63 Sermon Illustrations on Legalism

Sermon, "Salty Saints in a Sick Society."

1. Leaven of the Pharisees (legalism).

2. Leaven of the Sadducees (liberalism).

3. Leaven of the Herodians (licentiousness).

Alexander Solzhenitsyn at Harvard graduation, 1978:

People in the West have acquired considerable skill in using, interpreting, and manipulating law... Any conflict is solved according to the letter of the law.

If one is right from a legal point of view, nothing more is required. Nobody may mention that one could still not be entirely right. I have spent all my life under a communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either.

Wherever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relations, there is an atmosphere of moral mediocrity, paralyzing man's noblest impulses.

Excellent article on how Matthew deals with the Old Testament law. There are five approaches:

1. Matthew thought the OT law was no longer valid.

(Either Jesus brought a new Torah or fulfilled the old.)

2. Jesus thought the law was no longer valid, but Matthew rejudaized him.

3. For Matthew, the law was only partially valid. Some commands set aside.

* 4. The law is completely valid.

* 5. The law reveals God's purpose when interpreted by a specific

hermeneutical key.

Author likes last two choices. To Matthew, the proper understanding of the law is attained through a "prophetic" reading of it that sees love and mercy as its real focus. Jesus disregarded the holiness code (some would say he abolished it) and focused on the mercy code. Matthew 8 & 9 emphasize Jesus reaching out to the impure and sinners. True righteousness is characterized by love, just as the two greatest commands of the OT focus on love.

All eight occurrences of "law" in Matthew are linked to the prophetic writings. The law cannot be understood apart from the prophets. Some laws are more important, especially those focusing on justice and mercy. Others are concessions (Deut 24:1), with God's true intent shown elsewhere -Gen 2:24.

Matthew 5:17-20

"Fulfilling the law" means Jesus affirms it (cf. Rom 13:8, Gal 5:14). A literalistic or atomistic interpretation of the law is unacceptable. Note the temptation accounts, where Jesus subordinates the word of God quoted by Satan with a more important quote. Individual texts must be placed within the larger framework of the whole of Scripture.

Matthew 5:21-48 "The Antitheses"

The prohibition of oaths does not set aside the OT law, but limits people to truth. Concerning "an eye for an eye" Jesus redirects the law to focus on the ultimate concern of the law, the love command. Whereas the lex talionis is concerned with legal rights, Jesus' teaching about the kingdom asks that people give up rights and legal satisfaction in favor of love and mercy. The question repeatedly is, "What is the law really about?" Matthew's answer is "love and mercy."

Matthew 15:1-20

Matthew doesn't have Jesus setting aside the food laws (as Mark 7:15,19 does). Matthew focuses only on eating with unwashed hands.

Is Matthew Legalistic?

Matthew 23:2-3,23 and 24:20 suggest a conformity of Jesus to the law that is hard to imagine, but is actually hyperbole. Jesus does not reject the teachers of the law but their illegitimate interpretations. He is against legalism.

Christology and the Law

Usually Christ and the law are contrasted but Matthew doesn't see Jesus and the law as antithetical. But the law is no longer the center of gravity - Jesus is. He is the one to whom the Scriptures point. Disciples gather in his name, not around the law (18:20).

"Matthew's teaching on the law is surprising. Through an equal focus on the prophets he presents Jesus as having brought about a shift in paradigms so that the law is not organized around ideas of separation and purity but around love, mercy, and justice."

What is it like to know God? Our image of God changes with who we are and

what we are experiencing. David Hazard's teacher in high school was asked

what it was like to be a Christian, and he said:

"For me, knowing God is like walking on a tightly stretched rope, high over a

bottomless chasm of blackness. Below me, I can hear screams of torment. Up

ahead of me, somewhere, I know I'll walk out into the light someday. For now,

I pray and read God's Word, and carefully put one foot in front of the other

to keep from sinning."

At the end of the school year the tension ebbed from this man and he stopped

stuttering. He totally revised his statement: "God is not a tightrope to me

anymore. Knowing God is like resting in an open field." A more inviting

image, for sure. Later, he learned that this man struggled with homosexual

temptations.

Varying approaches to what God is like:

1. The God of all comfort.

"God loves us just like we are, but he loves us too much to leave us

that way!"

To those who have been deeply hurt, a comforting God is attractive.

Carole ran away from an abusive home, fell in love with an associate

pastor and got pregnant. He accused her of trapping him and skipped

town and the baby was given up for adoption. The senior pastor said

she should never marry because her "premarital sin" would taint her

spouse. She found another church. "Sometimes it hurts so bady, I need

to know that God is just THERE for me."

2. The God who rules with rules.

Some people need lots of rules, but it can lead to legalism.

3. The God of the wilderness.

King David found God in a "dry and weary land." Sometimes we have to

block out all other things to see that God is totally sovereign.

4. The God who keeps green pastures.

Platitudes like "God protects" and "God provides" are inadequate in a

sin-torn world, but give encouragement to some.

We each know something of God, but not everything. We can learn from

different viewpoints.

#3045

*

We can block the Holy Spirit's work without realizing it.

1. Grieving the Spirit.

2. Old Testament grieving. Focuses on our response to God.

a. Forgetting God.

b. Grumbling.

c. Disobedience.

d. Disbelief.

3. New Testament grieving.

(One difference with OT is that our response to each other also grieves God.)

a. Pride.

b. Self-effort.

c. Resistance to the Spirit.

d. Hypocrisy.

e. Legalism.

4. Consequences of grieving the Spirit.

(A checklist to determine if you are grieving the Spirit)

[A sidebar follows by A.B. Simpson on more things that grieve the Spirit)

#3491

*

Sermon in Ecclesiastes series. Extremes in religion. Eccl 7:13-29

======================

DON'T BE TOO RELIGIOUS

======================

I. Does religion "work"? 7:14

A. Most come to God because they are looking for a change.

B. We assume God wants us happy.

C. Experience shows that religion doesn't always work.

II. Two dead-ends. 7:15

A. Don't be "overrighteous." 7:16

B. Since no guarantees, should we throw away restraint? 7:17

C. Avoid all extremes. 7:18

III. All have sinned. 7:20

A. No one is perfectly religious.

B. Sin touches everything you do, and are.

IV. What can we attain? 7:24

A. How close is true wisdom?

B. It is unattainable.

C. Wisdom can be revealed to us. Deut 30:9-16; Romans 10:5-11

Ron Enroth describes the characteristics of “churches on the fringe” by asking, What do these disparate groups have in common? His six answers are mindful of the kind of political control that characterizes too much of Christian leadership today:

(1) control-oriented leadership

(2) isolationist attitudes

(3) spiritual elitism

(4) lifestyle rigidity

(5) discouragement of dissent

(6) painful exit

Ronald Enroth, “Churches on the Fringe,” Eternity, October 1986, pp. 20–22.

*

The most unreasonable threat I ever made to my parents was in response to one of the things parents are always telling their children to do. Every night, right in the middle of my favorite TV program (my favorite being what was on at the moment) they would say, "Time for bed." I would usually argue. But on one particularly inspired occasion I replied, "I'll go to bed this time. But when I'm on my own, I'm staying up forever."

I have not been able to make good on that threat. But in my youthful fantasies of revenge, I planned to one day call my parents to get back at them for all their "unreasonable" rules and show them just what I could do as a man on my own. "Hello, Mom. It's 4:30 a.m. Nothing's wrong, but I just wanted to let you know I

didn't go to bed tonight. And guess what, Dad? The refrigerator door is wide open. And every light in the house is on. I played outside today in the street and I was barefooted the whole time. I didn't brush my teeth or take a bath, Mom. My room is a mess with all my clothes scattered all over the floor. I used a hammer today, Dad, and I didn't put it back where I found it. And right this minute, I'm watching TV and I'm sitting only 4 inches from the screen." That would've shown them!

Now that I am 36 and on my own, guess how many of those parental rules I break? You got it. Zero. And amazingly, I don't even want to.

