalism, legalistic-ness, and moralism are all human attemps to satisfy God by a man-made list of rules and regulations.
The 10 commandments are part of "legalism"... yet I don't think Paul smashed those to tiny bits. I think it's tempting to focus on Paul's hatred for the man-made parts of the law, and miss the countless times that Paul called us to holiness in the way we live our lives.
Again... it probably all comes down to how we choose to define legalism and moral code.
Because, we have received His grace. We seek to be conformed to the image of Jesus...not in order to gain merit with God the Father...but as a reaction of gratitude and love.
It's not a reaching up to God through our performance...rather, it's a working out the life of Christ that is within.
I agree with this.... to an extent. I don't consider it reaching up to God through our performance when the mindset is that it's not possible without the work of the Spirit. I think most Christians recognize that they can't even get close without the Spirit bridging that gap. Maybe not... I certainly don't intend to speak for all Christians. I'm just basing my opinion on my experience with others. So while you and I may express it differently... I think we're close on belief here.
You know.... I've thought about this a little and I need to buy the CD from Sunday. I'm not sure that I interpreted the remarks made to or about legalists correctly. I do know that others in my Sunday School class the met right after the service heard it pretty much the way I did. But... maybe the intent was to correct some who would hold others to a biblical standard. Maybe the remarks weren't intended to be about Christian growth at all?? I need to re-listen to it.
What did you feel the context was?
Thanks for the dialogue James. I appreciate your time. I'm out this afternoon.... but I'll be around tomorrow and Friday.
See you Sunday!
Since you guys are talking about my words I thought I would step in. I stand by my statment that legalism and moralism are another form of sin. Remember the context of my statement was at the invitation. I was talking to the unbeliever. I do not believe there is anything by our nature that we bring to Christ. Nothing in my hands I bring, simply to the cross I cling. We are totally depraved and our hearts are the seat of iniquity. Our righteousness is like filthy rags to God. Moralism is rearranging the flesh and replacing one (or more) sin(s) with the worst sin of all- pride.
I agree with John MacArthur:
But morality -- I warn you, folks -- morality damns just like immorality. And morality does not bring divine blessing. Jesus went head to head with the most superficially moral people in His world, the most religious people in His world, the Pharisees and the scribes. And He used His most scathing, His most searing, His most severe invectives on the religious right of His day. Matthew 23, Jesus addressed the religious leaders of his time, the moral people, the people who were the fastidious keepers of the law of God and human tradition. And He says to them in Verse 13: "Woe," which means damn, judgment, curse, "...you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites." Verse 14, He repeats that. Verse 15, He repeats it. Verse 16: "Woe to you, blind guides." Verse 17: "You fools and blind men." Verse 19: "You blind men." Verse 23: "Woe to you," again, "...scribes and Pharisees. 24: "You blind guides." 25: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites." Verse 26: "You blind Pharisee." 27: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees." And it just keeps going like that all the way along. In the end of the Chapter, He says, Verse 37: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you kill the prophets, you stone those that are sent to you." Verse 38 He says: "Your house is being left to you desolate. Desolate." And He was looking ahead to the destruction in 70 A.D., as well as the profound spiritual judgment.
Jesus never used such words as that on the outcasts, the prostitutes, the criminals. In fact, Jesus spent his time with those people; the outcasts of his day, the tax collectors. And they said, as we learned this morning, that Jesus was a glutton, "and a drunkard and a friend of tax collectors and sinners." That was a label put on Jesus by the religious right. Moralism was never the message of the Old Testament prophets. It was never the message of the Messiah. It is never the message of the New Testament apostles and prophets. It has never been God's message to the world because, when all is said and done, listen to what Isaiah said: "All your righteousness is filthy rags." Romans Chapter 3 is a very important chapter because it describes the condition of human wickedness. And in Chapter 3 Verse 10 it says: "There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks after God." So whatever imaginary righteousness men have, whatever superficial morality he may exhibit, in the end, they're not righteous before God. It gains them nothing. Nothing. There is no one good enough, "not even one," Verse 12 says. Everybody, Verse 19 says, everybody "under the law," everyone who lives according to the law to some degree or another, will find that their mouths are "closed." They have no defense. And the whole world is "accountable," guilty, "...before God. Because by the works of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight."
