In light of the changes to come (as noted in the last posting), I think we should also prepare ourselves to face some persecution when we begin to be labeled as adherents of "legalism." We will see evidence of this persecution when we decide to stand up for the things that the Lord has scripturally commanded us to do and about which we have strong convictions, especially when our actions of obedience to God's Word run contrary to the "gospel of convenience" that is being preached in many churches today.
Legalism is not a word that I find used in the bible; perhaps the LORD in all His wisdom knew what chaos could come out of the human use (or rather mis-use) of the word! It is a dangerous word, for both Christians and non-Christians alike.
In Christian circles, its incorrect usage has made it a source of fear for Christians, and the avoidance of being labeled "legalistic" has led many Christians to rationalize their way right into sin rather than be branded "different" or "legalistic" from their brethren who do not feel called to live a life that is "holy and pleasing unto the Lord."
In the unbelieving world it has become a primary reason of why it's best NOT to become a Christian, causing many of the lost to remain in their sin. In both cases, its usage is incorrect....and deadly.
Webster's defines it as: strict, literal, or excessive conformity to the law or to a religious or moral code. This is the definition used by most Christians and most non-Christians; this is the definition that leads to gross error in doctrine.
The problem with Webster's definition is that it leaves the determination about what is to be considered "strict, literal, or excessive" in the hands of each individual, and as individuals vary one from another, so does the definition of "legalism."
For example, one Christian might be at church every time the doors are opened because he or she loves the social time. Another Christian, who is more shy or withdrawn, may think that gathering more than once or twice a week is just "excessive."
God, on the other hand, might want to get together with us as His children 100% of the time. Now THAT could be defined as "excessive." But which of us wants to label God "excessive'? Certainly not me!
Do you see the problem with Webster's defintion of "legalism"?
With either of the Christians used in the example above, one cannot tell strictly by the number of times they attend church whether they do so out of a love of God or a lack of love of God. When we try to apply a judgment term of "excessive" or "legalistic" to another person (as defined by Webster), we risk interfering with the relationship between that person and God, and it could be that God LIKES the "excessive" time spent with Him. There is a consideration of the heart regarding each of these Christians which is neglected when we place a label of "legalism" onto Christians who do not respond exactly as we do.
Here instead is a better and, I believe, more accurate definition of "legalism."
The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word "legalism" with less vagueness (and in my opinion, according to the biblical standard God would have us use): "adherence to moral law more than personal religious faith" and then it goes on to explain it in simple terms: "stress obedience apart from faith and you produce legalism."
Key words: "more than" and "apart from". Now we have a specific circumstance in which "legalism" can be correctly applied, so that we don't have to be all over the chart in our ideas of what "legalism" means.
When adherence to morality (or the law or God's commands) exceeds faith (in God through Jesus Christ) then our adherence to morality (our obedience) is done with wrong motives and is in fact sin.
So obedience can be sin?
Sure. Let me give you an example using one of the biggest compromises of sin amongst Christian believers today: sex before marriage.
We have two men: Joe Brown, an unbeliever, and Jim Green, a professed follower of Christ.
Joe Bown, in our example, does not have sex before marriage, but does not know Christ; Jim Green, on the other hand, professes to know Christ, but has rationalized that sex before marriage is allowable...in his circumstances. Both men are living in sin...both men will have to deal with the consequences of their sin. But the word "legalism" will be incorrectly used as both men's "get out of jail free" card. Or so they think.
Joe Brown (fictitious person) is a very moral and upright person. He never breaks a law of the land, and he is sexually moral. He has never had sex outside of marriage, has always been faithful to his wife, and is a good father to his children. But He doesn't acknowledge the death of Jesus Christ as atonement for his sin; and thus he does not have a relationship with the Father. In fact, although he has heard the Good News on several occasions, he rejects that "legalistic crutch" that so many people use concerning Jesus Christ and needing a Savior; after all he is a good man who doesn't need "saving."
Yet Joe manages to walk unkowingly in obedience to "some" of the commands of God (simply by living a moral life) but he does not abide by "all" of the commands of God. How could he? He doesn't know what the commands of God are because he has never read the Bible, yet in many ways he is doing what the Bible commands us all to do. Joe has unknowingly placed himself under the "law." He has rejected Christ and the mercy of God through Christ that is available to us when we repent of sin. He has chosen to be judged according to his works instead.
But the apostle Paul says that the problem with living "under the law" (by works alone, rather than by faith that produces works) is that if you offend in even ONE point of the law, you are guilty of ALL of the law. This is because you have made the LAW your judge, and the law, being an inanimate thing, cannot show mercy. It is what it is: a stern taskmaster.