Paul says mature Christians put away childish things (1 Cor. 13:11). And as we grow in Christ and let his Word richly dwell in us, we too will find we don't want to do ungodly things that we might have earlier desired. The psalmist explains, "Delight in the Lord and He will give you the desires of your heart" (Psalm 37:4). It's not that we will receive anything we can think of, it's that God will place the desires in our hearts.

--Ernie Thigpen (Spartanburg, SC)

There is no tyranny more intolerable than a conscience by love.

Like an ill-loaded gun, it recoils at the breech and kills at the

muzzle. A conscience unsubdued by love torments the owner, and

bruises those upon whom he lets it loose. - {Henry Ward

Beecher}

- James W. Cox, ed. {The Minister's Manual for 1994} (San

Francisco: Harper & Collins Publishers, 1993) 311

Shalom Auslander was raised in the largely Orthodox Jewish town of Monsey, New York. Monsey was a pretty town where everything was forbidden. One was forbidden to drive on the Sabbath, one was forbidden to take four steps without a yarmulke, one was forbidden to eat meat with dairy. Having eaten meat, one had to abstain from dairy for six hours; having eaten dairy, one had to abstain from meat for three hours. One was always forbidden to eat pig, at least until the Messiah arrived – only then, Rabbi Goldfisher taught him in the fourth grade, would the wicked be punished, the dead be resurrected, and the pigs be kosher.

The people of Monsey were terrified of God, and they taught Shalom to be terrified of Him, too. He learned that Sarah would one day laugh at God, so God made her barren; that Job, completely ruined, had asked “Why?” and God had come down to earth, taken him by the collar, and howled, “Who the heck do you think you are?”

In early autumn*, when the leaves choked, turned colors, and fell to their deaths, everyone gathered together in synagogues across the town and wondered, aloud and in unison, how God was going to kill them: “Who by water and who by fire, who by sword, who by beast, who by famine, who by thirst, who by storm, who by plague, who by strangulation and who by stoning.”

________

*i.e., on Yom Kippur

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #2379]

Louis XII, of France, had many enemies before he ascended to the

throne. When he became king, he caused a list to be made of his

persecutors, and marked against each of their names a large black

cross. When this became known, the enemies of the King fled, because

they thought it was a sign that he intended to punish them. But the

King, hearing of their fears, caused them to be recalled, with an

assurance of pardon, and said that he had put a cross beside each name

to remind him of the cross of Christ, that he might endeavor to follow

the example of Him who had prayed for His murderers, "Father, forgive

them, for they know not what they do." --Children's Friend

It is not only sinners who misinterpret the goodness of God. Too

often, legalists preach the message of the cross as if it shall be

Christ's means of destroying all who do not line up to their views and

notions. While supposedly preaching the gospel, they convey a message

of death instead of a message of forgiveness through the cross of

Christ. --Duane V. Maxey

Legalism is rooted in the nature of unsanctified men. Therefore, it

is manifested throughout both religious and secular history. In this

regard, consider point six below:

The Roman philosopher and statesman, Cicero, said this some 2,000

years ago, and it is still true. The six mistakes of man:

1. The delusion that personal gain is made by crushing others.

2. The tendency to worry about things that cannot be changed or

corrected.

3. Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot

accomplish it.

4. Refusing to set aside trivial preferences.

5. Neglecting development and refinement of the mind, and not

acquiring the habit of reading and study.

6. Attempting to compel others to believe as we do.

There's a wideness in Gods mercy

Like the wideness of the sea;

There's a kindness in His justice

Which is more than liberty.

For the love of God is broader

Than the measure of man's mind,

And the heart of the Eternal

Is most wonderfully kind.

But we make His love too narrow

By false limits of our own,

And we magnify His strictness

With a zeal He will not own.

--R. F. Horton

Romans 6-8 deals with sanctification and holy living in the Christian life. It answers important questions such as these: If salvation is by grace without works and the believer is not under the law, does it matter how the Christian lives? Can he live as he pleases? How can the believer live a godly life and have victory over sin? Can the believer gain complete freedom from sin in this life?

This important passage of Scripture refutes many false teachings about sanctification and Christian living:

THE FALSE DOCTRINE OF ERADICATION AND PERFECTIONISM

According to this doctrine, the believer can achieve sinless perfection in this life. It is called “entire sanctification.”

Harry Ironside, who wrote many helpful Bible commentaries, encountered this teaching as a young preacher in the Salvation Army. He was taught that he could achieve entire sanctification and thereafter not be subject to the struggle against indwelling sin. Seeking this experience, he traveled away from the city and spent some time fasting and praying in a forest. On that occasion he had a powerful emotional experience and was convinced that he had “found it.” He hurried back to the Salvation Army testimony services and stood to tell his brethren that he had “it” and that they must rejoice with him in his newfound victory. After some days he fell from this emotional plateau and realized that the struggle with sin was still present. He became so discouraged and confused that he was admitted to a hospital with an emotional breakdown. There he was visited by some godly believers who gave him some literature that refuted the error of entire sanctification and taught the biblical doctrine. He was established in his understanding of the Christian life and went on to have a long and fruitful preaching and writing ministry. His testimony can be found in the book “Holiness: The False and the True.” This is available at the Way of Life web site (http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/holiness1.htm) as well as in the Fundamental Baptist CD-Rom Library.

ANSWER:

Throughout Romans 6-8 and throughout the New Testament epistles it is assumed that the believer still has the sin nature and that he has to learn to deal with this reality. There is no promise in Scripture that the flesh will be eradicated in this present life.

1. Perfectionism is refuted by Paul's acknowledgement that the believer can sin (Rom. 6:1, 15; 8:12; 13:13-14). Paul everywhere assumes that the believer can continue in sin.

2. Perfectionism fails to distinguish between position and practice, standing and state, relationship and fellowship (Rom. 6:3-4; Eph. 4:1; 5:8). Paul carefully makes this distinction in Romans 6-8:

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Rom. 6:3-4).

The believer has a new standing as dead in Christ and resurrected with Christ. Therefore, because of this new standing, he is instructed to “walk in newness of life.”

This is the teaching of the book of Ephesians. Chapters 1-3 describes the believer's standing in Christ, while chapters 4-6 describes the believer's walk in this world. The two things are seen in the following verses:

“I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of that vocation wherewith ye are called” (Eph. 4:1).

“For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light” (Eph. 5:8).

The believer has full salvation in Christ (that vocation wherewith ye are called), therefore he should walk worthy of it. The believer is light, therefore, he should walk in the light. He is a child of God, therefore he should live like one.

Thus there are two aspects of sanctification, position and practice, eternal and temporal. The believer has complete eternal sanctification in Christ (1 Cor. 1:30). He is therefore exhorted to work out that sanctification in his daily life (1 Thess. 4:3).

3. Perfectionism is refuted by Paul's description of the struggle with the flesh (Rom. 7:18-25; Gal. 5:16-17). It has been described as having two dogs living inside of me, a black dog and a white dog, and the one I feed and the one I say “sik 'em” to is the one that dominates.

My maternal grandmother was one of the godliest Christians I have known. I am confident that her prayers had a lot to do with my salvation after I had gone so far out into the world. She only lived a couple of years after I was saved, but I got to spend some time with her before she passed on to Glory. I had so many moral scars and struggles because of all of the foolishness of my former life. Several months after I was saved I asked her, “Granny, do you still have any struggles with sin?” I was hoping that she would tell me that those struggles had ended decades before and that it had been only smooth sailing after that, but she replied, “Oh, yes, Dave, there are still many struggles.” She was 79 or 80 years old and had walked with Christ for more than 60 years, but there were still struggles. The only time the child of God escapes the struggle with sin is when he leaves this veil of tears.

Here we must give a loud WARNING. God will judge us if we allows the flesh to dominate (Rom. 8:12-13; 1 Cor. 9:27). The child of God can live a careless life, but he will live to regret it at the judgment seat of Christ (1 Cor. 3:13-15).

