Legalism

[savedfromdistruction]

Legalism, what is it? There seems to be some confusion as to what it is. What constitutes legalism? I believe that because of the lack of understanding of what legalism is that most who claim to be fundamentalists are actually moderates or liberals and do not know it.

[desmalia]

There is actually a similar discussion going on in the Ask A Fundamentalist subforum that you might find interesting. Here (http://foru.ms/t5903521-what-is-the-difference.html)is a link. :)

[WannaWitness]

In my opinion, legalism means a book of rigid rules based on a personal conviction (such as women never wearing pants or cutting their hair, never using playing cards or dice, never joking or having fun, or thinking that any music style that happens to be contemporary or jazzy is "satanic"). There is a difference between fundamentalism and legalism. God does expect us to obey Him, but I can't make myself believe He expects His people to walk on pins and needles all the time to do it. It would just make us miserable, and I don't think God would want us to always be unhappy.

We want the world to see that we can be joyful while still living upright. It can be done.

[DeaconDean]

Actually, what the New Testament defines as "legalism" is as the Apostle Paul taught the Galatians, "not only is a belief in God a requirement, but the believers must also submit to Old Testament laws, as in the case of the "legalizers" who came behind Paul and taught the Galatians that not only must they believe in God but they must submit to circumcision.

This sort of thing constitues "legalism."

God Bless

Till all are one.

[WarEagle]

Legalism, what is it? There seems to be some confusion as to what it is. What constitutes legalism? I believe that because of the lack of understanding of what legalism is that most who claim to be fundamentalists are actually moderates or liberals and do not know it.

Legalism is a funny thing. The Bible defines it as requiring new converts to adhere to the law in order to be saved.

However, in moder day pop-Christianity, it means, "you said something that caused the Holy Spirit to convict me about some Unbiblical activity or belief I hold. Therefore, you're a legalist."

In a recent thread, I was called a legalist and had a moderator imply that I don't have the Holy Spirit, just because I had the gall to quote Joyce Meyer saying something heretical.

It's a joke.

In modern time, pay attention to the way people use the accusation of legalism. They will always use it to try to defend some Unbiblical act or belief.

[No Swansong]

Seems to me on this board "legalism" is any biblical precept that I think I know more about than God.

Lord knows if it feels good it must be from God and any rule, commandment etc against it must be Legalistic, and therefore not applicable.

[kobuk]

Seems to me on this board "legalism" is any biblical precept that I think I know more about than God.

Lord knows if it feels good it must be from God and any rule, commandment etc against it must be Legalistic, and therefore not applicable.
A well crafted quip jtbdad.

[DerSchweik]

Legalism is a funny thing. The Bible defines it as requiring new converts to adhere to the law in order to be saved.

However, in moder day pop-Christianity, it means, "you said something that caused the Holy Spirit to convict me about some Unbiblical activity or belief I hold. Therefore, you're a legalist."

In a recent thread, I was called a legalist and had a moderator imply that I don't have the Holy Spirit, just because I had the gall to quote Joyce Meyer saying something heretical.

It's a joke.

In modern time, pay attention to the way people use the accusation of legalism. They will always use it to try to defend some Unbiblical act or belief.
Wow, you struck a note there Wareagle - noting that legalism has taken on a new meaning in modern pop-Christianity.

I have to agree with that, inasmuch as legalism seems to have become the "accusation du-jour" for all things unpleasant for those who subscribe to the "If it feels good, believe it" neo-liberalism rampant in many modern Christian circles today.

Good point. I need to think on this more as I've run into what I have felt is a bizarre new twist to Christian debates of doctrine and theology. It has kind of gotten to the point that you simply cannot debate certain Christians anymore without being labeled a legalist. I've been taken aback numerous times, dumbfounded by the lack of reasoned thought and absence of "Berean noble-mindedness" among pop-culture Christians. Probably just my own age.

Legalism used to be the pursuit of righteousness by adhering to man's laws (often convoluted amendments to God's fundamental laws) rather than pursuing God's righteousness.