As a result of all of this, Joe's acts of obedience can only lead him to death everlasting, because he was not able to act obediently to ALL of the law (i.e., Love the Lord your God will all of your heart, soul, mind and strength...Commandment #1 of the Law) and the law will judge him to be guilty of death. In fact, God knew this when He provided His son Jesus to be atonement for our sin, as a way of escape for us for our inevitable disobedience to the law; He ordained Christ's death on the cross from the foundation of the world. Joe, unfortunately, has rejected the only advocate for mercy and grace that God would have heard on Joe's behalf: Jesus Christ.
Meanwhile, Jim Green (another fictitious person) has acknowledged Jesus Christ to be His Savior. He attends church faithfully. He is, in fact, a deacon in the church. But Jim has misunderstood the freedom and liberty that he has been given in Christ. This freedom, Paul says, is freedom FROM SIN. Not freedom from the CONSEQUENCES of sin.
In the past, Jim was a slave to sin, but now he has been set free through Jesus Christ so that he no longer MUST sin, as a captive MUST do what his jailer commands him to do. Jim is now FREE to live in holiness according to the standards of a Holy God as demonstrated to us by Jesus Himself. But Jim has chosen a different path, one that leads away from holiness, and right into sin.
His misunderstanding of the freedom given to us in Christ, has lead Jim to think that God has now become lenient towards sin. [Interesting that Jim feels it is ok to let things slide with God, but he is extremely careful to be a law-abiding citizen, much like Joe Brown above, because, of course, if you run contrary to the law of the land you could end up in jail!] But Jim believes that God is love and God is grace. And since the flesh is strong in us humans, whether saved or not saved, Jim has allowed his flesh to control his actions, especially in regards to what God has labeled "sexual immorality" or "sex outside of marriage" which according to God is not "sacred" at all but an abomination.
But, of course, Jim does not view his particular circumstances as falling into the category of sexual immorality.
Jim has fallen in love with a believer like himself, and because he is so sure that they will soon marry, he has rationalized that because God knows what's in his heart for this woman, God will excuse sex outside of marriage in this particular case. [There are many Christians deceived into committing this sin, especially as churches are not preaching against it openly.] And in any case, Jim has read that "grace covers a multitude of sins." His perfect liberty in Christ, allows him then, in his thinking, to walk in an area that God says is forbidden.
Jim is walking in deliberate sin. It is deliberate because Jim has studied the bible, has read that God does not condone sex outside of marriage, in fact, that God abhors sex outside of marriage and considers it to be idolatry. But he has allowed the strong desires of his flesh to dictate and have authority in his life, rather than the standards of God that speak to Jim from the pages of the Bible. Jim is not walking in holiness. "Be holy, as I am holy" declared the Lord. This apparently does not apply to Jim.
Paul, speaking to Christians in the church at Rome (who had the similar mind-set that Jim Green has), clarifies this freedom and liberty in Christ, and what it means for us:
"What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousenss? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness....being made free from sin, and become sevants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:15-23)
Jim has a form of faith, but his brand of faith is not producing the accompanying acts of obedience to God. Thus, his faith is dead. "Even so faith, if it hath not works [obedience to God], is dead, being alone." (James 2:17)
And here is where the incorrect usage of "legalism" enters in to Jim's scenario. When another Christian believer confronts Jim and tells him he is in sin and must stop having sex prior to marriage, Jim accuses him of being "legalistic."
"Legalisim" then becomes the escape clause which allows Jim to continue as his flesh desires him to act, rather than as a holy God desires him to act.
Jim has a choice before him: he can repent and experience true grace from God; or he can choose to continue giving into his flesh, sin against God deliberately believing incorrectly that all is covered by the grace of God, and face the losses that will come from such a choice (losses that will be felt both in this life and the life to come).
Without faith we cannot please God. But faith without the accompanying works of obedience is still dead faith. Never can you have one without the other, and while faith will result in obedience, still if you are not walking in obedience, you cannot say that you have faith.
This is important to discuss here, because the day will come when our flesh will cry out to be spared rather than face death; yet our lives will only be spared if we choose to walk in dis-obedience to God by worshipping the image of the beast. If in these days of non-presecution, we rationalize our way into sexual immorality, how much more will we be able to rationalize into any sin when real persecution begins and our lives are at stake?
