Showing posts with label B - 1 John. Show all posts
Showing posts with label B - 1 John. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Legalism: a definition

I've recently been thinking about the subject of legalism. I've come to the conclusion that no matter which branch of the body of Christ a person belongs to he will agree that legalism is wrong. Imagine going to hear a sermon and the pastor beginning by saying, "well, I hope everyone is enjoying being legalistic! Today I'm going to preach on why legalism is great". Legalism is generally held in disdain and for good reason. Legalism is contrary to Christianity. The problem I've found, though, is that legalism, while unanimously condemned is not often well understood. I've been thinking for the last few weeks on a good definition. Here's what I've got:

Legalism is one of two things:
1) an attempt at conformity to a good law for a substituted purpose
2) an attempt at conformity to a substituted law for a good purpose

Allow me to explain. Legalism is a word that has at it's root what is "legal" or "lawful". People who are legalistic either pervert a good law into something for which it was not intended OR they begin with good motives but seek to meet proper ends with an improper law. A Legalist person is aware of and concerned about law, though, which the inverse, an Anti-nomian or Licentious person would not. Biblical Christianity, in contrast to both, has an aspect of attempt at conformity to a good law for a good reason.

The Letter and The Spirit

Let's take a law: "You cannot drive over 70 MPH along X stretch of highway". This may be, and for the sake of discussion let's say that it is, a good law. A law has a letter and a spirit. The letter of this law is that it is wrong to drive at any speed greater than 70 MPH. If a person were to drive 70.000001 MPH, he or she would be breaking the letter of the law. Consider, though, that the example law is not an isolated thing. Behind the creation of this law there is an intention of whoever wrote the law. We might say, and for the sake of discussion let's conclude that, the intention, or spirit, of the law is "Do not drive in a way which puts persons or property at risk of harm or damage." This is rooted in the second greatest commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself."

Suppose a man is driving 69.999999 MPH. He is swerving to the left and right as he weaves through traffic. He cuts off a bus full of children. To save a few seconds off of his commute, he drives through a person's front yard and flower bed. Is he obeying the letter of the law stated above? Yes. Is he doing it for the intended purpose? No. He is obeying the letter but not the spirit of the law. He is a legalist by the first definition. His utter contempt for the spirit of the law reveals the wrongness of legalism.

Suppose, now that a young woman desires to protect life and property. She learned from her parents to always drive 10 MPH below the speed limit. As she enters the highway she cautiously accelerates to 59 MPH. As people pass her traveling at speeds of 65 or 68 MPH, she smiles at them but wonders in her heart, "Why are all these people breaking the speed limit?" She finds another car going her speed and carefully paces them, preventing anyone following from going above 60 MPH. Is she being legalistic? This is where we enter the second definition of legalism, and to be completely honest this part is a bit more difficult to see the error. She is keeping the letter of the law. She is even keeping the spirit of the law to some extent. I'd say she is being legalistic, though. What makes it difficult to determine is the idea of Hedging.

Trimming the Hedges

Hedging is, simply, to impose a boundary upon one's self to help prevent transgression. Let's take the speed limit example above. If I decide that to help myself obey the law I will always drive 2 miles below the speed limit, I am building a hedge. Building a hedge for one's self is OK, provided it is for the correct intention (i.e. toward the spirit of the law). Hedges are not a problem so long as they are kept only for one's self. Hedges become legalism when the hedge is substituted for the law. This is portrayed clearly for us in Mark 7:

7:1 Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, 2 they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash [1] their hands, holding to the tradition of the elders, 4 and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. [2] And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches. [3]) 5 And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, “Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?” 6 And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; 7 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”

9 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!
The elders of the Pharisees and scribes had developed hedges to help themselves obey the letter of the law. Generations later, the hedge had been mistaken for the law it surrounded! We see the horror of this when the Pharisees accuse Jesus of leading his disciples into sin. What a bold thing to do! The Pharisees accuse Jesus, who is God, of breaking the God's law! God is perfect and cannot deny himself. We see the rebuke they receive is well warranted. By replacing God's law with man's traditions, the Pharisees were the ones who were rejecting God's law.