4. Perfectionism is refuted by the Bible's description of the Christian life. The Bible does not describe the Christian life as only believing in Christ's finished work; it is not described as passive but as active -- as yielding (Rom. 6:16), walking in (Gal. 5:16), putting off and on (Eph. 4:22-24), putting away (Eph. 4:31), mortifying (Col. 3:5), fleeing (2 Tim. 2:22), laying aside (Heb. 12:1; 1 Pet. 2:1).

5. Perfectionism is refuted by the doctrine of confession (1 John 1:8-10). The subject of John's first epistle is the believer's fellowship with Christ (1 Jn. 1:3). He teaches that fellowship is a matter of walking in the light and confessing one's sins (1 John 1:7-10). He plainly states that the Christian life is not a matter of sinlessness. If the true Christian life is a matter of sinless sanctification, why does John instruct us to confess our sins?

Those who teach some form of sinless perfectionism often lower the standard of sin. They can claim that they are living in a state of sinless perfection because they have redefined sin down to their level. I remember a godly woman who made that claim, but she did not count her failings as sin. If she bossed her husband, for example, that was not sin!

WHAT WOULD COMPLETE SANCTIFICATION LOOK LIKE?

Michael Pearl of No Greater Joy ministries claims: “We should and can sin no more! ... I have been preaching and living this gospel of sanctification for many years. It is not a theory. It is practical, Scriptural reality” (No Greater Joy, Jan.-Feb. 2005, p. 21).

If this were true, what would it mean in a practical sense? It would mean that not once during this time has Michael sinned in heart or practice, that not once has he disobeyed or ignored even one of God's laws. It would mean that not once has he been angry with another person without a cause (Mat. 5:22); not once lusted after a woman (Mat. 5:28); not once been conformed to the world (Rom. 12:2); never thought of himself more highly than he should (Rom. 12:3); never dissembled in love (Rom. 12:9); not once failed to be patient in tribulation (Rom. 12:12); not once allowed any corrupt communication to proceed from his mouth (Eph. 4:29); not once spoken any sort of bitterness, wrath, anger, clamour, or evil speaking, (Eph. 4:31); not once allowed any malice to dwell in his heart (Eph. 4:31); not once allowed any moral uncleanness in his heart and life (Eph. 5:3); not once had fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but has at all times and in all situations reproved such works (Eph. 5:11); that he has walked circumspectly at every moment and has never failed to redeem the time (Eph. 5:15-16); that he has been at every moment kind, tenderhearted, and forgiving (Eph. 4:32); that he has continually walked in love (Eph. 5:2); that he has been filled with the Spirit at every moment (Eph. 5:18); that he has loved his wife with Christ-like love at all times (Eph. 5:25); that he has never provoked his children to wrath (Eph. 4:4); that he has set his affection on things above in a perfect and continually manner (Col. 3:2); that he has never lied or prevaricated (Col. 3:9); that he has been forbearing and forgiving on every occasion (Col. 3:13); that he has done every single thing in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (Col. 3:17); that he has never been bitter against his wife (Col. 3:19); that he has continued in prayer at every moment and been thankful in all things (Col. 4:2); that he has continually abstained from all appearance of evil (1 Thess. 5:22); that he has been perfectly holy, as holy as God, in all manner of life and at all times (1 Pet. 1:15-16); that he has perfectly and continually laid aside all malice, all guile, all hypocrisies, all envies, and all evil speakings (1 Pet. 2:1); that he has submitted to every single ordinance of human government at all times (1 Pet. 2:13-14); that on every occasion he has honored all men, loved the brotherhood, feared God, and honored the king (1 Pet. 2:17); that he has given honor to his wife at all times (1 Pet. 3:7); that at every moment he has exercised compassion, love as brethren, pity, and courtesy (1 Pet. 3:8), that he has sanctified the Lord in his heart at all times (1 Pet. 3:15), that he has been sober and watching unto prayer at every moment (1 Pet. 4:7); that he has never neglected the assembly (Heb. 10:25); that he has obeyed pastoral authority perfectly (Heb. 13:17); that he has at all times been peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated (Jam. 3:17); that he has no partiality or hypocrisy (Jam. 3:17); and that he has performed every other commandment and duty in the New Testament Scriptures.

In the case of a Christian woman who is sinlessly and completely sanctified, this would mean that she submits to her husband as unto the Lord on every occasion (Eph. 5:22); that she is in subjection to her husband even if he is not saved (1 Pet. 3:1); that she perfectly and continually exemplifies a meek and quiet spirit (1 Pet. 3:4); that she adorns herself modestly and demonstrates shamefacedness at all times (1 Tim. 2:9); and that she is a silent learner and that she never attempts to usurp the man's authority in any manner or on any occasion (1 Tim. 2:11-14).

There is only one who has lived sinlessly sanctified in this world, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ.

THE FALSE DOCTRINE OF A SECOND BLESSING

This teaching takes many different forms, but the crux of the doctrine is that the believer does not receive everything when he is born again and he must seek a second blessing or touch or experience whereby he is lifted above the struggles of the Christian life into a realm of complete and abiding victory.

Some call it the baptism of the Holy Spirit; some say there are two baptisms, the first for regeneration and the second for sanctification. Some have even held that there are three baptisms, the baptism of regeneration, the baptism of sanctification, and a third baptism of fire.

In the early 1980s a Pentecostal preacher claiming to be a prophet came to Nepal from England. He preached in one of the churches and promised the believers that they could experience “fresh baptism” and be lifted above the struggles with sin. He invited the believers to come forward to “receive your Spirit baptism.”

Others present this experience in the form of the “exchanged life” or a “deeper life.” Roy Hession, author of Calvary Road, is one of the popularizers of this doctrine. Consider these excerpts from his autobiography My Calvary Road:

“I recounted my struggles with self and acknowledged the new relationship with Jesus which I had entered by faith. ... In the light of our own recent experience of Christ, we preached a two-fold message: full salvation for the Christian quite as much as an initial salvation for the non-Christian. ... If consecration is thorough and complete, it need not be repeated. 'Reconsecration' is the language of piecemeal surrender to the Lord Jesus Christ” (Roy Hession, My Calvary Road).

Thus Hession is saying that it is necessary for the believer to enter into a second experience of Christ, a “full salvation,” and that if one achieves this experience he will be completely surrendered and will not have to surrender again.

ANSWER:

There is no instruction in the New Testament for the believer to seek a “second blessing” or another baptism. The only reference to the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the epistles is in the past tense. See 1 Corinthians 12:13.

If there were some sort of second experience whereby the believer could find complete victory, the New Testament epistles would say so plainly and each epistle would offer that experience as the solution to the believer's struggles and needs, but no such experience is ever described.

There simply is no one secret or a “second blessing” for a victorious Christian life. Those who teach this have departed from the Bible.

The Christian life is a walk, not a leap or a flight! It is so described 40 times in the New Testament epistles. See Romans 6:4; 8:1, 4; Gal. 5:16, etc.

The genuine Christian life is a matter of walking step by step in God's will, hour by hour and day by day doing those things that I know that God wants me to do, being sensitive to the guidance of the Holy Spirit: laying aside the sins of the flesh (1 Pet. 2:1), desiring the Word of God (1 Pet. 2:2; 2 Tim. 2:15), presenting my body as a living sacrifice for God's will (Rom. 12:1), not being conformed to the world (Rom. 12:2; Jam. 4:4; 1 Jn. 2:15-17), exercising my spiritual gifts (Rom. 12:3-5), having no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness (Eph. 5:11), being filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18), giving thanks always to God (Eph. 5:20), submitting to my husband (Eph. 5:22), loving my wife (Eph. 5:25), obeying my parents (Eph. 6:1-2), being a diligent and honest employee (Eph. 6:5-8), being a just master (Eph. 6:9), confessing my sins (1 Jn. 1:9), fleeing temptations (2 Tim. 2:22), not forsaking the assembly (Heb. 10:25), etc.