In the days ahead, there will be those who will remain holy and obedient to the Lord, even to the loss of their life:
"And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death." (Rev. 12:11)
And there will be those who have not learned how to bring their flesh into submission to God's holiness who will be caught unaware as Jesus warned:
"And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting [giddiness], and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare it shall come on all them that dwell on the face of the earth. Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man." (Luke 21:34-36)
"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast, saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." (Revelation 13:11-18)
Legalism is not a word that I find used in the bible; perhaps the LORD in all His wisdom knew what chaos could come out of the human use (or rather mis-use) of the word! It is a dangerous word, for both Christians and non-Christians alike.
In Christian circles, its incorrect usage has made it a source of fear for Christians, and the avoidance of being labeled "legalistic" has led many Christians to rationalize their way right into sin rather than be branded "different" or "legalistic" from their brethren who do not feel called to live a life that is "holy and pleasing unto the Lord."
In the unbelieving world it has become a primary reason of why it's best NOT to become a Christian, causing many of the lost to remain in their sin. In both cases, its usage is incorrect....and deadly.
Webster's defines it as: strict, literal, or excessive conformity to the law or to a religious or moral code. This is the definition used by most Christians and most non-Christians; this is the definition that leads to gross error in doctrine.
The problem with Webster's definition is that it leaves the determination about what is to be considered "strict, literal, or excessive" in the hands of each individual, and as individuals vary one from another, so does the definition of "legalism."
For example, one Christian might be at church every time the doors are opened because he or she loves the social time. Another Christian, who is more shy or withdrawn, may think that gathering more than once or twice a week is just "excessive."
God, on the other hand, might want to get together with us as His children 100% of the time. Now THAT could be defined as "excessive." But which of us wants to label God "excessive'? Certainly not me!
Do you see the problem with Webster's defintion of "legalism"?
With either of the Christians used in the example above, one cannot tell strictly by the number of times they attend church whether they do so out of a love of God or a lack of love of God. When we try to apply a judgment term of "excessive" or "legalistic" to another person (as defined by Webster), we risk interfering with the relationship between that person and God, and it could be that God LIKES the "excessive" time spent with Him. There is a consideration of the heart regarding each of these Christians which is neglected when we place a label of "legalism" onto Christians who do not respond exactly as we do.
Here instead is a better and, I believe, more accurate definition of "legalism."
The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word "legalism" with less vagueness (and in my opinion, according to the biblical standard God would have us use): "adherence to moral law more than personal religious faith" and then it goes on to explain it in simple terms: "stress obedience apart from faith and you produce legalism."
Key words: "more than" and "apart from". Now we have a specific circumstance in which "legalism" can be correctly applied, so that we don't have to be all over the chart in our ideas of what "legalism" means.
When adherence to morality (or the law or God's commands) exceeds faith (in God through Jesus Christ) then our adherence to morality (our obedience) is done with wrong motives and is in fact sin.
So obedience can be sin?
Sure. Let me give you an example using one of the biggest compromises of sin amongst Christian believers today: sex before marriage.
We have two men: Joe Brown, an unbeliever, and Jim Green, a professed follower of Christ.
Joe Bown, in our example, does not have sex before marriage, but does not know Christ; Jim Green, on the other hand, professes to know Christ, but has rationalized that sex before marriage is allowable...in his circumstances. Both men are living in sin...both men will have to deal with the consequences of their sin. But the word "legalism" will be incorrectly used as both men's "get out of jail free" card. Or so they think.
Joe Brown (fictitious person) is a very moral and upright person. He never breaks a law of the land, and he is sexually moral. He has never had sex outside of marriage, has always been faithful to his wife, and is a good father to his children. But He doesn't acknowledge the death of Jesus Christ as atonement for his sin; and thus he does not have a relationship with the Father. In fact, although he has heard the Good News on several occasions, he rejects that "legalistic crutch" that so many people use concerning Jesus Christ and needing a Savior; after all he is a good man who doesn't need "saving."
Yet Joe manages to walk unkowingly in obedience to "some" of the commands of God (simply by living a moral life) but he does not abide by "all" of the commands of God. How could he? He doesn't know what the commands of God are because he has never read the Bible, yet in many ways he is doing what the Bible commands us all to do. Joe has unknowingly placed himself under the "law." He has rejected Christ and the mercy of God through Christ that is available to us when we repent of sin. He has chosen to be judged according to his works instead.
But the apostle Paul says that the problem with living "under the law" (by works alone, rather than by faith that produces works) is that if you offend in even ONE point of the law, you are guilty of ALL of the law. This is because you have made the LAW your judge, and the law, being an inanimate thing, cannot show mercy. It is what it is: a stern taskmaster.