As followers of Christ, we need to guard against confusing our own hedges with God's perfect law. God's law is perfect as we are reminded in Psalm 19:
7 The law of the Lord is perfect, [3]reviving the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; ... 10 More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb. 11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward.
Since God's law is perfect, we must not substitute our law for His. We must continually trim our hedges to make sure that they do not impede upon the spirit of His law.

The Greatest Commandment

So, how do we ensure that we are keeping the spirit of the law? What is the spirit of God's law? Jesus tells us the greatest commandment, and I do not think it is just another law to add on top of the rest, I think it is the spirit of all of God's law:

Mark 12:
28 And one of the scribes came up and ... asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” 29 Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ 31 The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”
All other laws God gives are only extensions of this fundamental law: that God is one and that mankind is to love him wholly. Even the second commandment to love one another flows out of the first. We love one another because we love God. We love God because He loves us.

1 John 4:
19 We love because he first loved us.
A Guardian that is Good

The law is rooted in that we should love God. We know God first loved us because of the gospel. Paul the Apostle was quick to point out that the law should point us to the gospel. The law is good in that it drives us to Christ.

1 Timothy 1:
8 Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, ... and whatever else is contrary to sound [3] doctrine, 11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.
Paul even calls the law our guardian, imprisoning men until they are justified by faith:

Galatians 3:
23 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith.
As Christians, we should oppose legalism. It is either a misuse of God's law or a rejection of God's law in favor of man's law. In either case, legalism destroys the laws power to draw us to Christ. If we are not drawn to Christ, we will never have love for God who is a just judge. If we have no love for God, we will be forever doomed to fail at meeting the spirit of the law: to love the holy God with the whole of our being.

Monday, August 24, 2009

on the label "Calvinist"

A Calvinist is someone who agrees with John Calvin. Often, when someone speaks of being a Calvinist, they are speaking of someone who agrees with the "5 points of Calvinism". These points aren't actually written by John Calvin himself but are a summary of his views on salvation and the sovereignty of God. In this article, I'll introduce these points. I rely heavily on the book "The 5 points of Calvinism documented, defined, defended".

I'll start with a point which is foundational to all of the five: God saves sinners.

14 The Lord is my strength and my song;
he has become my salvation.


21 ... and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.

From this premise all the five points of Calvinism find their meaning. These five points are easily remembered using the acrostic: TULIP.

Five Points - like amazon.com ratings... only not.

Total Depravity - All humankind are fallen because Adam sinned and they are descendants of Adam. Mankind will not choose God of his own power. This point proves that sinners cannot save themselves.

Unconditional Election - Because it is God who saves sinners, the decision of who He will save is entirely His. He doesn't save anyone based on anything in the person (neither inherent in them nor forseen response to His grace).

Limited (or Definite) Atonement - God chose who He would save. He sent Jesus to die for those people. This is a note about the intended scope/efficaciousness of Jesus' death, not it's value. If God had chosen to save everyone in the world, Jesus' death would have been entirely sufficient.

Irresistible (or Efficacious) Grace - Because God is the one who saves sinners, he acts in a way that the sinner cannot resist. He changes the depraved will to a regenerated will. Because God is sovereign, when he wants to change a person's will, their will is changed.

Perseverance of the Saints - Those whom God has chosen to save He will save. God's plan cannot be thwarted by the schemes of the devil nor the old flesh of a sinner whom He has chosen.

What the 5 points do not mean:

Some men have read the 5 points and concluded "If God saves men, He can do it without my help. I don't need to evangelize... in fact I don't need to do anything. If God is going to save me, he'll save me." This line of thinking expresses the thoughts of those that are known as hyper-Calvinists. This is somewhat of a mis-nomer, however, as this line of thinking is not only non-Calvinist, it is non-Christian. Recall that a Christian has Jesus as their Lord and Savior. If a person believes that their responsibility to evangelize (or even have Jesus as Lord of their life) is nullified, that person is not a Christian.

