THE GUTTERS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD ("Freedom in Christ" vs "Legalism"
By my observation, there are two main camps, regarding the issue of legalism:
On the right there are those who believe that obedience to Jesus' commandments is more or less optional, and automatic---that if one is a true Christian, he or she will just automatically obey God, because he or she wants to, and because he or she is so thankful to God for saving him or her.
Unfortunately, these beliefs do not agree with what the Bible teaches, (or with what reality proves).
We can choose not to obey Jesus---we have that "freedom"; we can keep the commands we want as we want to, when we want to, and disregard or change the ones we don't like or that aren't convenient to our own desires or ambitions (as so many Christians do), justifying it however we may---but there are consequences: Not just the chastening of the Lord, or the potential to forfeit our salvation if we persist in deliberate sin against Him--which the Scriptures teach that we can do--but also the loss of eternal rewards, of spiritual blessings in the here and now, and a poor relationship with the Lord.
The Bible simply doesn't teach that Christians effortlessly or automatically obey God; and reality proves otherwise to anyone who is honest. We do have the God-given desire to please Him, but we still have to choose to obey---daily---and that choice often requires self-denial and doing things that we'd rather not; and sometimes it requires much prayer and personal struggle and pain.
No honest Christian would say that he or she always wants to obey God or choose what pleases Him---or is even concerned with what pleases Him much of the time, in the case of many Christians, unfortunately. (Evidence: They don't even bother to read their Bibles to find out what He actually commands or desires; or if they do, and they don't care for what it says, they skip around it or twist it, and just don't do it.)
Not to be unduly cynical, but a lot of the Christians of this camp (the anti-legalist, "free-in-Christ" camp) are really living to please themselves, because they don't think God's commands are that important; they're just helpful hints, with no serious consequences for not keeping them. They focus on the scriptures that allow them to live the way they want to, and overlook or try to change or make excuses for not living the others. And their preoccupation with and emphasis on their "freedom" in Christ is contrary to what the New Testament teaches.
We are not "free" in Christ; we were bought with a price. We have a Master. A loving one, and a kind one, but a Master nonetheless, to whom we must each give an account, and who we are supposed to be living to please and to glorify; and there are serious consequences for not obeying Him.
A curious irony of this position is that the very Christians who will call you "judgmental" for honestly and lovingly pointing out the fact that they're not living according to the teachings of the New Testament will tell you that Christians who choose to sin aren't really Christians.
So somehow (according to these), it's judgmental to tell someone to obey the Lord, but it's not judgmental to decide who is saved and who isn't based on whether or not they sin?
All Christians sin sometimes, and all Christians can choose to sin. How much sin does it take to be a "fake" Christian? A few flirts with pornography in secret now and then? Or even a secret addiction to it? A couple of fights with a spouse? Being in credit card debt for too long?
Where is this jury of sinless "true" Christians who decides who is "fake" and who isn't based on whether they sin or not? Because (according to these) true Christians don't choose to sin, or to continue in sin of some kind even when they know it's wrong---like gluttony or pornography. They always obey the Lord, because they just love Him so much, and are so thankful for eternal life; and because it's natural and automatic.
So you're "free" in Christ to be everything but human. Because if you sin, you're fake. (But if you insist upon obedience to the Lord, you're a judgmental, hypocritical legalist.) "No need to be so concerned about obedience, just enjoy your freedom in Christ. But don't sin; because if you do, you'll prove that you're not really saved. And don't talk about sin either, because it makes us uncomfortable."
(Well, according to the Bible it's whether we have the Spirit of God living in us that determines whether we are truly born-again or not, which God knows, and which each of us must know about ourselves---not whether a person ever sins or is living the way we think they should.)
And then, on the left, are the people who are orthodox about things that aren't Scriptural, or who want Christians to keep the law of Moses (which is only for unsaved Jews). "We must obey God," they say; and then they point you to the ten commandments and the rest of the Mosaic law.
(We have the ten commandments, but they're not in the Old Testament, but in the New, as Jesus amplified them and gave them to Christians. If we were to keep the ten commandments as they are written in the Old Testament, we would be breaking the commands of Christ in the New. We could commit mental adultery, as long as we didn't engage in the physical kind. We could be idolaters in heart by being covetous so long as we didn't worship a physical idol. We could be angry with and insult our brother as long as we didn't physically murder him.)
Or they insist upon calling God by a certain Hebrew name, or using a particular version of the Bible, or on rituals and special clothes and special days, or man-made traditions and doctrines; and they put religion in the place of God-given faith in disputable matters and how to apply His commands to our lives; and they tell you that you can and must be sinless, or have to work your way into heaven to be saved, as various religions of the world teach.
Both sides are wrong.
(Stick to the teachings of the New Testament, obey Jesus with an honest and good heart, set your heart to do what pleases Him, daily, and you'll be neither unduly or unrighteously legalistic nor foolishly free.