As a result of all of this, Joe's acts of obedience can only lead him to death everlasting, because he was not able to act obediently to ALL of the law (i.e., Love the Lord your God will all of your heart, soul, mind and strength...Commandment #1 of the Law) and the law will judge him to be guilty of death. In fact, God knew this when He provided His son Jesus to be atonement for our sin, as a way of escape for us for our inevitable disobedience to the law; He ordained Christ's death on the cross from the foundation of the world. Joe, unfortunately, has rejected the only advocate for mercy and grace that God would have heard on Joe's behalf: Jesus Christ.
Meanwhile, Jim Green (another fictitious person) has acknowledged Jesus Christ to be His Savior. He attends church faithfully. He is, in fact, a deacon in the church. But Jim has misunderstood the freedom and liberty that he has been given in Christ. This freedom, Paul says, is freedom FROM SIN. Not freedom from the CONSEQUENCES of sin.
In the past, Jim was a slave to sin, but now he has been set free through Jesus Christ so that he no longer MUST sin, as a captive MUST do what his jailer commands him to do. Jim is now FREE to live in holiness according to the standards of a Holy God as demonstrated to us by Jesus Himself. But Jim has chosen a different path, one that leads away from holiness, and right into sin.
His misunderstanding of the freedom given to us in Christ, has lead Jim to think that God has now become lenient towards sin. [Interesting that Jim feels it is ok to let things slide with God, but he is extremely careful to be a law-abiding citizen, much like Joe Brown above, because, of course, if you run contrary to the law of the land you could end up in jail!] But Jim believes that God is love and God is grace. And since the flesh is strong in us humans, whether saved or not saved, Jim has allowed his flesh to control his actions, especially in regards to what God has labeled "sexual immorality" or "sex outside of marriage" which according to God is not "sacred" at all but an abomination.
But, of course, Jim does not view his particular circumstances as falling into the category of sexual immorality.
Jim has fallen in love with a believer like himself, and because he is so sure that they will soon marry, he has rationalized that because God knows what's in his heart for this woman, God will excuse sex outside of marriage in this particular case. [There are many Christians deceived into committing this sin, especially as churches are not preaching against it openly.] And in any case, Jim has read that "grace covers a multitude of sins." His perfect liberty in Christ, allows him then, in his thinking, to walk in an area that God says is forbidden.
Jim is walking in deliberate sin. It is deliberate because Jim has studied the bible, has read that God does not condone sex outside of marriage, in fact, that God abhors sex outside of marriage and considers it to be idolatry. But he has allowed the strong desires of his flesh to dictate and have authority in his life, rather than the standards of God that speak to Jim from the pages of the Bible. Jim is not walking in holiness. "Be holy, as I am holy" declared the Lord. This apparently does not apply to Jim.
Paul, speaking to Christians in the church at Rome (who had the similar mind-set that Jim Green has), clarifies this freedom and liberty in Christ, and what it means for us:
"What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousenss? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness....being made free from sin, and become sevants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:15-23)
Jim has a form of faith, but his brand of faith is not producing the accompanying acts of obedience to God. Thus, his faith is dead. "Even so faith, if it hath not works [obedience to God], is dead, being alone." (James 2:17)
And here is where the incorrect usage of "legalism" enters in to Jim's scenario. When another Christian believer confronts Jim and tells him he is in sin and must stop having sex prior to marriage, Jim accuses him of being "legalistic."
"Legalisim" then becomes the escape clause which allows Jim to continue as his flesh desires him to act, rather than as a holy God desires him to act.
Jim has a choice before him: he can repent and experience true grace from God; or he can choose to continue giving into his flesh, sin against God deliberately believing incorrectly that all is covered by the grace of God, and face the losses that will come from such a choice (losses that will be felt both in this life and the life to come).
Without faith we cannot please God. But faith without the accompanying works of obedience is still dead faith. Never can you have one without the other, and while faith will result in obedience, still if you are not walking in obedience, you cannot say that you have faith.
This is important to discuss here, because the day will come when our flesh will cry out to be spared rather than face death; yet our lives will only be spared if we choose to walk in dis-obedience to God by worshipping the image of the beast. If in these days of non-presecution, we rationalize our way into sexual immorality, how much more will we be able to rationalize into any sin when real persecution begins and our lives are at stake?
In the days ahead, there will be those who will remain holy and obedient to the Lord, even to the loss of their life:
"And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death." (Rev. 12:11)
And there will be those who have not learned how to bring their flesh into submission to God's holiness who will be caught unaware as Jesus warned:
"And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting [giddiness], and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare it shall come on all them that dwell on the face of the earth. Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man." (Luke 21:34-36)
"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast, saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." (Revelation 13:11-18)
No comments:
Post a Comment