Comments on: A Good Definition of Legalism http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/ Changed into the same image Fri, 11 May 2012 09:09:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Joe Eger http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-2355 Joe Eger Sat, 18 Dec 2010 16:43:41 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-2355 The issue is the difference between salvation and faithfulness. Once a person is condemned as a sinner--he has sinned--he falls under the penalty of the law which is the death penalty. How are they then saved from that penalty? The answer is that it is only by the grace of God--the favor of God--that we are saved. The condition of that grace being extended is by the "pistis" "assurance of good faith" that the supplicant makes to the court of God. If we had been completely faithful in the beginning, there would have been no need for grace or favor of God. We would not have needed a Savior. However, as St. Paul states, "none has lived up to God's expectations of faithfulness." Therefore we need a savior. Having sinned we cannot "unsin" ourselves by good works. We remain under the original death penalty until it is taken care of. God taking care of the penalty by His grace--takes our pledge of fealty--faithfulness--to Him as a guarantee. If we fail in our faithfulness to His expectation, "I would that you sin not," we are once again in danger of coming under the penalty. Jesus told the woman in adultery to go and stop sinning unless another bad thing comes on her. Our faithfulness in keeping God's expectation is wrongly call salvation by works. Once we have had our position with God reestablished (saved), we are expected to keep the King's law. No salvation by works, just faithfully keeping the will of God after His mercy is given to us. Joe The issue is the difference between salvation and faithfulness.

Once a person is condemned as a sinner–he has sinned–he falls under the penalty of the law which is the death penalty. How are they then saved from that penalty?

The answer is that it is only by the grace of God–the favor of God–that we are saved. The condition of that grace being extended is by the “pistis” “assurance of good faith” that the supplicant makes to the court of God.

If we had been completely faithful in the beginning, there would have been no need for grace or favor of God. We would not have needed a Savior. However, as St. Paul states, “none has lived up to God’s expectations of faithfulness.” Therefore we need a savior.

Having sinned we cannot “unsin” ourselves by good works. We remain under the original death penalty until it is taken care of.

God taking care of the penalty by His grace–takes our pledge of fealty–faithfulness–to Him as a guarantee. If we fail in our faithfulness to His expectation, “I would that you sin not,” we are once again in danger of coming under the penalty. Jesus told the woman in adultery to go and stop sinning unless another bad thing comes on her.

Our faithfulness in keeping God’s expectation is wrongly call salvation by works. Once we have had our position with God reestablished (saved), we are expected to keep the King’s law.

No salvation by works, just faithfully keeping the will of God after His mercy is given to us.

Joe

]]> By: Tommy http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-2343 Tommy Mon, 29 Nov 2010 02:53:08 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-2343 Excellent Joe, I totally agree, the gate is narrow, and those who enter it must follow and obey Christ, not in any way to earn our salvation, BUT because we love Him above all else. Love in Christ, Tommy Excellent Joe, I totally agree, the gate is narrow, and those who enter it must follow and obey Christ, not in any way to earn our salvation, BUT because we love Him above all else.
Love in Christ,
Tommy

]]> By: Tyler Johnson http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-2339 Tyler Johnson Sun, 21 Nov 2010 19:08:40 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-2339 Christ is our Life. If your theology stops at the notion of a God who gives us a way to live and expects us to do it then-good luck. Already tried that, like amny others, and we have failed. Christ is Christianity. It's only one Person who can do it and so for us to be Christian we need Him to do it through us. Grace is Christ in us enabling us to live Jesus' Life. If it we think it is of our own working without Grace (Pelagianism) then, trust me, God will do whatever it takes to bring you to the end of yourself, the law and sin. I believe we are truly dead to all three. Now can a Christian, living by Grace, mess things up. For sure. Not because sin is alive in them or they don't trust Jesus anymore...it's just that we can all choose not to live by our Spirit Union with Christ. This is goofy of course. But it can happen. We don't fall out of Grace...we fall right on His lap - Praise Jesus! To sum up here I believe our Life is Christ. To live is Christ as Paul said. Paul also said, "It is no longer I who live but Christ in me" (Gal. 2.20). We will follow the moral law and love as Christ does only through submitting to Him to do so. Otherwise we get caught up in ourselves and what we do instead of letting Him do what He does - through us, in us and as us. Christ is our Life. If your theology stops at the notion of a God who gives us a way to live and expects us to do it then-good luck. Already tried that, like amny others, and we have failed. Christ is Christianity. It’s only one Person who can do it and so for us to be Christian we need Him to do it through us.
Grace is Christ in us enabling us to live Jesus’ Life. If it we think it is of our own working without Grace (Pelagianism) then, trust me, God will do whatever it takes to bring you to the end of yourself, the law and sin. I believe we are truly dead to all three.
Now can a Christian, living by Grace, mess things up. For sure. Not because sin is alive in them or they don’t trust Jesus anymore…it’s just that we can all choose not to live by our Spirit Union with Christ. This is goofy of course. But it can happen. We don’t fall out of Grace…we fall right on His lap – Praise Jesus!
To sum up here I believe our Life is Christ. To live is Christ as Paul said. Paul also said, “It is no longer I who live but Christ in me” (Gal. 2.20).
We will follow the moral law and love as Christ does only through submitting to Him to do so. Otherwise we get caught up in ourselves and what we do instead of letting Him do what He does – through us, in us and as us.