So I say again: You can become moral. You can change, you know. You can turn over your life and have some kind of a -- it used to be called moral rearmament. Come through a crisis and decide you're going to turn away from living an immoral life or you're going to start to live a better life, a cleaner life, clean up your act. And that has no bearing on your relationship to God whatsoever. Listen: The biblical message is not that humanity is divided between the moral and the immoral, or that humanity is divided between the good and the bad, or that humanity is divided between the virtuous and the wicked. The message of the Bible is that: "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." That there is no division; they're all immoral, bad and wicked. It's only a question of degree, or kind, or manifestation. Whatever somebody's external degree of morality might be, all are condemned sinners headed to hell.
You might be the most moral Pharisee in Israel; you might be the most moral Rabbi; you might be the most moral cleric. You can take it from there; the most moral, self-righteous, clean-living Mormon. And you're going to hell with the prostitutes, unless you've been reconciled to God through His son Jesus Christ. And then if you have been reconciled to God through his Son Jesus Christ, you have become a new creation, and the old behaviors are replaced by new ones.
So if we want change, what is the means? Morality saves no one. Morality does not command the blessing of God. In Romans 2:11 and 12 it says: "For there is no partiality with God." That sounds like a sort of hopeful statement at first. "There is no partiality with God." But listen to this: "For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law, will be judged by the law." Do you know what that says? It says whatever might be your relationship to the law of God doesn't matter to Him. Doesn't matter to Him, because you can't keep the law to His satisfaction. Because as we learned in Galatians 3, if you break the law in one point, you have broken the whole law. Romans 10, Paul said that the Jews, not understanding the "righteousness of God," go about to "establish their own righteousness." And he says: "They have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge." "
I agree with John MacArthur:
But morality -- I warn you, folks -- morality damns just like immorality. And morality does not bring divine blessing. Jesus went head to head with the most superficially moral people in His world, the most religious people in His world, the Pharisees and the scribes. And He used His most scathing, His most searing, His most severe invectives on the religious right of His day. Matthew 23, Jesus addressed the religious leaders of his time, the moral people, the people who were the fastidious keepers of the law of God and human tradition. And He says to them in Verse 13: "Woe," which means damn, judgment, curse, "...you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites." Verse 14, He repeats that. Verse 15, He repeats it. Verse 16: "Woe to you, blind guides." Verse 17: "You fools and blind men." Verse 19: "You blind men." Verse 23: "Woe to you," again, "...scribes and Pharisees. 24: "You blind guides." 25: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites." Verse 26: "You blind Pharisee." 27: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees." And it just keeps going like that all the way along. In the end of the Chapter, He says, Verse 37: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you kill the prophets, you stone those that are sent to you." Verse 38 He says: "Your house is being left to you desolate. Desolate." And He was looking ahead to the destruction in 70 A.D., as well as the profound spiritual judgment.
Jesus never used such words as that on the outcasts, the prostitutes, the criminals. In fact, Jesus spent his time with those people; the outcasts of his day, the tax collectors. And they said, as we learned this morning, that Jesus was a glutton, "and a drunkard and a friend of tax collectors and sinners." That was a label put on Jesus by the religious right. Moralism was never the message of the Old Testament prophets. It was never the message of the Messiah. It is never the message of the New Testament apostles and prophets. It has never been God's message to the world because, when all is said and done, listen to what Isaiah said: "All your righteousness is filthy rags." Romans Chapter 3 is a very important chapter because it describes the condition of human wickedness. And in Chapter 3 Verse 10 it says: "There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks after God." So whatever imaginary righteousness men have, whatever superficial morality he may exhibit, in the end, they're not righteous before God. It gains them nothing. Nothing. There is no one good enough, "not even one," Verse 12 says. Everybody, Verse 19 says, everybody "under the law," everyone who lives according to the law to some degree or another, will find that their mouths are "closed." They have no defense. And the whole world is "accountable," guilty, "...before God. Because by the works of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight."
