What is Legalism? And Why Is It Anti-Christ?

If you asked someone, “Are most people you know self-centered?” (Or you could name any other of a dozen sins). They will undoubtedly answer “Yes!” If you ask them “Are you self-centered?”, they will answer “Absolutely not! I am a very caring and unselfish person.” Human nature, as Jesus so aptly put it, is to see the splinters in our neighbor’s eye, but not see the 2×4 sticking out of our own eye.

Legalism is the same way. Everyone you talk to knows it’s bad, and that it’s a widespread destructive disease within Christianity, but you will never talk to a person who says, “I’m a legalist.” It’s always the church or the Christian across the street that is legalistic.

So what is legalism?

Simply put, legalism is set of religious beliefs and practices that is based on a system of law (usually euphemised as “moral law”). It’s an important distinction that these laws are almost exclusively “negative laws” — that is to say naming things you cannot do. Common examples are: you can’t eat pork, you can’t drink alcohol, you can’t use tobacco, you can’t gamble, you can’t have same sex relationships, you can’t have an abortion, etc.

So what’s wrong with having laws?

1. They are man-made laws claiming to be God’s laws. It is idolatry.

2. They are used to control people. Religious people make laws that they have no problem keeping, which makes them feel like the righteous ones and gives them the authority to issues edicts of punishment over those who break the laws.

3. They work contrary to God’s revealed plan of SAVING PEOPLE. That’s why it’s called a “plan of salvation.” Laws do not save anyone. All you have to do is look at our drug laws, the prohibition era, or drunk driving laws. Laws don’t prevent whatever behavior you outlaw, laws simply give you a basis for punishing people who do those behaviors. Legalism then, turns the church into a rod of punishment rather than an instrument of salvation.

So how is legalism anti-Christ?

1. It invalidates the word of Christ. Jesus said, “My yoke is easy and my burden is light.” He only had two commands we needed to keep: “love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself.” Legalism says, “No that’s not true.” Legalism calls Jesus a liar. On the one hand it’s much easier for a person to omit certain “sins” that they aren’t inclined to, than it is to love their black or Muslim neighbor like their own family member, or instead of buying that new boat or vacation home, using that money to feed the poor or provide shelter for the homeless or medical care for the sick.

2. It invalidates the work of Christ. The New Testament books of Romans, Galatians and Hebrews, especially, declare in uncertain terms that the law and grace are incompatible. That is to say that grace came to take the place of law. Romans clearly states that the purpose of the law was merely to condemn us (see point #3 above) and that the death of Christ satisfied the punishments of the law, making the law unnecessary and opening a way to God through the righteousness of Christ. We are saved by grace and that not of ourselves. It is not grace AND… The Galatian letter says those who are adding legal requirements have trampled the blood of Christ and made his death of no effect. They are putting themselves under condemnation again. We will either stand condemned by the law or we will stand saved by grace. There is no third option.

So what does that mean for me?

It means you need to reject the spirit of anti-Christ wherever you find it, even if you find it in a church. If your church or the so-called “Christians” you associate with, are focused primarily on a list of bad things they think people shouldn’t be doing (abortion, gay marriage, drinking, dancing, smoking, etc.) and yet you find they are guilty of far worse sins — tolerating/supporting racism, the oppression of the poor, immigrants, and refugees, aren’t actively involved in serving the poor, fighting for social justice, and so on; that should be a HUGE RED FLAG for you that you need to leave that association and find a body of believers that are actively involved in being an instrument of salvation and restoration.

Satan masquerades as an angel of light. There are many who call themselves Christian who are messengers of Satan intent on destroying the work of Christ. We need to have the discernment to recognize the difference and not be found to be enemies of Christ. Christ only has two laws: Love God and Love Your Neighbor. Christ’s laws don’t condemn anyone. Christ’s laws don’t bring punishment to anyone. They bring healing, restoration and reconciliation to a broken and hurting world. That is what we who call ourselves by His name are to be about. By their fruits you will recognize them.

What if Christianity were, well, more Christian?

I ran across one of the better articles I’ve ever read on evangelical Christianity today.  Forget the evangelical label, it’s an article about what how Christianity should be defined and displayed in our world.  Emphasis on should, because this picture is a far cry from the version of Christianity that most Americans have come to see.