Some people take Calvinism to mean that they are robots and that people aren't able to do what they want to. I've heard that the expression "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" was first said by someone who disagreed with Calvinists for this reason. A common scenario is theorized where someone might really want to please God, but because they are not part of God's elect they will be eternally condemned. I can understand that this would be a very bleak picture of God. God, though, has not left us without light on this particular theorized scenario.

10 as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; 11 no one understands; no one seeks for God. 12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”

Fitting with the idea of Total Depravity, God tells us that no one seeks after Him. Apart from God regenerating a person's will to enable them to, "no one seeks after God." So, this hypothetical objection to Calvinism is proven to be invalid. I'll note that this may not match what we see. There are often many people who appear to want to please God, but for one reason or another, seem to fall away. I believe these people have these appearances but not true faith. Remember that men can see fruit and judge by appearances, but God judges the heart.

Unity in Mission in the Godhead

I am a Calvinist and I believe in the Trinity. I believe the 5 points demonstrate a unity among the 3 persons of God. Unconditional Election means that God the Father chose a people to love whom He would redeem unto Himself. Limited (or Definite) Atonement means that God the Son loved, lived for, and died for those same people. Efficacious Grace means that God the Holy Spirit draws these same ones to repent of their sins and have faith in Jesus Christ. There is profound unity in the Trinity. God is indeed the God who saves.

Imagine the alternative: If God chose men based on what he foresaw, or worse, did not choose men at all, he basically set out a way for men to come to Him and waited for them to do so. He would only love men when they first love Him. This seems quite the inverse of 1 John 4:19.

1 John 4:
19 We love because he first loved us.

Furthermore, if Jesus' death is for everyone, then what truly decides if they are saved is not what He has done, but whether they accept it or not. Instead of "Jesus saving His people from their sins" it would best be described as "Jesus enabling people who chose Him to save themselves from their sins".

Perhaps worst of all, if the Holy Spirit's job is to draw men to God, and He equally distributes grace to all men toward repentance and faith, then He is a failure. If God is trying to save all men, then either all men will be saved or God is failing. Now, God does tell us His revealed will that we are to evangelize to all men:

1 Timothy 2:
3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

God's revealed will is that all men should be saved. This is the goal that we as men should shoot for because we don't know whom He has chosen. His secret will is to save those whom He has chosen.

Applying the Label

I am a five-point Calvinist. As a summary of reasons why and how predestination makes sense, and how to understand that God saves sinners, I think the five points are incredibly helpful. At the very core, Calvinism lets God be God. It elevates God in His supremacy. It also puts man in his place. It reminds me that I am ever a debtor to God and His grace shown to me. If I was once a child of wrath but now am a son of God, then I cannot point to myself and say, "look what a great person I am." God is the one who has made me who I am, and if he saved a wretch like me, then I can and will proclaim the gospel boldly to all men regardless of how clean or wretched they look on the outside. It will be for them what it has been for me: the grace of God alone that saves men from their sins.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Belief in the Invisible God

God is invisible. I suppose I should say that God chooses not to show himself. If God wanted to show himself, he surely could. When we say that God is invisible, it is in no way a slight against His power... in fact, it underscores it.

Exodus 33:
18 Moses said, “Please show me your glory.” 19 And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The Lord.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. 20 But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.”

God is so utterly different from mankind, so much more powerful, so much more intense, so much more... well, just more... that man would die if God were to fully reveal Himself to him. God also does not give us images to see Him. In fact, he commands that we not create images with which to worship Him.

Exodus 20:
4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands [2] of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Leviticus 19:
4 Do not turn to idols or make for yourselves any gods of cast metal: I am the Lord your God.

