It seems the word "Legalism" has been used a lot lately on this board. Perhaps it would be good for us to study what this word means and how should it be applied and when we cannot apply it.
Webster properly defines legalism in this way as �the doctrine of salvation by good works.�
Secular definition: Date: 1928
1 : strict, literal, or excessive conformity to the law or to a religious or moral code
2 : a legal term or rule
There are those, even on this board, who have suggested that those of us who believe and teach God's standards of right and wrong, what is acceptable to God and what is not, what God's moral principles are and how their choices do not conform to God's, we are then charged as being "Legalists". That reasoning is no surprise since it comes from secular humanism. People, including some Christians, simply do not like to be told that there is a standard of righteousness that Christ Jesus demands from His followers. But when you say that or believe that then you are labeled as being "legalistic". What it really boils down to is that there are Christians and are unwilling to submit to God's authority and prefer to abuse God's Grace. They take their Liberty in Christ as a means to sin thereby abusing liberty. Is that the fruit of a Christian? Is that someone you would want as a spouse?
This is an excerpt from a web page that hits the nail on the head in this issue. I don't agree with everything he says theologically but on this issue he is right on! http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0367.htm
"Why is it that folk like to label us as legalists? There are two related reasons. First, the thinking of most people has been heavily influenced by the thinking of humanism. Humanism is diametrically opposed to all rules, standards, codes of conduct and moral absolutes of any kind. It believes that everyone should be free to do as he pleases. Those who disagree are labeled �Legalists.� Secondly, most people want to use their liberty for an occasion to the flesh (5:13). They do not want anyone telling them that some of the things they enjoy may be wrong so they banish all such suggestions by labeling them �legalistic.�
The real issue is this: should we teach do�s and don�t�s in Christian living? Should we preach that there are standards which ought to be maintained and deeds which should not be done? A large crowd would say �no - don�t be negative - don�t be legalistic.� But what saith the Scriptures? Every page of Scripture lists things we are not to do. The first page of the Bible tells Adam �thou shalt not� and the last page of Scripture warns not to take away or add to the words of the Book. All of Scripture has rules of what to do and what not to do. Every page is replete with �thou shalt� and �thou shalt not.� To say that rules of conduct are only found as part of the Mosaic law is certainly a misrepresentation of the truth.
The problem in Christianity today is the seeping scourge of humanism that has saturated the minds of Christians, Christian leaders, Christian authors and even preachers. Humanism maintains that the ultimate goal of man is to enjoy himself and develop his potential without the restriction of outmoded taboos and irrelevant rules. Humanism says that each one must decide for himself what is right and what is wrong�no one else should interfere. This is the thinking that causes Christians to throw off any restraints and label them as �legalism.� In so doing they open the door to the inroads of all sorts of worldliness, questionable conduct and ungodly living. Christian standards have been discarded, Christian conduct has sunk to the level of the world and all is done to the theme of freedom from the law.""
So my Friends, my Brothers and Sisters in Christ, do NOT let anyone twist your thinking as to what is legalism especially when they cannot biblically prove their point or when they are just obviously being rebellious to God's standard of righteousness. Mark that person and be ware of them.
So for an exercise can you list scriptures that would apply to someone being legalistic and scriptures that by obeying them would not be?
Since everyone is scared to tackle you on this one, I guess that leaves just me. LOL. It won't be much of a game since both of us agree on most of the important points.
To me, legalism is still thinking that you can earn salvation or favor by your actions, and teaching others the same thing.
I still hold myself to a higher standard, not because I have to, but because it makes mme feel better to do so. It does not give me the right to push those standards off on others, or to judge them for what they are doing. Remember, many men in the Bible were being used by God when they were at what we would call their worst.We lead by our own standard, and see how many follow.
Yes you are correct. However what we have seen on this forum is that there are those who call us legalists for presenting God's word because it disagrees with their humanistic thinking. Presenting God's word is not judging others. We are not to judge someone's salvation or motives but we are to judge unrighteous behavior and bad theology. There is a rebellious spirit here that needs to be addressed. I and others have done so. We have seen before on this board the results of a rebellious spirit that ran loose. If we do not address bad teachings or share our opinions of bad teachings with clear well exegeted scriptures, then people will go on believing things incorrectly. By addressing things at least we are all given the opportunity to study deeper and perhaps reshape our thinking, IMO.
With all due respect, because you are a very well versed man of the Bible...
Sometimes you come across as trying "brow-beat" someone into submission to your way of thinking. I'm not saying you're always wrong, you're not. I think maybe it's your method.
If someone doesn't just automatically agree with you, you post these long dragged out posts that really do no good. You might feel as though you've gotten through to them, and maybe you have, but I know of other times that people just quit paying any attention to you and dismis you as being too self righteous.
I don't say these things to you to hurt you, please know that, but I'd rather people see the fruit you can bear instead of seeing something negative.
If someone chooses to think differently than you, don't sweat it, ya know? You've said your peace and given them the opportunity to see things your way. After that, they aren't your responsibility. I'm thinking of Titus 3?
I appreciate what you say but I am not too sure that you are understanding the purpose of this particular thread and why I have purposefully written what I have. There is an issue going on that is from other threads I think you may not be aware of. A few have caught it and agreed.
If you think I am self righteous then by all means please write me privately and show me where I have been as I will be happy to receive your criticism. :-)
I understand the purpose of this thread and I know to whom you are intending it. She isn't the only one that will read this.
My purpose in this thread is to try to get you to see that your posts could speak negativity to others. I've been contacted privately by a person that would like to post in these forums, but he seems to be afraid. Perhaps it's because he doesn't think he can convey his questions just right and will get "beat up" verbally by you. Please take a few minutes to reread some of your posts and look at them through the eyes of a new Christian or someone that doesn't fully agree with you.
I hope that you can open your mind and see my intentions, they aren't bad.
And quit making me cry or I'm gonna tell. LOL. J/K. You haven't bothered me, but I guess you have to have feelings to get them hurt. LOL.
In always enjoy a lively debate, but I do understand what T is talking about. Some places new Christians are afraid to post because they are not sure they can adequately express themselves. I guess some discussions can be intimidating. Not for me though.....it doesn't bother me a bit to look like an idiot. LOL.
he words indicated in Bold are censored from the CDFF Forum:
In My Opinion! No...that was it. IMO=In My opinion. I really don't have an opinion on this...well...if you insist, lol. I think there's a happy medium...
Hebrews 12:3 For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds. 4 Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin. 5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: 6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye basturds(CDFF censored the BIBLE!! Blasphemy!!), and not sons. 9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? 10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. 11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
So correction and reproof are necessary(sometimes God is the only one that can do it right)...but...all mixed in with Christian love. Gotta say though...sometimes christian love is hard to convey through text. I feel like I have a lot of trouble with that. They need waaay more emotes on here.