This is not as exciting as seeking a “second blessing” and thereafter being able to leap above the struggles with the world, the flesh, and the devil, but it is the true Christian life.

Those who teach these errors, when they are honest, admit that they struggle and that they have to grow! For example, I had a conversation with the aforementioned “prophet” in Nepal, and I asked him if he still struggled with sin. After much “beating around the bush,” he finally admitted that he did have struggles with the flesh. So much for his “higher” or “deeper” experience!

Roy Hession also admits this. In his autobiography My Calvary Road, which we quoted earlier, even though on the one hand he discounts the idea of “piecemeal surrender” to the Lord, he admits that he had lots of ups and downs in his Christian life even after he allegedly learned the “secret” and entered the “deeper” or “crucified life.” He got angry and short-tempered with his wife, even slamming the car door on her hand one day. He had dry preaching meetings and periods of spiritual deadness, a spirit of pride and a lack of repentance toward sin. In other words, in spite of the idea that the believer can enter into a special realm that is beyond the struggles with the flesh, in reality there is no such experience or “secret.”

THE FALSE DOCTRINE OF LICENSE

According to this teaching, the believer is free from “laws, resolutions, and rules.” For example in his book Grace Awakening, Chuck Swindoll teaches that fundamentalists who strive for doctrinal and moral purity are legalists who need to learn grace. He claims that it is legalistic to make prohibitions against immoral movies, sensual dancing, etc. Popular evangelical author Jerry Bridges says the same thing in his book Transforming Grace. He says it is legalistic to expect faithful church attendance, to be concerned about the length of a man's hair, to set up standards about worldliness. He warns about setting up fences and having “cast iron opinions.”

ANSWER: The believer's liberty in Christ does not mean that he does not keep rules and commandments. Though the believer is not a servant of the Mosaic law, he is a servant of righteousness (Rom. 6:18) and the servant of God (Rom. 6:22). Compare 1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 5:13.

The apostles taught that though we are saved without works we are also saved unto works (Eph. 2:8-10). By my count, there are 88 specific commandments for believers in the book of Ephesians alone, the book that says salvation is by grace through faith and not of works.

The believer is not under the Mosaic law, but he is not free from all law. He lives according to a new law.

It is the law of the Spirit (Rom. 8:2), because the Holy Spirit leads and empower us to obey God.

It is the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2), because Christ is our example and our goal (Rom. 8:29).

It is the law of liberty (Jam. 1:25), not because we are free to do as we please but because our condemnation fell upon Christ and we are free from condemnation.

It is the royal law (Jam. 2:8), because the sum of the law is to love my neighbor as myself.

THE FALSE DOCTRINE OF LORDSHIP SALVATION

The term “Lordship salvation” has been given many definitions, but I am using it to describe the teaching that says the true believer will make Christ Lord of every area of his life when he is saved and he will not struggle with sin thereafter. According to this view, those who struggle with sin have not properly yielded to Christ's Lordship and are not yet saved. Those who teach this usually deny that there is such a thing as a carnal Christian.

ANSWER:

This teaching is contrary to the message of every epistle in the New Testament. If the true believer is one who has no struggle with sin, why did the Apostles spend so much of their time warning believers not to sin?

This teaching is refuted by Paul's epistle to Corinth. When Paul wrote to the church at Corinth to correct their many sins and errors, he did not tell them that they were lost and needed to be saved. He said plainly that they were in Christ (1 Cor. 1:2-5). At the end of his last epistle, Paul does urge them to examine themselves to make sure they were in the faith (2 Cor. 13:5), but it is obvious from his greeting to them that he did not doubt the salvation of the believers at Corinth in general. And yet he told them that they were carnal and needed to walk in the Spirit (1 Cor. 3:1-3).

Paul described three types of men in 1 Corinthians: the natural man, or the man who is unsaved and does not have the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14); the spiritual man, or the believer who walks in the Spirit (1 Cor. 2:15-16); and the carnal man, or the believer who walks after the flesh (1 Cor. 3:1-3).

Any teaching that claims there is no such thing as a carnal believer has erred from the Word of God.

Further, this teaching of a lordship salvation is contrary to the Bible's description of the gospel. The gospel is not difficult. Even children can be saved. Jesus said to allow the children to come unto Him (Matt. 19:13-14). In fact, Jesus said that to be saved a person must become like a child (Matt. 18:3). Salvation is not difficult. The Lord Jesus Christ did not suffer so on Calvary so that salvation would be hard to find or achieve. It is the gift of God. Gifts are not difficult to receive! When the Philippian jailer asked Paul what he needed to do to be saved, Paul replied, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house” (Acts 16:31).

Salvation is that simple. Yes, it involves repentance, but repentance is simply turning to Jesus Christ from one's false gods and the life of sin and self. It is a change in direction that results in a change of life. It is not a complicated thing or a long process that one must undergo.

THE FALSE DOCTRINE THAT THE BELIEVER CAN CONTINUE IN SIN WITH NO CHANGE

According to this doctrine, a sinner can pray a sinner's prayer and be “saved” even though his life might not change. On a trip to London, England, in the 1990s, I met a Baptist missionary who told me about his evangelistic work on the streets of that big city. He told me that many were being saved. When I asked him how many were attending church, he replied that only a few attended and that it was difficult to get them to come to church after they were saved. When I questioned whether they were actually getting saved, he got upset and replied, “You can't judge whether or not a person is saved.”

Answer:

Every true believer is born again, and the new birth changes his life. This is what Paul describes in Rom. 6:3-9. While it is true that I cannot judge perfectly whether a person is saved (the apostles thought Judas was saved), nowhere in the New Testament do we see an example of someone who is genuinely saved whose life was not radically changed.

Salvation requires informed faith from the heart, not a mere prayer with the mouth (Rom. 6:17).

Salvation is by grace but it produces the fruit of holiness (Rom. 6:22).

The saved man minds the things of the Spirit; if a man still minds the things of the flesh, he is not saved (Rom. 8:5, 9, 14).

CONCLUSION

1. Have you repented and changed directions? Repentance simply means to turn around, to submit to Jesus Christ as God. “I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Lk. 13:3). “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent” (Acts 17:30).

2. Have you trusted Jesus Christ for salvation? As we have seen, salvation is not difficult; it is as simple as receiving a gift. Jesus Christ paid for that gift with His blood and death. He now offers the sinner eternal salvation, and it is the sinner's part to open his heart to Christ and received the Gift.

3. Have you been deceived by some false teaching in regard to Christian living? Then repent of it!

4. Are you living victoriously in Christ? There is no promise of sinless perfection in the Bible, but there is a promise of victory over sin.

Some suggestions for those who are struggling

a. Fill your mind with the Scripture (1 Pet. 2:2). Read it; study it; memorize it. I suggest that you take the course on “How to Study the Bible,” which is available from Way of Life Literature. The Scripture is powerful and life changing. It has been well said, “The Bible will keep you from sin or sin will keep you from the Bible” and “A dusty Bible points to a dirty heart.”

b. Put away anything that is hindering you, tempting you, feeding your carnal nature (2 Tim. 2:2; Rom.7:6-9). Avoid tempting situations. Be especially careful about things such as the Internet; trashy movies, television, and novels; ungodly video games; sensual music; the beach; malls that feature sensual clothing in posters and models; etc.

c. Guard the meditations of the heart; the imagination (Prov. 4:23; Ps. 19:14; Rom. 1:21, 28). Beware of forms of entertainment that bring the mind into ungodly or strange realms, such as strange or ungodly television programs, movies, novels, and video games.

d. Defeat sin one at a time (Rom. 6:12-13; Heb. 12:1). The only way to defeat sin is one sin at a time, one day at a time. When the child of God faces a certain sin and lays it aside one time, he will find that he grows in spiritual strength and can more easily lay it aside the next time he is faced with that temptation.