But in an era where the authority of God's Word seems to have been usurped by the caprice of pseudo spiritual self-indulgence, legalism no longer is reserved for man's laws, but now it apparently encompasses God's laws as well (at least the "negative" ones). To avoid the label of "legalist" you simply need quote no scripture but those that "edify" and "build up." No wonder Joel O is so popular.

Thanks - I need to chew on this...

[horuhe00]

Legalism is trying to live by Old Testament laws which reached their expiration date the moment Christ died on the cross.

[No Swansong]

So thou shalt not Kill, Thou shalt have no other God's before Me. Thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not covet etc all had an expiration date?

[horuhe00]

So thou shalt not Kill, Thou shalt have no other God's before Me. Thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not covet etc all had an expiration date?

Jesus sumed up the 10 Comandments into one. (Comandments, not Laws)

In Romans 4:3-5, 6:1-14, 7:1-7, Paul says that we are no longer bound by the Law. Jesus came to bring the Law into completion and begin the Era of Salvation by Grace, not Law.

If you want to still live under Leviticus 15:19, then you have to live under all of the Old Testament Laws because if you break one, you break them all.

[BigNorsk]

Yeah there's a problem that a lot of people are kind of infected with what is usually referred to as postmodernism that the only wrong is to tell someone they are wrong. You have a lot of universalists that basically believe there are many paths to salvation or that all religions, including Christianity are just morals.

But the legalists fall off the other side of the track. They make the law a part of one's justification or salvation. Many fall into an understanding that you aren't initially saved by obedience to the law but you have to obey the law after salvation or you lose your salvation. It's that old mistake of taking what was given by grace and thinking you can perfect grace with law.

It's very hard to know if someone is a legalist from the outside, because like all things, this is really a matter of the heart. And more than one who has told people for years that one is really under law when push comes to shove they contradict what they say and turn in faith to Jesus.

Someone who is in open sin will often try to call someone who points out their sin a legalist in an attempt to make the sin that of the other person and not themselves.

Marv

[Armistead]

Christ did away with the Lev. law that was given only to the jews to start with.

Christ gave us one law...he said to love others "fulfills all the law and the prophets.

The 10 commandments were not part of the lev. law, they are God's moral law, good for all time..They also abide in love...to steal, murder, ect..would break the law of love.

[horuhe00]

Christ did away with the Lev. law that was given only to the jews to start with.

Christ gave us one law...he said to love others "fulfills all the law and the prophets.

The 10 commandments were not part of the lev. law, they are God's moral law, good for all time..They also abide in love...to steal, murder, ect..would break the law of love.

:thumbsup:

[IamRedeemed]

Interesting. At least two or three people here claim that Jesus gave us "one commandment" and it was a horizontal command but nothing vertical toward God. Please study your Word more as this is very important not to miss. Jesus gave us TWO not one, commandments, the FIRST of which is vertical toward God and covers the first FOUR of the ten commandments, and the SECOND is horizontal toward others and covers the last SIX of the ten commandments.

The Two Commandments are these, and the First always supercedes the second.

1. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength.

2. Love your neighbor as yourself.

Love your neighbor as yourself does not mean what today's pop Christianity tries to make it mean either. We are not loving our neighbor when we refuse to honor God and uphold His Word because we don't want to risk offending our neighbor but we are willing that they perish. That is not loving God OR our neighbor, but rather loving ourselves.


Let's start being more JC and less PC for everyone's sake and not cause the Cross of Christ to be of no effect for
some because we were cowardly or overly tolerant not wanting to be rejected or persecuted for speaking the Truth.
Looking out for our own feelings, and worrying about what it might cost us. We couldn't pay any where near what
Christ paid even if our life was taken for telling the truth.

He who seeks his life will lose it, but he who loses his life for my sake will gain it. Love Jesus

[annie1speed]

Legalism when applied to the Old Testament or the Judaizing teachers is the belief that if you obey the Old Law ( keep the ten commandments, be circumcised, ...) that will get you to Heaven.

