As we read the Bible, few of us have any difficulty identifying the imprisoning constraints of excessive legalism in Biblical characters.  However, when we assess our personal lives, escape from legalism becomes far more difficult.  As he outlines the underlying principles of legalism in the seventh chapter of Romans, Paul also takes us gently by the hand and leads us through the challenging waters of personal experience.  Without this chapter and Paul’s wise—and inspired—leadership, it would be incredibly easy for us to clearly grasp and understand the theological flaws of legalism, while at the same time becoming dreadfully harsh legalists in our personal conduct.

At its heart the Christian life is not about how well we follow an ever-increasing number of rules and regulations.  It is about a vibrant, living relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.  The legalist will react with fear to such a notion for the legalist only responds to the fear of rules and regulations.  Often the legalists will point with condescending disdain at other non-legalistic Christians and hurl the poison accusation “Antinomian” at them.  “Antinomian” is a term which literally means “against the law.”  Perhaps there are a few antinomian types around, but most Christians readily understand that freedom from the law—a point that Paul clearly made in the sixth chapter of Romans—does not mean libertine freedom.  Rather it means that the person of the Lord Jesus Christ has now replaced the cold and impersonal authority of law, so that freedom from the law enables the believer to discover and live the full and fruitful life through a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

May we discover that beautiful vision and live it fully; “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.”

God bless,

Joe Holder

 
The Death of Legalism: Part 2

Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?  For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.  So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.  Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.  ( Romans 7:1-4 )

In the last chapter we examine the transition of God's moral government from the Mosaic code to the personal moral government of the Lord Jesus Christ.  We are now ready to examine the practical implications of this transition on our personal Christian experience.  Jesus' personal moral government of His people is no less specific and binding than the Mosaic code.  "…but I say" frames the major outline of the Sermon on the Mount.  Before we examine the personal and experiential implications of Jesus' personal moral governance, we should examine what this idea does not mean.  Sorry for beginning with the negative, but the prevalence of some of these destructive ideas in our time necessitates their exposure before we can constructively examine the positive implications of our moral accountability to the Lord Jesus Christ.

1.         "Jesus has revealed to me that…" is a frighteningly common refrain in contemporary Christianity.  When people make such a claim, we need to ask how they know their idea was revealed by Jesus.  Perhaps it is merely their personal belief, so they presume that Jesus revealed it to them.  There is a flawless test for every claimed "revelation."  Peter wrote that the writing of Scripture was performed by the power and working of the Spirit of God.  Since God is wholly consistent and immutable, if we discover what the moral concepts of God were in the revelation of Scripture, we may safely conclude that they are exactly the same today as when the Holy Spirit inspired men to write the Scriptures.  A major evidence of the supernatural origin of Scripture is that some forty to forty five men contributed to the writing of Scripture over a period of approximately fifteen hundred years; yet there are no contradictions in all of these quite diverse writings.  Years ago I was in conversation with a person who frequently claimed "God has revealed to me…" often defending rather unusual ideas behind the claim.  I challenged one of the more obvious of these frivolous claims by offering a passage of Scripture that contradicted the idea this person had just presented.  Immediately she responded, "Oh, you are being legalistic."  If appealing to Scripture's final authority is being legalistic, I gladly plead guilty as charged!  In her comment this person clearly indicated that she viewed her perception of a personal and private "revelation" with more authority than anything written in Scripture.  We should set clearly in our minds that no claimed revelation from God will contradict Scripture, so even our supposed "revelations" must be put to the test of Scripture.  The fundamental principle involved in this point is rather straightforward for our present study.  Jesus' personal moral governance of His people does not occur exclusively through personal or private revelations.  Primarily it occurs through a conscientious and ongoing study of Scripture.  Paul reminded Timothy of this truth, "Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things."  ( 2 Timothy 2:7 )  We gain insight into Jesus' personal ethics through Scripture, not through private, personal, and thus non-verifiable "revelations."

2.         "Since God has written His law in my mind, if I sincerely think a thing is right, it must be right."  This error is akin to the first.  Personal sincerity does not supersede Scripture.  A person may well be wholly in error and be as sincere as any true believer alive.  Once again, the supremacy of Scripture, not one's personal opinion or sincerity, must prevail.

3.         "Jesus fulfilled the Law for me, so I don't need to live according to it."  This error confuses the imputed righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ in our redemption with the ethical commands of God to His children.  Our legal standing before God in Jesus' impute righteousness in no way diminishes our obligation to live according to God's moral code.  Paul affirms this truth, "Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth surec, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity."  ( 2 Timothy 2:19 )  If our legal standing in Jesus' righteousness relieved us of personal obligation to live according to God's moral code, Paul could not have written these words.

4.         "The Bible has nothing to say about my present situation, so I am free to do whatever I wish to do about it."  This error actively seeks to "dumb down" the Bible so that it conclusively says nothing about anything.  In over fifty years of studying the Bible and ministry I remain constantly amazed at the incredible enlightenment and relevance of Scripture to my daily life.

5.         "My obedience, my personal righteous action, is irresistibly ordained by God, so I don't have to worry about it."  This error rejects the clear teaching of Scripture on the role of the believer's will in God's moral government of His people.  It reduces personal obedience to a mindless response to irresistible divine power.  In this view obedience to God's will is little more than the "obedience" of a molecular chemical reaction or the response of a falling rock to gravity.  Most advocates of this view will readily accept responsibility for their sins, but attribute any righteous act to irresistible divine causation.