e. Yield to the Spirit rather than to the flesh (Eph. 5:18). Being filled with the Spirit is a daily matter, not a once for all event. It is the business of yielding to the indwelling Spirit as He prompts and guides. It is a matter of yielding my day to Him as it begins and of yielding my decisions and my activities to Him as I go through the day. It is the opposite of being drunk with wine, which takes control violently and overwhelms the human will. The Spirit of God leads gently and lovingly. To be filled with the Spirit is to yield the reigns of my heart and mind and life to Him hour by hour.

f. Be faithful to the Lord's house (Acts 2:42; Heb. 10:25). The church is a crucial part of God's program; it is the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). The individual believer is an important member of the body (1 Cor. 12:12) and has gifts for the building up of the work of God through the church (Rom. 12:3-8). The early Christians continued steadfastly in the fellowship and business of the church, and this is the will of God for every believer today. To neglect the house of God is to put oneself into a position of spiritual danger. I do not know how many times I have seen believers backslide when they began to neglect the church. This also reminds us of how important it is to be in a strong Bible-believing, Bible-practicing church.

g. Be busy in the Lord's service (Rom. 12:3-8; 1 Cor. 15:58). God has a part for every believer in His great program for this age, the Great Commission. Finding the will of God is not a matter of waiting and hoping for something in the future; it is a matter of doing something today. As the believer gets involved in the Lord's service in small and simple ways and continues to be faithful week by week, God leads him in His perfect will. It has well been said, “Idle hands are the devil's workshop.”

h. Be careful about associations (1 Cor. 15:33; 2 Tim. 2:22). The Bible warns that “evil communications corrupt good manners.” The wrong associations will always weaken good Christian living. Be very careful about your friends and close associates. It was neglect of this in my youth that resulted in great spiritual devastation and many dark years of living far from God.

i. Practice biblical fasting. “Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting” (Mat. 17:1). The Lord Jesus taught us that there are some types of demonic strongholds that can be overcome only by prayer with fasting.

j. Practice confession and prayer. “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much” (Jam. 5:16). As a young Christian I was struggling with smoking. I had smoked heavily for about six years and I found it extremely difficult to give it up. I tried and failed many times during the first few months after I was saved. Finally I stood up during a Wednesday prayer meeting and told the brethren about my problem. I confessed my fault and they prayed for me, and I have never smoked again since that day! There is power in confession and prayer.

________

Updated March 8, 2006 (first published February 9, 2004) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143)

Distributed by Way of Life Literature's Fundamental Baptist Information Service, a listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. http://www.wayoflife.org

*

[Original illustration at this number was added to HolwickID #9127]

During the afternoon, I asked Dr. Klausner (professor in the Hebrew University in Jerusalem) if he would sign my autograph album to which he replied, “No, I am sorry; but it is the Sabbath.” I did not know until I made inquiry that night that the Talmud asserts that writing two words in succession is work, and if a man even signs his name on the Sabbath he has broken the Law.

As those of us gathered in his study discussing one subject after another, Dr. Klausner would climb a little stepladder and bring down some heavy tome from his shelves, open it, point to some relevant passage, then return the book and soon take down another. The Talmud says nothing about bringing down books from shelves as work—to write two words would be labor, but to develop a perspiration by reaching up for volumes and vigorously discussing them is not work!

This is a perfect illustration of what our Lord meant when he talked about his contemporaries “holding the tradition of the elders” (Mark 7:3).

—Dr. Wilbur M. Smith

Sermon in Colossians series. Colossians 2:8-15

THE KINDEST CUT

===============

I. The dangers of captivity.

II. The prison of mysticism. 2:8

A. Mysticism - the effort to see what is "beyond."

B. What are "basic principles"?

C. Colossians were relying on human & occult approach to religion.

III. The prison of ritualism. 2:11

A. Rituals fill our lives.

B. Rituals are not bad but can capture us.

C. Circumcision and baptism go hand-in-hand.

D. Not ritual, but relationship. 2:11

IV. The prison of legalism. 2:14

A. Legalism is one of most popular religious deadends.

B. Law of Moses is in view.

C. The law condemns us, sacrifice saves us.

V. The liberation of Christ.

*

Conservative and Christian leaders were shocked to learn that the president of Michigan's Hillsdale College, George Roche III, reportedly carried on an affair with his daughter-in-law, Lissa. As noted in U.S. News and World Report last month, "The whole mess started unraveling ... when she (Lissa) died in what police call a self-inflicted shooting."

Lisa was editor of Imprimis, the school's magazine. In recent years, it became an important mouthpiece for conservatives. Before her apparent suicide, her father-in-law divorced his wife of 44 years and married another woman.

Neo-conservative leader William Bennett, author of The Book of Virtues, has resigned from the presidential search committee for Hillsdale, claiming that the college refused to confess to the adultery allegations. The news media has gleefully pointed out that Hillsdale College has refused to take federal funds or allow students to accept government loans because of a commitment to "moral and social instruction."

Saddened, we pray these revelations are not true. However, they underscore a theme of my organization, that is the opposition of both moralism and lawlessness to Christian redemption.

Friends who have worked behind the scenes at Hillsdale have long reported to us that they sensed an institutional/ moralistic bias there, combined with anti-Christian bigotry. These Hillsdale employees made it clear that something was not right. Of course, what was not right is that works without faith are dead, while faith-inspired good works and obedience to the law is one of God's blessings on mankind.

Paul's letter to the Galatians is very clear on this. Paul says it is impossible without the redemptive power of Jesus Christ to live under the Law. Eventually, any person who tries to do so will fall short and will need to be rescued. Such a person must be brought by God's grace to the point of understanding that he or she needs the grace and forgiveness which can only be found in Jesus Christ.

Recently, a fund-raising friend asked us to remove the name "Christian" from The Christian Film and Television Commission. He believes that, if we just get back to Victorian values, everything will be OK. Yet Victorian values only heighten the rebelliousness of sinful man. We need to recognize the redemptive power of Jesus Christ, who can make us more than conquerors and write His Law upon our heart.

Today's society - particularly the media - takes strong swipes at the church for being moralistic. They see God as marginal and look at Him as a big policeman, but society's view of God is too small. God is "just." God is "righteous." The fear of the Lord is the beginning of all wisdom. The omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence of God is a blessing -- because God is powerful enough to come into our lives and give us the ability to be free from the tendencies that may have destroyed George Roche III.

Apart from Christ, the Law can only convict us of sin. With Christ, we can triumph over sin and death. The true foundation of God's Law is faith expressing itself through love (Galatians 5:6 and 14).

If there was an anti-Christian undertone at Hillsdale, that should have been a red flag that it was offering a conservative legalism that was no better than the lawlessness of the liberals. Those who still remember this truth should never want to remove Christian from their name because it is that name that makes us more than conquerors in Christ.

George Roche III once wrote, "Honor and virtue are increasingly rare commodities." He forgot, however, that these ideals do not come from man, but originate with God. As Paul says, "God sent his son, born of a woman, born under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. Because you are sons, God sent the spirit of his son into our hearts, the spirit who calls out, 'Father.'"

Only Jesus Christ can redeem our society and turn around its moral decline. Honor and virtue without Christ is meaningless.

Baehr is chairman of The Christian Film and Television Commission, 2510-G Las Posas Rd, #502, Camarillo, CA 93010; (805) 383-2000. His essay was distributed by Assist Communications, an online agency run by veteran British journalist Dan Wooding.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) - After Steve Bickel finishes worshipping at his synagogue every Sabbath, he and his wife Eliyana have to do a little more praying. They pray their twin 2-year-olds won't be too tired to walk home - because if Bickel or his wife had to carry them, it would be a violation of Jewish law.

At least, it will be until the eruv is built.

For eight years, the Bickels and other Orthodox Jews have been working to build a wall of wires and other existing boundaries around their communities in Cambridge and Somerville to form an eruv - a giant, symbolic household.

Though many non-Jews who live and work within an eruv might never notice it, for Orthodox Jews such as the Bickels, it is of great significance.