Legalism when applied to New Testament principles is the belief that you have to follow all the 'rules' ( be baptized, attend church regularly, don't get divorced except for a scriptural reason, .....) and do everything just right or you won't go to Heaven.

In either case, legalism is works based salvation, and in neither case will it get you to Heaven. Legalism is rules without love - without heart.

God said He would write His law on our hearts, that his children would have a circumcision of the heart, we should obey God and do His will from the heart. Not just go through life checking things off the list.

Annie

[horuhe00]

Legalism is rules without love - without heart.

God said He would write His law on our hearts, that his children would have a circumcision of the heart, we should obey God and do His will from the heart. Not just go through life checking things off the list.

Annie


I like that a lot! :)

[SlowTrainComing]

Legalism when applied to the Old Testament or the Judaizing teachers is the belief that if you obey the Old Law ( keep the ten commandments, be circumcised, ...) that will get you to Heaven.

Legalism when applied to New Testament principles is the belief that you have to follow all the 'rules' ( be baptized, attend church regularly, don't get divorced except for a scriptural reason, .....) and do everything just right or you won't go to Heaven.

In either case, legalism is works based salvation, and in neither case will it get you to Heaven. Legalism is rules without love - without heart.

God said He would write His law on our hearts, that his children would have a circumcision of the heart, we should obey God and do His will from the heart. Not just go through life checking things off the list.

Annie
A little late to this thread, but an EXCELLENT post IMO!!!!!

[horuhe00]

A little late to this thread, but an EXCELLENT post IMO!!!!!

I wrote all that? :cool:

[SlowTrainComing]

LOL...... I'm kinda stupid......

[shrewdsnake]

I see legalism as one of two things. Holding Old Testament Law as necessary for salvation and taking personal beliefs not found in Scripture and applying them as proof of salvation, fruit and being a good Christian in others.

[mlqurgw]

Legalism is looking for specific sins in others by a set of rules which you yourself don't keep. It is always judgemental. Seeing sin in others doesn't make you a legalist. Denying that you do the same does.

[FundamentalistJohn]

Are you looking for a Scriptural definition or how it is used by most people today?

Scripturally someone earlier pointed out that what makes one a legalist in the New Testament was simply requiring a believer to live as a Jew. I believe this is probably the most accurate and concise definition of legalism that we are provided with.

However it seems to me that what most people today consider legalist seems to be the implication that there are any standards. I have been called a Legalist because I called theft a sin. I have also been called a legalist because I called homosexual sex a sin, and one more example I was called a legalist because I had the nerve to state that God is Holy and he calls us to be as well. (Please note I had earlier made it clear that we would never live without sin in our lives no matter how hard we try.)

Fundamentalists will always be called legalists because although we make it clear that we believe that our salvation occurs only because of the sacrifice of Christ but we do believe that God would have us to live as Holy a life as possible.


FJ

[JSGuitarist]

Legalism--Law without grace

I know there are some people who do take their beliefs too far, but it's so easy to throw around. I do beliee that we as Christians need to hold high standards, but at the same time, we are responsible to show grace to others just as Christ has shown grace to us.

I say though that if the pharisees are the perfect model of legalism, conservative (or fundamentalist) Christians have a long way to go. Their sin was far beyond legalism; they were also hypocrites, only tried pleasing God with lip service, put heavy burdens on the backs of their followers without doing anything to help them carry it. They'd travel everywhere to find one single convert, but when they found one, they made him twice as worthy as hell as themselves. Jesus called them children of hell and broods of vipers. I personally don't know any "fundamentalists" like that, and I go to a conservative church.

[FundamentalistJohn]

Legalism--Law without grace

I think Paul would agree with that.

I know there are some people who do take their beliefs too far, but it's so easy to throw around. I do beliee that we as Christians need to hold high standards, but at the same time, we are responsible to show grace to others just as Christ has shown grace to us.

Very well said my friend.

I say though that if the pharisees are the perfect model of legalism, conservative (or fundamentalist) Christians have a long way to go. Their sin was far beyond legalism; they were also hypocrites, only tried pleasing God with lip service, put heavy burdens on the backs of their followers without doing anything to help them carry it. They'd travel everywhere to find one single convert, but when they found one, they made him twice as worthy as hell as themselves. Jesus called them children of hell and broods of vipers. I personally don't know any "fundamentalists" like that, and I go to a conservative church.


