Legalism

Monday January 7, 2008   ~   8 Comments

Yesterday, I focused on "communion" with God in my message. I will link the audio soon. I taught on how Jesus was the Great High Priest. The outline is below.

During my message, I briefly mentioned legalism and recommended Grace Awakening by Chuck Swindoll. The book was on my mind becuase I recently read an interview with Howard Hendricks and Chuck Swindoll where Swindoll defined the legalism problem as:

...when we get into areas that are not set forth in Scripture, either in precept or even in principle. These may be such things as length of hair, tattoos and other body piercings, skirts or pants for women, makeup or no makeup. Those are not scriptural issues. Sometimes these issues are cultural, and you do have to address them when you are in that particular culture. But I think legalism begins when you do or refrain from doing what I want you to do or not do because it’s on my list and it’s something that I am uncomfortable with.

Then, he gives his blunt advice:

The problem with legalists is that not enough people have confronted them and told them to get lost. Those are strong words, but I don’t mess with legalism anymore. I’m 72 years old; what have I got to lose? Seriously, I used to kowtow to legalists, but they’re dangerous. They are grace-killers. They’ll drive off every new Christian you bring to church. They are enemies of the faith. Other than that, I don’t have any opinion!

So, if I am trying to force my personal list of no-no’s on you and make you feel guilty if you
don’t join me, then I’m out of line and I need to be told that.

Download the interview here.

Here is the message outline:

New Years Revolutions
Communion: Connection People to God

Hebrews 4:14-16

1. He is the Right High Priest…

“14 Therefore since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens—Jesus the Son of God—let us hold fast to the confession.”

Hebrews 5:1-3 (HCSB) 1 For every high priest taken from men is appointed in service to God for the people, to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he himself is also subject to weakness. 3 Because of this, he must make a sin offering for himself as well as for the people.

2. Because of Who He Was…

“15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tested in every way as we are, yet without sin.”

1 John 3:5 (HCSB) You know that He was revealed so that He might take away sins, and there is no sin in Him.

2 Corinthians 5:21 (HCSB) He made the One who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.


3. And He Invites Us Into Relationship with Him.

“16 Therefore let us approach the throne of grace with boldness, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us at the proper time.”

2 Peter 1:3-4 (HCSB) 3 For His divine power has given us everything required for life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and goodness. 4 By these He has given us very great and precious promises, so that through them you may share in the divine nature, escaping the corruption that is in the world because of evil desires.


We Are Commanded to Connect.

How?

a. Right Understanding “Therefore let us approach the throne of grace…”

b. Right Attitude
“…with boldness…”

c. Right Expectation
“…so that we may receive mercy…”

d. Right Solution
“…and find grace…”

e. Right Help
“…to help us at the proper time.”

Posted on January 7, 2008 at 8:39 AM   ~   8 Comments

Tagged with:

8 Comments

Clayton Smith
01/07/08 @ 10:00 AM

I can't exactly remember where/when I heard this but I think it's a good metaphor and distinction:

The problem with the "easy believism, cheap grace" crowd is that they don't understand the severity of their sin. In other words, it's hard to appreciate someone paying your bill for you if the bill wasn't all that much to begin with.

On the other hand...

The problem with the Ned Flanders-type "legalists" is that they don't understand the extent and efficacy of Christ's redemptive work to forgive all our sins - past, present and future. In other words, they keep trying to pay a debt that has already been paid. And unfortunately, they look at every other believer as a person who needs to keep working in order to pay their own bill as well.

I'm just glad that Jesus came in both grace and truth.

Food for thought...

Kevin Bussey
01/07/08 @ 10:12 AM

Great stuff Ed. Legalism about killed me.

irreverend fox
01/07/08 @ 1:23 PM

amen! legalism and liberalism are equally devilish...(I wonder how many faithful church goers understand and truly belive that)...both are grasping at the throat of evangelicalism in general and the SBC specifically.

Michael
01/07/08 @ 4:02 PM

Great message yesterday. I'm glad you are part of our church, Ed. I was convinced once again of God's calling you to our church. I've been at this church 27 years, and I've never seen a colored undershirt, behind an open color. Maybe that's a superficial observation, but does it not say a lot? You are waking the demons.

Doug Keesler
01/07/08 @ 7:45 PM

Ed - there's an important distinction to make here. Legalism, by definition, is making salvation conditioned fully or partially on one's standing before the law (whether biblical law or man-made law makes no difference) [see Galatians].

To admonish someone that something may not be appropriate Christian behavior or may be hindering one's growth in grace (whether music, mini-skirts, tobacco, or whatever) is not a legalistic attitude as long as we are not telling the person that it is a salvation issue.

American Christians like everything to be black/white. It's either OK or it's sin. That's why we preach abstinence regarding alcohol when scripture teaches moderation. However, in the real world there are a lot of gray areas that Christian's need to make decisions about daily.

For example, I enjoy many genres of popular music, but when a song comes on that glorifies sexual impurity, or has a clearly anti-Christian message, I am compelled to change the station. My salvation may not depend upon it, but as one who is seeking to become like Christ it is still an important choice even though the Bible doesn't directly address it.

Ed Stetzer
01/08/08 @ 6:58 AM

Doug,

People do have different definitions of legalism (Swindoll and you, for example), but whatever you call the attitude Swindoll, it is a church (and soul) killer.

Heath Lloyd
01/09/08 @ 2:39 PM

I wonder if Chuck Swindoll would call Al Mohler a legalist?

Jack Brooks
01/21/08 @ 3:39 PM

Legalists don't know, or respect, the moral law. If they did, they wouldn't add to it, or distort it by extrapolating it out too far. That was what was so peculiar and twisted about the Pharisees. Everyone thinks of them as the Law Guys, but Christ criticized them for their actual ignorance of the Scriptures and substitution of Biblical commandments with made-up traditions.


You are welcome (and encouraged) to comment below, but be sure your comment relates to the post. Feel free to discuss the topic, but do not denigrate individuals. Comments are moderated and usually appear within 15 minutes of being posted. Regrettably, Ed cannot personally respond to most comments and questions.

Leave a Comment

You may use HTML to style your comment.