Jewish law forbids the Orthodox from 39 forms of "creative labor" on the Jewish day of rest. That includes carrying children, pushing strollers and wheelchairs and bringing prayer books to services.

However, Jewish law allows them to carry items within their own household. So unifying the neighborhood into a symbolic household, or an eruv, makes it permissible to do those things within the boundary.

"It's a chance to see people and catch up, and it's the glue that binds the community," Bickel said. "Places that have eruvim, they have an advantage. Kids can go out and play ball. Young mothers can visit people. So they consider and often move to places that do have an eruv."

An eruv's "walls" usually consist of a piece of wire, twine or pre-existing boundaries such as fences and sea walls. But it can take years of planning and thousands of dollars for one to be constructed.

Bickel and other Orthodox Jews in Cambridge and Somerville are hoping to finish construction on their eruv by the beginning of 2001 - nine years after the project began.

It's worth the time and effort, Bickel says.

Eruvim have already been constructed in cities such as Atlanta, Baltimore, Cleveland, Miami, New York, St. Louis, Paris and Sydney, Australia.

Most visitors to those cities would never know they were within eruvim.

By Jewish law, the boundary must be at least 38 inches off the ground, but many are much higher. Some are unobtrusively strung near the tops of telephone or utility poles.

The group behind Bickel's eruv has been working on and off since 1993. It needs to get permission not only from the two cities which will be encompassed by the eruv, but also from all the organizations on whose property they plan to place the boundary.

Since several of those organizations, like the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, require a plan drawn up by an engineer before they issue approval, the process gets more lengthy and costly. The group has raised $74,000, and hopes that will be enough.

Most eruvim have not faced much resistance. In Cambridge, Bickel says he's often had to explain what an eruv is, but generally people are respectful of his religious practices.

"In some ways, the most cynicism we get is from people who consider themselves as part of the Jewish community but not part of the Orthodox community," Bickel says. "They think it's ridiculous, or that it will cause embarrassment. They see this as kind of medieval."

Eruvim history goes back about 2000 years. They are mentioned in the codes of Jewish Law dating back to the first century.

Most of the existing eruvim were created in the 1980s and 1990s. Some cover an area of almost 20 miles, and serve thousands of Orthodox Jews.

Some Orthodox Jews, however, don't accept an eruv as a valid justification to violate the prohibitions on the Sabbath.

Bickel says he sees no reason not to make life easier for himself and his family.

"Judaism is a legal-based system, and because of that it has all the trappings of any legal system - including loopholes," Bickel says. "That's how any legal system makes peace with the dilemmas it has."

Paul the Apostle tells us “love rejoices in the truth.” This is a deeply profound statement for a culture bereft of any absolute point of reference. Paul obviously sees a connection between relating to others and relating to reality. Ultimately, how can we be healthy in our relationships unless we have true beliefs, ordered emotions, and proper actions?

Lady Lucia, my one-year-old Corgi, demonstrated a clearer perspective to me in this area of love. Opening the can of dog treats, she immediately notes the noise and presents herself at her master's feet. Looking at me with big brown eyes, she remembers the actions that brought about the reward last time. Immediately, she begins the routine even before I say anything. She sits. She lays. She rolls over. Sometimes this ends with the explanation point of a bark.

I laugh. I tell her to sit. She sits. Then lays. Then rolls over. What can be done to get her to listen? Still not giving her any treats, I try again. She sits on command. Then she lays on command. The reward is given.

You see, my dog has a hard time with the difference between obedience to her master and tricks for treats. At her core, I'm afraid she's a legalist — doing sets of behavior to avoid punishment or to receive rewards.

Humans, too, often have a view similar to the dog's. They see God as the taskmaster who demands tricks for treats. And I've even seen some Christians, many who claim to have a strong relationship with God, mustering up all the tricks they can, not to love to God in obedience, but to receive special blessings. Of course, blessing is always a part of loving God, but it isn't what loving God is essentially about.

Oh how often God puts up with our silliness! How often He must smile at our ridiculous attempts at getting things from his hand, instead of coming to Him as friend and child. How longsuffering He must be to help us understand!

Both the Old and New Testaments tell us our purpose in life is not merely about good behaviors. From the beginning, God loves. He loves when He creates. He loves when He calls. He loves when He sends His only begotten Son. The reason He gives commands in the Scripture is because He loves — not because He wants us to perform arbitrary tricks. Rather, He wants us to flourish by learning His character, His ways, His purposes. It was for this reason we were made, called, and redeemed.

Legalism paralyzes the soul, but obedience in love brings nourishment. May we look afresh at God's loving commands and find in them the reflection of His love and the heart of our freedom.

__________

Copyright © 2004 Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM). Reprinted with permission. "A Slice of Infinity" is a radio ministry of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.

*

[Original illustration here was a duplicate in HolwickID 25837-26027]

Luke 6:1–11 — Lord of the Sabbath « Leader information shown in this fashion »

A. Comments on the Sabbath

1. The Sabbath and Sunday are not the same; the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week, while Sunday is the first day of the week « — although some calendars try to make Monday the first day of the week. Note that there has always been doubt as to the continuity of Sabbath keeping since the giving of the Law »

2. there are two extremes in the Christian church about Sunday

a. Sabbatarian keeping of Sunday « — treating it in every way as the same as the Sabbath, with all, or almost all, of the same rules of conduct »

b. secularization « — it is a day like any other day; for doing all the same things and anything that you like to do »

3. in the New Testament we find that the early church treated the first day of the week in a special fashion.

a. from Revelation 1:10, we see that it may have been called “the Lord’s day” — why would have this been appropriate?

(A) Mark 16:2 « — Christ was raised on first day of the week »

(B) John 20:19 « — Christ met with the disciples on that day »

(C) Acts 20:7 « — they met to remember Christ (communion service) on first day of the week »

(D) 1 Corinthians 16:2 « — a day of setting aside an offering to the Lord of what had been received from God »

b. what spiritual dangers are there in making Sunday special?

(A) « legalism; dependency on works »

(B) « get a false sense of holiness »

(C) « what should be rejoicing becomes needlessly sombre »

c. what spiritual advantages in making Sunday special?

(A) « opportunity to assemble with Christians (Hebrews 10:25, Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16) »

(B) « special opportunity for spiritual exercise »

(C) « a testimony to unbelievers (but our lives must agree) »

B. Plucking Corn on the Sabbath — Luke 6:1–5 (parallel passages in Matthew 12:1–8, Mark 2:23–28)

1. 1 Now it happened on the second Sabbath after the first that He went through the grainfields. And His disciples plucked the heads of grain and ate them, rubbing them in their hands. 2 And some of the Pharisees said to them, “Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?” 3 But Jesus answering them said, “Have you not even read this, what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: 4 how he went into the house of God, took and ate the showbread, and also gave some to those with him, which is not lawful for any but the priests to eat?” 5 And He said to them, “The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.” (NKJV)

2. Some notes

a. there is no agreement as to what is meant by the phrase, “second Sabbath after the first” — the most probable is a reference to the counting of weeks up to Pentecost

b. some translations use the word “corn” which has a different meaning to us who live at the eastern end of the “corn belt” — this was one of the grains such as wheat, rye, barley or oats

c. the Pharisees had defined just about every action that could not be done on the Sabbath to ensure people kept it; in the action of the disciples, it is said, they found transgressions

(A) plucking the heads « — harvesting »

(B) rubbing the heads together « — threshing »

(C) blowing off the husks before eating « — winnowing »

(D) making the heads edible « — preparing food »

(E) Deuteronomy 23:25 — the taking of grain was allowed

d. what does Mark 2:27 add to the record of this incident? « — that the Sabbath was created for man’s benefit »

e. what does Matthew 12:5 add to the record? « — that the duties of the priests overrule the rules of the Sabbath. John 7:22–23 confirms this last point since circumcision was performed, Sabbath or not »

f. what does Matthew 12:6 add to the record? « — more reason that the Son of Man (a Messianic name) is Lord of Sabbath »

g. what does Matthew 12:7 add to the record? « — the Pharisees’ problem was their own hearts, not the disciples’ actions »