We could cover any number of similar errant ideas regarding the believer's present moral obligation, but these will suffice to illustrate the point.

Paul's analogy in our study verses confronts us at every decision point of our lives.  How do I go about deciding what to do about this question?  What do I do about it?  In a godly marriage neither partner attempts to manipulate his/her spouse.  They live respectfully toward each other, seeking to honor and to please their partner.  If we seek to live as if we are truly married to the Lord Jesus Christ, we must face life's decisions with Him and His personal teachings wielding a dominant influence in our decision making processes.  "What would Jesus do?" is more than a popular cliché of our time.  It is actually quite insightful if we use the question to go to Scripture and learn through Scripture what we can uncover regarding Jesus' ethical teachings.

My wife's family looks back with a certain humor at a time in her youth when her father received his weekly check, and with it a lay off notice.  He took his final check to the bank, deposited it, and drove straight to the local Buick dealer where he purchased a new Buick convertible!  Needless to say his wife was not happy with the news that night.  Had my father-in-law considered his wife's views, he would have never purchased the new car.  Scripture teaches us that a married couple should consider their spouse in the things they do and say.  Translate this affectionate concern to Paul's analogy in our study passage.  If we fulfill the potential and the relational role that he intended, we will consider the Lord Jesus, our "husband" in the analogy, before making decisions, taking action, or uttering words.  We will not shamelessly and irresponsibly reinvent Him or His revealed will in Scripture to rationalize our personal appetite.

The "legalist" in each of us often tends to focus the spotlight of the law on others while we remain carefully in the shadows.  We will loudly proclaim the faults of others, but become noticeably quiet when others question us about our own faults.  This double standard typifies the legalist, making such a person something significantly less than pleasant for those who choose to associate with them.  I am convinced that quite often the legalist feels an incredible sense of personal guilt about his/her own failures, but instead of dealing with those failures they busy themselves with the faults of others and carefully work to keep their own faults out of anyone's sight.

This observation leads us to consider the next experiential problem with the legalist.  Although they may carefully work to avoid the spotlight, the legalist often struggles with amazing conflict and discouragement, but their legalistic spirit prevents them from confessing their faults and asking others to help them overcome their besetting sins.  Therefore the legalist must live a lonely life with his/her faults.  As Paul develops this theme later in the chapter, he carefully holds himself, not someone else, up to the legalistic measuring rod of the law.  No matter how hard you work, or how much you do, the Law assesses your performance and questions why you didn't do more, or it finds fault with what you did do and questions why you didn't do it better.  Legalism is a miserable lifestyle!

It has been my observation that legalistic Christians often become nearly obsessive about "assurance" of their salvation.  To hear them speak about their insatiable hunger for assurance, you would think that this was the only topic discussed in all the sixty six books of the Bible.  Sadly, no matter how much the legalist does, at the end of the day he/she struggles with a nagging sense that he/she didn't do enough, lacks the desired assurance, and becomes driven to do more for the primary purpose of gaining more assurance.  However, the harder one works with assurance as the primary objective the more discontented he/she will be.  Why this strange phenomenon?  It is no mystery at all.  Scripture clearly teaches us that true discipleship begins with self-denial, not self-pursuit of assurance.  Once we deny self and invest our primary effort in life to the service of others, assurance becomes a peripheral issue, not the primary objective of everything we do.  And the beautiful wonder of it all is that the more we invest our lives in the service of others the greater our true assurance!  My friends, that is exactly the way God designed Biblical discipleship and Biblical self-denial to be.  Serve Him by serving others with the least possible emphasis on self, and the blessings of providence and rich assurance flow like an artesian spring in your life.  Focus your primary objective on gaining assurance, regardless of what you do, and those same blessings dry up like a drop of water in the desert.

 Paul has given us the key to joyful, fulfilling discipleship in this simple analogy.  The more we live our life under the perspective that Jesus is our spouse and is involved in everything we do, the more we discover the joys of our relationship with Him.  The more we react to disaster by creating another one, be it a new Buick on unemployment or some other equally silly strategy that we invent, the more we will struggle with no joy and with no hope-and with no assurance.

 …that we should bring forth fruit unto God."  The fruit that Paul seeks in this lesson is not fruit to self, not stars in our crown-either in this life or in the world to come-not a high mark on the scale of self-assurance, but rather fruit to God.  When Jesus introduced the analogy of the vine at the beginning of the fifteenth chapter of John's gospel, He set the proper stage.  He, not we, is the owner of the vineyard.  We are not even the root of the grape vine.  We are a mere branch on the fine.  We may choose to bring forth fruit to Him and find the joys of the abundant life described in Scripture, or we may choose to bring forth fruit to ourselves and end up being pruned from His constant supply of blessings.  At the end of the day it is both as complex and as simple as that.

The grand summation of this lesson is far easier to grasp that it is to apply to our lives.  The life we choose as a legalist is a miserable existence!  Why bother?  Why choose it?  Paul takes us by the hand and gently walks us through a far better way to live, a way that glorifies God and that-as a side-bar issue-also blesses us immensely.  His lesson sets the stage for a simple analysis of our life.  If you claim to be devotedly married to Jesus, why do live life as if you are married to the Law?  What is our answer to this question?