So I say again: You can become moral. You can change, you know. You can turn over your life and have some kind of a -- it used to be called moral rearmament. Come through a crisis and decide you're going to turn away from living an immoral life or you're going to start to live a better life, a cleaner life, clean up your act. And that has no bearing on your relationship to God whatsoever. Listen: The biblical message is not that humanity is divided between the moral and the immoral, or that humanity is divided between the good and the bad, or that humanity is divided between the virtuous and the wicked. The message of the Bible is that: "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." That there is no division; they're all immoral, bad and wicked. It's only a question of degree, or kind, or manifestation. Whatever somebody's external degree of morality might be, all are condemned sinners headed to hell.
You might be the most moral Pharisee in Israel; you might be the most moral Rabbi; you might be the most moral cleric. You can take it from there; the most moral, self-righteous, clean-living Mormon. And you're going to hell with the prostitutes, unless you've been reconciled to God through His son Jesus Christ. And then if you have been reconciled to God through his Son Jesus Christ, you have become a new creation, and the old behaviors are replaced by new ones.
So if we want change, what is the means? Morality saves no one. Morality does not command the blessing of God. In Romans 2:11 and 12 it says: "For there is no partiality with God." That sounds like a sort of hopeful statement at first. "There is no partiality with God." But listen to this: "For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law, will be judged by the law." Do you know what that says? It says whatever might be your relationship to the law of God doesn't matter to Him. Doesn't matter to Him, because you can't keep the law to His satisfaction. Because as we learned in Galatians 3, if you break the law in one point, you have broken the whole law. Romans 10, Paul said that the Jews, not understanding the "righteousness of God," go about to "establish their own righteousness." And he says: "They have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge." "
Excellent post Mike. I'm glad you found my blog!
I agree that James and I are probably closer than it seems... depending on how you define legalism. You've got a couple of pretty good examples. I've been called a legalist and a moralist by some simply because I believe that adultry and homosexuality are sins, and that christians should not be part of that lifestyle.
Good quotes from Matthew. You know.... I think Jesus took God's part of the old covenant to a whole new level when during the Sermon on the Mount he attached the condition of our heart to some of those 10 commandments. Saying we could commit murder, adultry etc, with our "heart" and without even doing the action, and be just as guilty. Praise God that he defeated death for us.
Excellent example about the music. Especially since I'm the guy who probably holds the record for the most complaints after playing a distorted, rockin, electric guitar during one of our church services :)
But what you said about documentation is exactly right. We live by the bible. Especially the New Testament. That is our documentation. The complete, inerrant word of God. Without God's word as our guide..... we could just be walking on hot coals.
I agree that James and I are probably closer than it seems... depending on how you define legalism. You've got a couple of pretty good examples. I've been called a legalist and a moralist by some simply because I believe that adultry and homosexuality are sins, and that christians should not be part of that lifestyle.
Good quotes from Matthew. You know.... I think Jesus took God's part of the old covenant to a whole new level when during the Sermon on the Mount he attached the condition of our heart to some of those 10 commandments. Saying we could commit murder, adultry etc, with our "heart" and without even doing the action, and be just as guilty. Praise God that he defeated death for us.
Excellent example about the music. Especially since I'm the guy who probably holds the record for the most complaints after playing a distorted, rockin, electric guitar during one of our church services :)
But what you said about documentation is exactly right. We live by the bible. Especially the New Testament. That is our documentation. The complete, inerrant word of God. Without God's word as our guide..... we could just be walking on hot coals.
Morning Rick... looks like you posted while I was typing.
Thanks for the clarification. Certainly we all agree that nobody gets to heaven through their own righteousness. No way, no chance.
Thanks for the clarification. Certainly we all agree that nobody gets to heaven through their own righteousness. No way, no chance.
Interesting thoughts. I have found myself involved in this same struggle on many occasions.
I am coming to the opinion that grace does not give me liberty to sin, it gives me liberty from having to sin.