3. In addition to what we have already noted, Jesus uses an incident from the life of a previous messiah, David, to show the proper application of the Law. (1 Samuel 21:3-6, cf., Leviticus 24:5-9) What are the proper priorities as we find in this incident?

a. « the law should not result in deprivation of the innocent – “human need must not be subjected to barren legalism” »

b. « the law is for the benefit of God’s people, particularly His messiah, not vice-versa; ie., we should not worship the Law »

c. the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath … « not only in its origin as Creator (Genesis 1) but in its institution (Exouds 20:8-11). This is a significant claim; why? Because one more time in this book of Luke we find that this Son of Man, this human being, is Deity, God in the flesh. »

C. Healing the Man’s Withered Hand — Luke 6:6–11 (parallel passages in Matthew 12:9–14, Mark 3:1–6)

1. 6 Now it happened on another Sabbath, also, that He entered the synagogue and taught. And a man was there whose right hand was withered. 7 So the scribes and Pharisees watched Him closely, whether He would heal on the Sabbath, that they might find an accusation against Him. 8 But He knew their thoughts, and said to the man who had the withered hand, “Arise and stand here.” And he arose and stood. 9 Then Jesus said to them, “I will ask you one thing: Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy?” 10 And when He had looked around at them all, He said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” And he did so, and his hand was restored as whole as the other. 11 But they were filled with rage, and discussed with one another what they might do to Jesus. (NKJV)

2. Notes

a. this confirms Jesus’ lordship, not only over the day, but also over disease

b. the rabbis (Yoma 8:6) had no objection to healing when there was the danger (which they interpreted fairly liberally) of the loss of life; this is pertinent to Jesus’ answer to them

c. what does Matthew 12:10 add to the record of this incident? « — that they provoked the discussion, but here He knew why »

d. what does Matthew 12:11–12 add to the record? « — the proof of the sheep in the pit that the Pharisaic / rabbinic teaching was misguided; it had a wrong sense of values »

e. what does Mark 3:5 add to the record? « — again, the basis problem with the Pharisees was their own hearts, not what Jesus was doing, or when He was healing »

3. What are the proper priorities?

a. Luke 6:9 is unequivocal – explain it

(A) « there is no middle ground, nos such thing as neutrality »

(B) « the only alternative to doing good, is doing evil »

(C) the story of the good Samaritan illustrates this; it would seem that the priest and the Levite feared becoming ceremonially unclean would not help the injured man

b. « the love command should always, under the Holy Spirit, give a proper interpretation to God’s commands »

4. the reaction of the Pharisees

a. The word “rage” in Luke 6:11 is literally “without mind” so that the phrase can be translated “filled with senselessness,” “filled with folly,” “became mindless,” “beside themselves with anger” or “filled with fury.” Why were they so?

(A) « they could not dispute that He was right, could not reply to His question »

(B) their hearts were wrong before God despite their careful religion

The law is harsh and cannot help us to receive forgiveness

----------

In CRADDOCK STORIES, a collection of outstanding stories by Fred Craddock, is the following account with one who could understand law, but not grace.

Craddock preached in Blue Ridge, Georgia, one Sunday while the pastor was away. He preached on the lectionary text which was on the prodigal son. After the service a man said, “I really didn’t care much for that, frankly.”

The preacher asked the man why and he said he just didn’t like that story because it was morally irresponsible.

Craddock asked, “What do you mean by that?”

“Forgiving the boy,” the man replied.

Craddock responded, “Well, what would you have done?”

“I think when he came home he should have been arrested,” answered the man.

Craddock writes, “This fellow was serious. He’s an attorney, I thought. I thought he was going to tell me a joke. But he was really serious. He belonged to this unofficial organization nationwide, never has any meetings and doesn’t have a name, but it’s a very strong network that I call ‘quality control people.’ They’re morality police. Mandatory sentences and no parole, mind you, and executions.”

Craddock then asked, “What would you have given the prodigal?”

The man replied, “Six years.”

________

Fred Craddock, Craddock Stories, Chalice Press, 2001, 51; Dr. Ronald Meeks teaches Bible in the Department of Biblical Studies and is the Director of Church Relations for Blue Mountain College, Blue Mountain, Mississippi.

Acts 15:13–35 — The Jerusalem Council: the Decision (outline by F. F. Bruce, NICNT) « Leader information shown in this fashion »

{A.} The Birth of the Church (1:1–5:42)

{B.} Persecution and Expansion (6:1–9:31)

{C.} The Acts of Peter and Beginnings of Gentile Christianity, 9:32-12:25

{D.} Church Extension from Antioch & Apostolic Decree at Jerusalem Acts 12:25–15:35

{1} Barnabas and Saul (12:25–13:3)

{2} Cyprus (13:4–12)

{3} Pisidian Antioch (13:13–52)

{4} Iconium, Lystra, Derbe (14:1–18)

{5} The Council of Jerusalem (15:1–35)

A. Judaizers Visit Antioch (15:1–2)

B. Paul & Barnabas Go Up to Jerusalem (15:3–5)

C. The Council Meets (15:6)

D. Peter’s Speech (15:7–11)

E. Paul & Barnabas Address the Council (15:12)

« Last week we looked at the issue being addressed and noted that it was not just circumcision, but whether salvation is by the Law or by God’s mercy; by our works or by God’s grace. But another concern was Gentile versus Jewish morality: how could these have table fellowship? The decision addresses these issues. »

F. James’s Summing Up (15:13–21, NKJV): 13 And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, “Men and brethren, listen to me: 14 Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: 16 ‘“After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; 17 So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,” Says the Lord who does all these things.’ 18 Known to God from eternity are all His works. 19 Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. 21 For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”

1. Who is this James (Galatians 1:19)? « – called “the brother of the Lord” to distinguish from “the son of Zebedee” (now dead) and “the son of Alphaeus” (also known as James the lesser); this James an elder in Jerusalem, probable writer of Book of James »

2. In Deuteronomy 14:2, who are the Israelites? « – a people taken out of all peoples (ie., nations) by God to be His own possession »

3. What are these Christians described in verse 14? « – a people of Gentiles taken out by God to be surnamed “God’s” »

4. The writers of the New Testament had no problem in taking promises to Israel such as Exodus 19:5–6, Deuteronomy 14:2, Psalm 130:7–8, Isaiah 42:21 and applying them to the church of Jesus Christ as in Titus 2:14 and 1 Peter 2:9; so it is here in Acts.

5. Peter quotes, in verses 16–17 from the Greek translation of Amos 9:11-12 which “spiritualises” the Hebrew original

a. The overall sense of the Hebrew is « — God will restore the house of David to rule over its former territory, including Edom’s remnant and the nations “called by my name” »

b. The spiritualization, quoted by James, is « — God’s restores so that the remainder (remnant) of humanity may seek God »

c. What has the tabernacle of David to do with this? « — Jesus, Messiah, the Son of David, has established the house (read Hebrews 3:6), the church, which is a possession of all nations which are called by the name of the God of Israel »

6. In verses 14–18, who does James say is taking the initiative? … on what basis (verse 18)? « — God took all the initiative; the basis is that it is all according to His eternal knowledge (plan, purpose) »

7. What practical church problem does verse 20 address? … what two applications of this are pertinent today?

a. Problem: « how to have in the same body, the church, both Jew and Gentile with their widely varying standards of behaviour, and particularly with respect to those things that were offences to Jewish sensibilities. »

b. Application 1: « We need to be sensitive to actions that offend those of other cultures who are part of the church. »

c. Application 2: « We also live in a promiscuous, pagan society and need to state clearly Christian morality; our missionary in Guinea, Chantal Pilon, discovered this with new believers. »

8. How would Moses being read affect Gentile Christians (v. 21)? « — (1) they had opportunity to learn of Jewish concerns (2) they would be in frequent concourse with Jewish believers »