I want to share this one small excerpt from his segment on the beauty of Christian love.  This could be an exposition or commentary on 1 Corinthians 13.  Actually, it is, whether the author intended it or not.  I wonder how it would change our thinking if we use the ideas he shares here as the colored glasses through which we view all our social differences — immigrants and foreigners, people of other races, languages, or skin colors, people of other religions (Judaism, Islam, Atheism), and so on.  What if LOVE, as the author describes it below, dictated how we think about, feel about, and interact with every human being we meet.  It would be revolutionary! World-changing!

Love allows us to regard the brother in a foreign land as more than someone for whom things must be done but as one from whom wisdom can be learned. In other words, can we say, “I see that you are different from me” without feeling a need to say, “You must become like me”? Love delights that we can. Love allows us to look past labels and see the “other” and to recognize in them someone very much like myself. In other words, might we say, “You and I are from different tribes” while simultaneously celebrating that people from every tribe will one day be gathered before the throne of God? Love admits that we may.

The author goes on to say,

I am not suggesting that our differences do not matter. Nor am I suggesting that all beliefs, practices, or understandings are equally valid. They are not. There is truth and there is falsehood, and all sorts of shades in between. But we cannot with credibility proclaim a gospel of love and grace if we are not people of love and grace. We dare not offer a God of reconciliation and peace if we are persistently unwilling to be agents of reconciliation and makers of peace. My own beliefs likely do not align perfectly with truth as God understands it. But he loves me anyway, and continually invites me into deeper truth. And he asks me to offer the same grace to others.

Read the full article here:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2016/february-web-only/better-way-to-be-evangelical.html

Who’s My Brother?

On an almost daily basis, I see these types of inspirational articles show up in the media. Great and courageous stories of people sacrificing to relieve the unimaginable suffering of millions of refugees.

One would expect Christians to be at the forefront of these efforts (Americans at least), instead it’s Israelis, Greeks, Spaniards, Canadians and French — atheists, Jews, and many more of undetermined faith identity.

This all reminds me of a poem I wrote some 30 years ago, which in hindsight seems that it was written just for this occasion:

The True Brother  

I fought with one in battle
who spoke of mighty deeds.
I thought he was my brother
for he understood my creeds.

But when wounded in the battle
I looked to him in need.
He just quoted me his doctrine
and left me there to bleed.

Another chanced by later
who pulled me from the fray.
He wore a different uniform,
but he saved my life that day.

He didn’t speak my language
or understand my creeds,
but I knew I’d met my brother
for he did my Father’s deeds.

“By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” –John 13:35

Shocked and Offended by Comparison of Christianity to Extremism

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook yesterday:

I replied politely that perhaps if he were to consider more objectively the “God and Guns” movement that’s sweeping the nation, he would better understand the attitudes the president is alluding to.

He deleted my comment.

I then shared this photo with him:

 

He deleted the photo.  So I shared these photos:

 

 

 

He deleted all of them and blocked me from commenting or communicating on his Facebook page again.

This man is not only a friend I’ve known for over 30 years, he’s a former pastor and currently a superintendent in a large denominational evangelical church.

This epitomizes the current state of Christianity.  Not only do we not want to dialogue about issues, we are going to tell you how it should be and you’re going to listen because we are basically God (that is I’m God’s appointed spokesperson).  And if I’m wrong and you try to bother me with facts we are going to dispose of you, whether than means killing you, imprisoning you, or just cutting off all communication with you.

I still call myself Christian.  Every day I’m more and more embarrassed to do so.  This does not represent the Jesus I discovered in scripture, and it certainly doesn’t embody the “God is love” ideal that attracted me to the faith.

I keep hanging on to the hope that a group of Christians will rise up and rally behind the call to be the arms of Jesus embracing the world with the love of God, but every day I lose a little more hope of that ever happening.  Today I lost a lot more hope.

 

Tori Johnson: Gay Hero of Sydney Hostage Crisis

James Peron recently posted an article where he discusses the heroic actions of a gay man, Tori Johnson, who sacrificed his life to end the hostage situation in Sydney and allow his fellow hostages to escape.

The article is interesting—and worthy of discussion—for a number of reasons. First, rather than a discussion of one man’s heroic action, it’s a collage portraying the heroic actions of several gay men in recent history. I’m ok with this. For those in society who are stigmatized, negatively profiled, and traditionally have to deal with the effects of public suspicion, criticism, harmful stereotyping, and so on (whether it be gays, blacks, Muslims or Mexicans), it’s important to share these stories and remind the public that these people are also patriots, heroes and social contributors.