]]> By: to domain name http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-1631 to domain name Mon, 03 May 2010 11:02:44 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-1631 <strong>hi guys...</strong> hi guysI would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well and i have start my own blog now, , thanks for your effort... hi guys…

hi guysI would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well and i have start my own blog now, , thanks for your effort…

]]> By: joe cotroneo http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-1566 joe cotroneo Sat, 03 Apr 2010 20:16:28 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-1566 Why complicate the matter? .... it is simple What you may call the moral law is merely Jesus' commandments or sayings reference Matt 7:24-27 24.Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25.And the rain descended , and the floods came , and the winds blew , and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26.And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27.And the rain descended , and the floods came , and the winds blew , and beat upon that house; and it fell : and great was the fall of it. A good starting point would be the sermon on the mount of which these words above are our Lord's concluding remarks...the only problem is that most people have reasoned that it is not necessary to follow Jesus in these matter or not "practical" I even heard of a pastor who was convicted in this area and decided to preach the sermon on the mount and that we ought to follow it 100% He lost 1/2 his congregation in 2 weeks Didn't Jesus in Matt 7:13-14 say for us to enter in by the straight gate which leads unto life, but there are FEW that find it? And immediately therafter he goes on to preach against false prophets, I believe because he knew that many would "water down his words" or say it was not necessary to follow his sayings Do you Love Jesus? Jesus said those who love Him KEEPS His commandments John 14:21......There is NO OTHER way to Love Jesus by His own words than to OBEY Him After all this...didn't Jesus say.... Why do you call Me Lord and not do what I say? Why complicate the matter? …. it is simple

What you may call the moral law is merely Jesus’ commandments or sayings

reference Matt 7:24-27

24.Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25.And the rain descended , and the floods came , and the winds blew , and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26.And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27.And the rain descended , and the floods came , and the winds blew , and beat upon that house; and it fell : and great was the fall of it.

A good starting point would be the sermon on the mount of which these words above
are our Lord’s concluding remarks…the only problem is that most people
have reasoned that it is not necessary to follow Jesus in these matter
or not “practical”

I even heard of a pastor who was convicted in this area and decided
to preach the sermon on the mount and that we ought to follow it 100%

He lost 1/2 his congregation in 2 weeks

Didn’t Jesus in Matt 7:13-14 say for us to enter in by the straight gate
which leads unto life, but there are FEW that find it?

And immediately therafter he goes on to preach against false prophets, I
believe because he knew that many would “water down his words” or say
it was not necessary to follow his sayings

Do you Love Jesus?

Jesus said those who love Him KEEPS His commandments
John 14:21……There is NO OTHER way to Love Jesus by His own words
than to OBEY Him

After all this…didn’t Jesus say….

Why do you call Me Lord and not do what I say?