)
By my observation, there are two main camps, regarding the issue of legalism:
On the right there are those who believe that obedience to Jesus' commandments is more or less optional, and automatic---that if one is a true Christian, he or she will just automatically obey God, because he or she wants to, and because he or she is so thankful to God for saving him or her.
Unfortunately, these beliefs do not agree with what the Bible teaches, (or with what reality proves).
We can choose not to obey Jesus---we have that "freedom"; we can keep the commands we want as we want to, when we want to, and disregard or change the ones we don't like or that aren't convenient to our own desires or ambitions (as so many Christians do), justifying it however we may---but there are consequences: Not just the chastening of the Lord, or the potential to forfeit our salvation if we persist in deliberate sin against Him--which the Scriptures teach that we can do--but also the loss of eternal rewards, of spiritual blessings in the here and now, and a poor relationship with the Lord.
The Bible simply doesn't teach that Christians effortlessly or automatically obey God; and reality proves otherwise to anyone who is honest. We do have the God-given desire to please Him, but we still have to choose to obey---daily---and that choice often requires self-denial and doing things that we'd rather not; and sometimes it requires much prayer and personal struggle and pain.
No honest Christian would say that he or she always wants to obey God or choose what pleases Him---or is even concerned with what pleases Him much of the time, in the case of many Christians, unfortunately. (Evidence: They don't even bother to read their Bibles to find out what He actually commands or desires; or if they do, and they don't care for what it says, they skip around it or twist it, and just don't do it.)
Not to be unduly cynical, but a lot of the Christians of this camp (the anti-legalist, "free-in-Christ" camp) are really living to please themselves, because they don't think God's commands are that important; they're just helpful hints, with no serious consequences for not keeping them. They focus on the scriptures that allow them to live the way they want to, and overlook or try to change or make excuses for not living the others. And their preoccupation with and emphasis on their "freedom" in Christ is contrary to what the New Testament teaches.
We are not "free" in Christ; we were bought with a price. We have a Master. A loving one, and a kind one, but a Master nonetheless, to whom we must each give an account, and who we are supposed to be living to please and to glorify; and there are serious consequences for not obeying Him.
A curious irony of this position is that the very Christians who will call you "judgmental" for honestly and lovingly pointing out the fact that they're not living according to the teachings of the New Testament will tell you that Christians who choose to sin aren't really Christians.
So somehow (according to these), it's judgmental to tell someone to obey the Lord, but it's not judgmental to decide who is saved and who isn't based on whether or not they sin?
All Christians sin sometimes, and all Christians can choose to sin. How much sin does it take to be a "fake" Christian? A few flirts with pornography in secret now and then? Or even a secret addiction to it? A couple of fights with a spouse? Being in credit card debt for too long?
Where is this jury of sinless "true" Christians who decides who is "fake" and who isn't based on whether they sin or not? Because (according to these) true Christians don't choose to sin, or to continue in sin of some kind even when they know it's wrong---like gluttony or pornography. They always obey the Lord, because they just love Him so much, and are so thankful for eternal life; and because it's natural and automatic.
So you're "free" in Christ to be everything but human. Because if you sin, you're fake. (But if you insist upon obedience to the Lord, you're a judgmental, hypocritical legalist.) "No need to be so concerned about obedience, just enjoy your freedom in Christ. But don't sin; because if you do, you'll prove that you're not really saved. And don't talk about sin either, because it makes us uncomfortable."
(Well, according to the Bible it's whether we have the Spirit of God living in us that determines whether we are truly born-again or not, which God knows, and which each of us must know about ourselves---not whether a person ever sins or is living the way we think they should.)
And then, on the left, are the people who are orthodox about things that aren't Scriptural, or who want Christians to keep the law of Moses (which is only for unsaved Jews). "We must obey God," they say; and then they point you to the ten commandments and the rest of the Mosaic law.
(We have the ten commandments, but they're not in the Old Testament, but in the New, as Jesus amplified them and gave them to Christians. If we were to keep the ten commandments as they are written in the Old Testament, we would be breaking the commands of Christ in the New. We could commit mental adultery, as long as we didn't engage in the physical kind. We could be idolaters in heart by being covetous so long as we didn't worship a physical idol. We could be angry with and insult our brother as long as we didn't physically murder him.)
Or they insist upon calling God by a certain Hebrew name, or using a particular version of the Bible, or on rituals and special clothes and special days, or man-made traditions and doctrines; and they put religion in the place of God-given faith in disputable matters and how to apply His commands to our lives; and they tell you that you can and must be sinless, or have to work your way into heaven to be saved, as various religions of the world teach.
Both sides are wrong.
(Stick to the teachings of the New Testament, obey Jesus with an honest and good heart, set your heart to do what pleases Him, daily, and you'll be neither unduly or unrighteously legalistic nor foolishly free.
)