G. The Apostolic Letter to Gentile Christians (15:22–29, NKJV): 22 Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren. 23 They wrote this letter by them: “The apostles, the elders, *and the* brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings. 24 Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, ‘You must be circumcised and keep the law’ — to whom we gave no such commandment — 25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.” « – *and the* not in MSS before 8th century; read “apostles and elders, brothers;” so I see why some of you looked questioningly at me last week »

1. Note that Judas is mentioned only here; Silas same as Silvanus

2. How does the greeting in this letter reinforce its message? « — the emphasis that those sending it and those receiving it are related by the new birth through the two-fold use of “brothers” »

3. Why the addition of Judas Barsabas and Silas? « – first, to provide reliable, confirming witness to the letter’s authenticity; second, to enlarge by spoken word on what was in the letter »

4. Who is addressed in the letter? … who omitted? … did that limit it? « – the new Gentile believers living in the area of Antioch, Cyprus and Tarsus; omitted are the more recent converts in area of Galatia to whom the Judaizers had not yet reached; no. »

5. What concern is expressed? « – for the effect of the confusing and upsetting words of unapproved teaching of legalism on them »

6. In addition to the testimonies of Judas and Silas, what was to encourage the Gentile Christians in their faith?

a. Regarding Paul and Barnabas « – the dangers they had faced for the sake of the gospel message »

b. Regarding the message « – it was not primarily men’s ideas, but a leading of the Holy Spirit »

7. Did these necessary things diminish with time (Revelation 2:14, 20)? « – no, their non-observance in the churches of Pergamum and Thyatira are condemned by the exalted Lord Jesus »

8. How is this to be reconciled with 1 Corinthians 8:1–13; 10:14, 19ff? « – eating of such meat, sold in the marketplace pure and simply as meat, was not wrong, but that the partaking of such meat as part of a feast directly or indirectly in honour of a pagan idol is to what Revelation refers; in addition, eating such meat if it defiles the conscience – your own or another’s – is wrong »

9. What application can we make today? « – there are actions and attitudes that identify us with the pagan world in which we live rather than with the newly begotten redeemed of Jesus Christ, rather than with God’s people, the church – these are therefore just as clearly forbidden to us »

H. The Church of Antioch Receives the Apostolic Letter (15:30-35, NKJV): 30 So when they were sent off, they came to Antioch; and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the letter. 31 When they had read it, they rejoiced over its encouragement. 32 Now Judas and Silas, themselves being prophets also, exhorted and strengthened the brethren with many words. 33 And after they had stayed there for a time, they were sent back with greetings from the brethren to the apostles. 34 However, it seemed good to Silas to remain there. 35 Paul and Barnabas also remained in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also. « – MSS before 5th cent. omit v. 34 »

1. How did the Antiochenes perceive and receive the letter? « – they saw it as one of encouragement and viewed it with joy »

2. What other reason do we find here for Judas and Silas being sent along with the letter? « – their prophetic gift which they added to those in Antioch with like gifts, could give direction to these believers (exhortation) and build them up and strengthen them in their new life (encouragement). The presence of others in Antioch with prophetic gifts served to confirm that of these two who had come from Jerusalem (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:29). »

3. In this missionary and New Testament church, who carried on the ministry of God’s word? « – those who had been sent to them and many others (presumably of their own number) »

4. Do you begin to understand what the local church should be?

In THE GRACE AWAKENING, Charles Swindoll told of a missionary family who literally were forced off the mission field over peanut butter. They were sent to a location where peanut butter was not available, so they asked friends back in the States to occasionally send them some. The problem was that the other missionaries considered it a mark of spirituality NOT to have peanut butter. The newer missionary family considered this a matter of differing opinions, so they continued to receive and enjoy their peanut butter. But the pressure from the other missionaries to conform became so intense, the newer family finally gave up and left the mission field.

How could something like this — that probably seems petty and foolish to us — have happened? I imagine it developed something like this: A missionary family who greatly enjoyed peanut butter went to this particular mission field. They faced the choice of doing without it or asking friends or relatives in the States to send it to them. As they considered their options before the Lord, they came to the conclusion that doing without peanut butter was a small sacrifice to make. Though, like the Apostle Paul, they had a “right” to peanut butter, they chose not to use that right (see 1 Cor. 9:1–12). If my theory of this issue’s origin is correct, I personally find their thinking quite acceptable, perhaps even applaudable, in that circumstance. That’s Paul’s whole point in Romans 14. If they decided to give up peanut butter as to the Lord who am I to belittle or ridicule them? Paul said the man whose faith allows him to eat peanut butter must not look down on him who does not (Romans 14:3).

So what went wrong? My guess is that one family elevated the particular leading of God for them to the level of a spiritual principle, which they then applied to everyone: “If God has ‘led’ us to give up peanut butter on the mission field, surely that is His will for everyone else.”

A.J. Jacobs grew up in a secular Jewish home, but says of himself, “I’m Jewish in the same way the Olive Garden is an Italian restaurant.” He recently spent a year trying to live his life while adhering — as literally as possible — to all of the Bible’s laws, teachings and commandments, which he describes in his book, THE YEAR OF LIVING BIBLICALLY.

Jacobs was interested not only in what he calls “the famous” laws, like the Ten Commandments and “love thy neighbor,” but also in what he describes as the “hundreds of oft-ignored ones,” like not shaving your beard (Leviticus 19:27) and stoning adulterers (Leviticus 20:10).

His first step was to pack up any of his clothing that contained mixed fibers, because in Leviticus 19:19 it says, “You shall not wear clothing that is a mixture of two kinds of material.” As a secular journalist Jacobs discovered the relevance, and the difficulty, of prohibitions on gossip, covetousness and lying. He also discovered the difficulty of smashing idols (Deuteronomy 12:3) in “modern-day Manhattan.”

A self-described agnostic, Jacobs discovered the meaning and delight of prayer, especially offering thanks. “In Deuteronomy the Bible says we should thank the Lord when we’ve eaten our fill... but Christians moved the grace to the beginning of the meal, [so] to be safe, I pray both before and after.” Such prayers reminded him that his food was the result of work and efforts of many people, which helped him “...feel more connected, more grateful, more grounded, and more aware of [his] place” in the cycle of food production.

Jacobs’ intention was to “take legalism to its logical extreme and show that it leads to righteous idiocy.” But his project helped him to discover something far more meaningful than religion — spirituality. “The spiritual journey now takes up far more of my time,” he says, comparing it to wrestling with an opponent who is “...sometimes beautiful, sometimes cruel, sometimes ancient, sometimes crazily relevant.” And true to his Biblical namesake, who wrestled with an angel, he says of this Opponent, “I can’t get a handle on it.”

If you’d like to try Jacobs’ experiment, I can suggest a simpler model. When Jesus was asked which was the greatest commandment, he said, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

And so they do.

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #20880]

A perfect fit?

Nothing can choke the heart and soul out of walking with God like legalism. Rigidity is the most certain sign that the disciplines have spoiled. The disciplined person is the person who can live appropriately in life.

Consider the story of Hans the tailor. Because of his reputation, an influential entrepreneur visiting the city ordered a tailor- made suit. But when he came to pick up his suit, the customer found that one sleeve twisted that way and the other this way; one shoulder bulged out and the other caved in. He pulled and struggled and finally, wrenched and contorted, he managed to make his body fit. As he returned home on the bus, another passenger noticed his odd appearance and asked if Hans the tailor had made the suit. Receiving an affirmative reply, the man remarked, “Amazing! I knew that Hans was a good tailor, but I had no idea he could make a suit fit so perfectly someone as deformed as you.”

Often that is just what we do in the church. We get some idea of what the Christian faith should look like: then we push and shove people into the most grotesque configurations until they fit wonderfully! That is death. It is a wooden legalism which destroys the soul.

Scripture: Mark 7:9; Luke 11:52; Romans 2:28-29