When my wife and I go to see a movie based on a book we've read, I usually enjoy it. My wife, however, gets annoyed. "That's not how it happened in the book." This has always been the case. The movie is never the same as the book. There are good reasons for this... sometimes the words of the book leave room for ambiguity, to leave room for the reader to ponder, yet in a movie it is hard to leave ambiguity. Most often, the book has so much detail that a verbatim movie would be so long audiences would lose interest. This illustrates the negative side of images used in worship. God is so much more than than we can comprehend, that any image created by us would be an epic failure at portraying God.

There is a positive side of images used in worship (I do not mean positive as in "good", I only mean it like "added"). Once my wife and I have seen a book turned movie a few times, we both find that the movie heavily influences the way we read the book. For instance, when I read the 6th Harry Potter book, The Half Blood Prince, I see in my mind Ron as Rupert Gint and Harry as Daniel Radcliffe. Even the character Dudley, who in the books is a blonde, is burned into my mind as being the dark haired Harry Melling. When my wife reads to me on long car trips, the voice she reads for Hagrid matches the actor, Robbie Coltrane's (my wife does a great impression, I might add). This illustrates the point that images in worship sometimes introduce or "add" notions that aren't there. They might cause someone to be "blinded" by what they see or have seen.

Spiritual blindness is truly the matter at hand. To be blind of something is to not see it. This is, perhaps, the antithesis of faith. Faith is knowing of things which cannot be seen with natural senses. It is agreement that these things exist. It is also trusting, or a steadfast assurance in those things.

Hebrews 11:
11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

I think this gets to a very fundamental theological point. Although God could reveal himself in a way that is undeniable, He has chosen to reveal Himself in ways which are subtle. God hasn't recently caused the sun to stand still in the sky, or to flood the entirety of the earth. Instead, He relates to His people through revelation and faith. Consider this: Jesus performed miracles before large crowds. There were some who saw them and believed, while there were some who saw them and did not. Some responded in faith and saw Jesus for who He really was.

Colossians 1:
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

God's revelation of himself is like this. Two people might read the bible and one respond in faith and the other not. Faith is crucial to having a relationship with the invisible God. When I say that God is invisible, I do not mean that He does or has not revealed Himself or conveyed truths through things which are visible. The bible is one example. The sacraments are another: God conveys spiritual truths through the sacraments. Baptism visibly represents the washing away of sin (something which is invisible). Circumcision visibly represented for Israel the cutting away of their hardness of heart. The Lord's Supper, or Eucharist, is something that can be seen, touched, tasted, and smelled, but it points to Jesus's sacrificial death on the cross which is not physically seen, touched, tasted, nor smelled today.

Incidentally, I agree with scripture that Jesus is the image of the invisible God. Some have made statues and paintings of Jesus. Such actions should give God-fearing people serious pause. God the son chose to take on a human body and become flesh. This was God's act of self-revelation. It would seem a great error to take the Mona Lisa to a Kinko's, print off a black and white 8 1/2" x 11", and hang it on my wall. Doing so is no service to Mona, and shows no respect to Leonardo Da Vinci. We should guard against idolatry. Indeed, it seems that some have elevated bread and wine to the position of Jesus Himself. I won't get into all the arguments for why they would believe this, but I will state firmly that if the bread and wine are not God, but are worshipped as if they were, those worshiping and teaching the error will one day answer to the invisible God on charges of idolatry.

1 John 3:
2 Beloved, we are God's children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears [1] we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is.

I charge those reading this, as I do myself, to rely on the invisible God by faith. I've heard of someone saying, "I've had lots of friends that have died. I don't hear any of them coming back to tell me how great heaven is." I'm saddened by this person's loss, but moreso for their lack of faith. Someone has come back from the dead: Jesus Christ. He has told us in the bible and through the preaching of the word what we must believe to go to heaven. Do we believe Him? Do we serve Him? Do we have hope in the invisible God? If not, the best hope we could have is that He does not exist.