]]> By: Jim http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-834 Jim Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:15:47 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-834 I agree with you. A believer should follow after holiness, after all; God has called us onto holiness. As long as a person realizes that they can walk in the Spirit because they have been Justified and not that they are Justified on account of their holy living. For a person to think that they are in right standing with God due to their own righteousness, they would have to greatly misunderstand a large part of the NT. I notice in one of your articles that you reject semi-pelagianism. I would assume that you would reject the wellspring of semi-pelagianism as well (Pelagianism.) The reason I ask is because I thought I detected you referring to Finney in a favorable light. I followed Finney for years. My copy of his Systematic Theology is nearly worn out and so marked with underlining and notes, it's nearly unreadable. I was a Finneyite through and through. Thank God he brought me out of that, as Finney was a pure Pelagainist. Denied original sin, and based his whole system on the carnal reasoning that obligation requires ability. A philosopical concept the he called a "first truth of reason requiring no proof." He denied the atonement or that Christ actually died for anyone...he died to satisfy "public justice." Actually, Barnes wrote a whole book on the subject and bought into the "new school" theology as well. Finney denied any influence of the Holy Spirit beyond 'moral suasion", etc. He remade every major doctrine in the Bible into something out of his own convoluted logic. In the end here is where you arrive. Present entire obedience is the condition of Justification. In other words..how does this sound: total and complete current sanctification is the condition of you staying Justified. I'm sorry, the Bible says that God is just and the justifier of the UNGODLY! Justification goes before sanctification. His brand of righteousness is something accomplished by YOU, as you were always able to obey the law anyway. I could go on. This is not the gospel, it is a system of works religion that is actually another gospel. So if you are toying with Finney I caution you as someone who does have a sound grasp of what he is all about. Your site puts out the vibe that you are quite the scholar, so I hope you have considered the ramifications of Finney's Pelagianism and know what you're getting into. If I'm wrong about your affection for C.G.Finney, please forgive my presumptousness. I agree with you. A believer should follow after holiness, after all; God has called us onto holiness. As long as a person realizes that they can walk in the Spirit because they have been Justified and not that they are Justified on account of their holy living. For a person to think that they are in right standing with God due to their own righteousness, they would have to greatly misunderstand a large part of the NT. I notice in one of your articles that you reject semi-pelagianism. I would assume that you would reject the wellspring of semi-pelagianism as well (Pelagianism.) The reason I ask is because I thought I detected you referring to Finney in a favorable light. I followed Finney for years. My copy of his Systematic Theology is nearly worn out and so marked with underlining and notes, it’s nearly unreadable. I was a Finneyite through and through. Thank God he brought me out of that, as Finney was a pure Pelagainist. Denied original sin, and based his whole system on the carnal reasoning that obligation requires ability. A philosopical concept the he called a “first truth of reason requiring no proof.” He denied the atonement or that Christ actually died for anyone…he died to satisfy “public justice.” Actually, Barnes wrote a whole book on the subject and bought into the “new school” theology as well. Finney denied any influence of the Holy Spirit beyond ‘moral suasion”, etc. He remade every major doctrine in the Bible into something out of his own convoluted logic. In the end here is where you arrive. Present entire obedience is the condition of Justification. In other words..how does this sound: total and complete current sanctification is the condition of you staying Justified. I’m sorry, the Bible says that God is just and the justifier of the UNGODLY! Justification goes before sanctification. His brand of righteousness is something accomplished by YOU, as you were always able to obey the law anyway. I could go on. This is not the gospel, it is a system of works religion that is actually another gospel. So if you are toying with Finney I caution you as someone who does have a sound grasp of what he is all about. Your site puts out the vibe that you are quite the scholar, so I hope you have considered the ramifications of Finney’s Pelagianism and know what you’re getting into. If I’m wrong about your affection for C.G.Finney, please forgive my presumptousness.

]]> By: Bob Mutch http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-6 Bob Mutch Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:38:26 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-6 Hi christophmcleod; The ten commandments has one ceremonial law which is Saturday keeping. The moral law of Christ is the New Testament law. I would consider the Old Testament covenant or law (moral, ceremonial, civil) replaced by the New Testament covenant or law. Most commandments in the New Testament covenant are moral but there are some ceremonial like baptism. I don't believe that willful sin is compatible with true faith. If a Christian is willfully disobedient to a known law of Christ they no longer have true faith and need to do there first works over again and be saved. I won't says some one that goes back into sin after being saved was never saved. I hold that all Christians live a life free from willful sin. Hi christophmcleod; The ten commandments has one ceremonial law which is Saturday keeping.

The moral law of Christ is the New Testament law. I would consider the Old Testament covenant or law (moral, ceremonial, civil) replaced by the New Testament covenant or law. Most commandments in the New Testament covenant are moral but there are some ceremonial like baptism.

I don’t believe that willful sin is compatible with true faith. If a Christian is willfully disobedient to a known law of Christ they no longer have true faith and need to do there first works over again and be saved. I won’t says some one that goes back into sin after being saved was never saved.

I hold that all Christians live a life free from willful sin.

]]> By: christophmcleod http://morechristlike.com/a-good-definition-of-legalism/comment-page-1/#comment-5 christophmcleod Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:28:00 +0000 http://morechristlike.com/?p=156#comment-5 In this post you mention a couple of times "Christians must be obedient to the moral law of Christ". Two questions, 1) what is the moral law of Christ? (Ten Commandments?) 2) what do you mean by "must be obedient"? What happens if they aren't? Does that prove that they were never really children of God afterall? Does it mean they won't be able to live a life free from sin? In this post you mention a couple of times “Christians must be obedient to the moral law of Christ”. Two questions, 1) what is the moral law of Christ? (Ten Commandments?) 2) what do you mean by “must be obedient”? What happens if they aren’t? Does that prove that they were never really children of God afterall? Does it mean they won’t be able to live a life free from sin?

]]>