That being said, I don’t think it’s fair or helpful to try to portray any of these groups as better than they are, or as better than anyone else. The real point to be made is that they are the same as you and I. The fact that someone is gay or Muslim, or Hispanic, is incidental. There are white, gay, and Muslim criminals. There are white, gay, and Muslim heroes. Rich people, poor people, intelligent people, talented people, handicapped people, and every other social sub-grouping you can imagine is made up of all sorts of people—white, gay, Muslim, Hispanic and otherwise.

Tori Johnson was a hero who just happened to be gay. Actually, he may have preferred that his sexual orientation not be a part of the story, but I do think it’s important that people be loved and appreciated for the entirety of who they are; so, yes, Tori Johnson was a gay hero—and that’s an important story.

Now, whether Tori Johnson was a second class citizen is another question. He certainly died without fundamental human and civil equalities being afforded him, and that is a shame. However, I find of equal importance the discussion of the suffering from social stigma these men often endured—the excommunication from family and friends, social stigma and isolation, the accompanying depression and symptoms of severe emotional pain. All of this considered together is shamefully intolerable and completely unacceptable.

As a Christian, I do believe in good and evil. I believe there are “sins” to be avoided and “virtues” to be gained. I believe committing adultery against one’s spouse is a sin. I believe giving to the poor is a virtue. I believe lying to damage someone’s character is a sin. I believe offering hope and encouragement to others is a virtue. However, I know people who fall in both categories.  Quite honestly, all of us are a mixture of virtues and vices. In fact, one of the fundamental defining principles of Christianity is that “all have sinned.” “There is none righteous, no not one.” If Christianity teaches anything, it teaches that humans are equal. We are all in the same boat. Even if I define this, that, or the other as “sin”, that affords us no basis for treating another human being with anything other than love, respect and dignity—for I too am a sinner.

Where I part ways with the author is when he says,

If [Prime Minister] Abbot wishes to honor the heroism of Tori Johnson he should push for marriage equality.

I couldn’t disagree more. That’s the worst reason ever given for passing any law. They should pass an equality law only because it’s the right thing to do. That’s the only reason to ever pass a law—because it’s just. We don’t (and shouldn’t) pass laws to honor people.

Now, in fairness, whether a gay marriage bill should be passed is a separate issue. All people deserve love, respect and dignity. Whether they should have the legal freedom to engage in certain preferred activities is a completely separate question, and if certain freedoms are denied does not necessarily make them “second class citizens” in the sense the social stigmas do.

For example, hypothetically, if a former marine who was decorated in combat, served on a Seal team that apprehended major terrorists, and later died in heroic action saving a family from a burning building, and during the inquiry into the heroic marine’s life it was discovered that he was into bestiality or that he had a romantic relationship with a 12-year-old girl, would this author recommend that we pass laws to recognize and legalize marriages to one’s favorite pet or to underage children in order to honor this marine? Doubtful—unless he’s insane. But this marine would still deserve his honor for his unselfish and heroic actions. He would deserve to be loved as a human being—albeit, like the rest of us, a “sinful” human being.

Here’s the thing: the “marriage” issue is really a two-pronged issue. On the one hand, marriage is a long-standing “religious” institution, which is why marriages are traditionally performed in churches. The religious elements find same-sex marriage to be in direct conflict with their religious values and thus oppose inclusion. Many ministers make no distinction between man-man marriages and man-beast marriages, or man-child marriages for that matter. A “marriage” can only be between an adult man and an adult woman. As an equal rights supporter, I’m fine with not messing with religious tradition.

The second prong of this “marriage” issue is the social contract—what the state recognizes. Are community property laws going to apply? Can you get joint filing status and tax benefits associated with other life-partnerships (traditional marriages)?

This is the issue that needs addressed. If the church doesn’t want to perform a ceremony for a same-sex couple, they shouldn’t have to; but if a couple is willing to sign a lifetime commitment contract, the state should be willing to recognize that life-partnership and afford them the same equality under the law that traditional couples receive. But the state should do this because it’s right, just and fair—not to honor Tori Johnson or anyone else.

More importantly, whether or not the state ever does the right thing, we who hope to fancy ourselves as “good” people—Christians especially—should treat every human being with the same love, dignity and respect that we want to be treated with, because at the cross the ground is level.