Paul said without love we are a sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. I think that this might explain what you are getting at.


FJ

[FundamentalistJohn]

By the way welcome to CF JSGuitarist!

FJ

[JSGuitarist]

By the way welcome to CF JSGuitarist!

FJ
Thank you :)

[TimRout]

I suspect, extending Paul's comments in Galatians, that legalism is a reliance on obedience to rules, rather than a reliance on God's grace.

[WannaWitness]

I think people misuse the word "legalism". What I believe it refers to is having certain convictions (common examples are choosing to be KJV-preferred or even KJV-Only, no CCM, TV, or playing cards, or thinking women should always be in dresses or skirts no matter what) and measuring one's "holiness level" on those particular standards. Having a set of rigid, often unreasonable rules, and saying people are lukewarm Christians (or not even saved) merely because they don't follow those exact rules. That's what true legalism is to me.

The word "legalism" is misused when a person living a lukewarm lifestyle (I mean truly lukewarm) uses the term to refer to a Christian who merely tries his/her best to live according to the Bible.

[contriteheart]

Practically speaking, a legalist, like a fanatic, is anyone who is more serious about a certain issue than I am! :D

[horuhe00]

I think people misuse the word "legalism". What I believe it refers to is having certain convictions (common examples are choosing to be KJV-preferred or even KJV-Only, no CCM, TV, or playing cards, or thinking women should always be in dresses or skirts no matter what) and measuring one's "holiness level" on those particular standards. Having a set of rigid, often unreasonable rules, and saying people are lukewarm Christians (or not even saved) merely because they don't follow those exact rules. That's what true legalism is to me.

The word "legalism" is misused when a person living a lukewarm lifestyle (I mean truly lukewarm) uses the term to refer to a Christian who merely tries his/her best to live according to the Bible.

:thumbsup:

[JSGuitarist]

Sometimes I'm not sure how to define it. It just sounds like a very easy word to throw around. I tithe, and I guess to some that would make me a legalist because it's "an dead old testament law that no longer applies," though I feel God wants me to do it and I am actually very anxious to give. Does this make me a legalist?

[horuhe00]

Sometimes I'm not sure how to define it. It just sounds like a very easy word to throw around. I tithe, and I guess to some that would make me a legalist because it's "an dead old testament law that no longer applies," though I feel God wants me to do it and I am actually very anxious to give. Does this make me a legalist?

Ah... but to give God his 10% was established well before the Laws. What Jesus did was replace what was achieved by the Law for Grace. That didn't cancel God's 10%. :)

[~Nikki~]

Practically speaking, a legalist, like a fanatic, is anyone who is more serious about a certain issue than I am! :D

Exactly.
A legalist is someone with a higher standard than myself, and a compromiser is someone with a 'lower' standard. :P

[~Nikki~]

Actually, my take on this is that to be legalistic is to be like a Pharisee.

What I mean by this is that they made up a whole load of extra rules as a hedge of proctection around God's law, which they put there in order to stop them breaking God's law. But the legalism part comes in when they put as much (or more) importance on their own man-made rules as they did on God's law.

So they were keeping stuff which if it is from the heart may not be a problem, but a personal conviction...yet they kept it as law and tried to force others to keep their own rules as well.

To me that is legalism.

I still believe we're supposed to follow what God says, even the bits of the OT that apply today, because God knows best and doing things the way He says will be a blessing to us. But to make up extra stuff and try and make people keep that with as much importance placed on following *my* rules as God's, well yeah, that would be legalistic.

[WannaWitness]

Actually, my take on this is that to be legalistic is to be like a Pharisee.

That's pretty much the size of it. I mean, it's fine to have a certain conviction (a common example is thinking that women should only wear dresses). It's not fine to say others are "ungodly" merely because they don't share that particular conviction. Every believer's interpretation of the Scriptures are going to differ slightly.