"For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and godly, in this present world;" Titus 2:11-12
On a lighter note, my new definition of legalist is anyone who preaches against something I enjoy doing.
Blessings.
I am coming to the opinion that grace does not give me liberty to sin, it gives me liberty from having to sin.
"For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and godly, in this present world;" Titus 2:11-12
On a lighter note, my new definition of legalist is anyone who preaches against something I enjoy doing.
Blessings.
The American Heritage Dictionary
Moralist-
1. A teacher or student of morals and moral problems.
2. One who follows a system of moral principles.
3. One who is unduly concerned with the morals of others.
Legalism-
1. Strict literal adherence to the law or to a particular code, as of religion or morality.
I follow a set of morals. Try to follow guidleines in the Bible. The Baptist Faith and Message. Pretty strictly. I want my kids to do that too. I don't think it saves me, but I think it is what God wants me to do. Not to be saved, but to be "in the world and not of it".
We don't listen to music that describes anything that we wouldn't do ourselves. Or watch movies to that effect, or television shows that glorify a godless ethic. Even if it might increase our relatabilty to the unsaved.
I have (what I believe to be) a loving attitude toward those I meet. I try to meet their needs if I know there are any. I listen empathetically, take meals, give money, watch kids, bring people to church...But most people who know me know that I have things I am not going to participate in with them.
And I think even the most "No God" person that I know respects that...and they know that I care for them as people even if I don't agree with their choices. I don't know if that makes me a moralist or not or a legalist or not. But I'll probably stick with it.
Rick, it was cool to see you here. :-) And I will tell you the thing that stuck with me in your sermon (besides this:-)) was the part about planning your sin. (Now everyone don't get excited here...) I don't know that I was doing that, although I probably do sometimes, but I know that there are instances when I use my time badly by rushing through the important stuff so that I can do just "fun" stuff (feeling that I probably deserve it as "me" time...which is OK if not taken to the extreme)...and I felt convicted about that when you mentioned the whole "planning" thing. So thanks and I am working on that.:-)
Gordon and Mike, you guys are really balanced and even. Fun to read you here.
And Kenny, you know I always appreciate how you work to get everything said. It is good to make sure that there is little room for "interpretation" and that things are fleshed out in their entirity, biblically...and you are good for that.
Post a Comment
Moralist-
1. A teacher or student of morals and moral problems.
2. One who follows a system of moral principles.
3. One who is unduly concerned with the morals of others.
Legalism-
1. Strict literal adherence to the law or to a particular code, as of religion or morality.
I follow a set of morals. Try to follow guidleines in the Bible. The Baptist Faith and Message. Pretty strictly. I want my kids to do that too. I don't think it saves me, but I think it is what God wants me to do. Not to be saved, but to be "in the world and not of it".
We don't listen to music that describes anything that we wouldn't do ourselves. Or watch movies to that effect, or television shows that glorify a godless ethic. Even if it might increase our relatabilty to the unsaved.
I have (what I believe to be) a loving attitude toward those I meet. I try to meet their needs if I know there are any. I listen empathetically, take meals, give money, watch kids, bring people to church...But most people who know me know that I have things I am not going to participate in with them.
And I think even the most "No God" person that I know respects that...and they know that I care for them as people even if I don't agree with their choices. I don't know if that makes me a moralist or not or a legalist or not. But I'll probably stick with it.
Rick, it was cool to see you here. :-) And I will tell you the thing that stuck with me in your sermon (besides this:-)) was the part about planning your sin. (Now everyone don't get excited here...) I don't know that I was doing that, although I probably do sometimes, but I know that there are instances when I use my time badly by rushing through the important stuff so that I can do just "fun" stuff (feeling that I probably deserve it as "me" time...which is OK if not taken to the extreme)...and I felt convicted about that when you mentioned the whole "planning" thing. So thanks and I am working on that.:-)
Gordon and Mike, you guys are really balanced and even. Fun to read you here.
And Kenny, you know I always appreciate how you work to get everything said. It is good to make sure that there is little room for "interpretation" and that things are fleshed out in their entirity, biblically...and you are good for that.
<< Home
