legalism? can someone please define..?

I've heard the term "legalism" used before, i'm not sure I understand what "legalism" is..Can someone please define "legalism" in a church or in a person or whatever it applies to..Thank you!

The term legalism has been used by many to justify spiritual liberalism. However having grown up in what many termed a "legalistic" church I needed to really pray my way into real "freedom" rather than just throw off anything I in my flesh deemed to be legalism, ie "not throw out the baby with the water".Legalism is when we try to make ourselves acceptable to God by doing something other than just faith in the finished work of the cross and the washing of the shed Blood of Christ. We need to ensure that we never teach people "how to be" or "how to behave like" a christian rather than teach them what it is that brings about the rebirth by the Spirit. When we do things led by the Spirit as a spiritual being then we do them under the compulsion of heaven and not as a "fleshly sacrifice" to appease God. Thus for many the getting rid of televison and the abstinance from various forms of entertainment is not legalism but a divien interaction between them and heaven.If however we teach that the same acts make one "acceptable" then we are on legalistic grounds.Paul

I believe the word legalism simply means that a person can keep the law and commandments in his own flesh and therefore trying to justify themselves before the God.This is absolutely true. Legalism is trying to keep laws in the absense of the presence and power of God. Legalism trys to work towards holiness- yet holiness is the outworking of the Holy Spirit in our life. Get full of the Holy Spirit and you will live holy. 1) Teaching the commandments of men as if they were the commandments of God2)Producing good works to earn salvation.Key in on what is said in number 1 and watch this progression:a) Rules of men become the traditions of men.b) Traditions of men become the commandments of men.c) Commandments of men are taught as the commandments of God.It has been said that religion is the worship of God in His absense; I submit that legalism is the practice of rules in His absense. God Bless,-Robert

bubbaguy wrote:Legalism is also spliting of hairs in theological terms. It means that, for instance, a certain set of words are manditory for true repentance or to define a belief strictly and narrowly. An example is confessing Christ and your beliefs about the precise nature of Jesus. You can get very legalistic about this. I try to stick to a simple, Christ Jesus died for our sins. But you can get legalistic about this very quickly if you have a narrowly set definition of salvation. Legalism is a form of putting ourselves in God's place and making judgements about others.Jake (Bub)While part of this may be true I think knowlege of "the precise nature of Jesus" is a very important part of combatting legalism... take this from Collosians 2 for example:"8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; 10 and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power."what do people think?

Belief in Christ is more than an intellectual assent. I don't fully understand God (and never will) but am asking Him to teach me His ways. His ways and thoughts are higher than our ways and thoughts.There's proof throughout the scripture for this hypothesis but here's three verses from John 14.Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. Joh 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

Jesus spoke of the "weightier matters of the law" which were mercy, justice, and faithfulness. These were to be set as the foundation to approaching God's commandments and interpreting them. Often those who are consumed with how long a woman's dress must be, or how long their hair must be, or how short a man's hair must be have often forgotten the principle of mercy. Thus, they come up with bizzarre means of interpreting what is acceptable and what is not.

Legalism can also be where we take what God has told us and then assume that it applies to everyone else.For example, God told me to stop drinking a specific type of caffeinated soft drink. If I take what God has directed to do and then say it's for the entire body of Christ, I've turned it into legalism.God is doing this because He's reaching to take out something in my heart. On the other hand, if something is clearly sin, then it's not legalism to say to stop sinning.There's a clear distinction between the two things.

I never will be able to wrap my mind around the mechanics of how our infinately powerful God resided in a human form. Its not that I don't believe it, I just don't understand it. Like trying to conceptualize infinity all at once. It is beyond the human minds ability for comprehension.He did not reside in human form, He became human.

philologos wrote:He did not reside in human form, He became human.I am glad I read your post before I posted ;-), as I was about to say the same thing.Dan

I'm listening to a great sermon (as I type) on this topic by Zac Poonen entitled "The Call of God - The Call to Holiness." Here is a link: https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?lid=4317.One of my prayers these days is that the Lord will give me an increased fear of him and that I will quickly obey Him.I'm still thinking about what you said here Jesse. Our motives are so important and as we draw nearer to Jesus, He will expose those motives for what they really are. When we really want to be someone, that's when we must be very careful.I simply want to walk in holiness because if I fail to do it, then God's presence is gone from my life and I can't live without the presence of the Holy Spirit in my prayer closet and through out the day. That's not to say that I haven't sinned since this discovery, but it leads me away from sin.There's a great book on Rhees Howell by Norman Grubb that is a great book by anyone who really is looking to live a sold out life to Christ.

I don't see any distinction. And this also illustrates a form of legalism.I think you sense it even if you don't 'see' it. This is why you refuse to say "God became a man". You believe that somehow God presenced Himself in the person of Jesus. This is not what the Bible teaches; it teaches that God became man. Here is the scriptural revelation, everything else is speculation.(Joh 1:14 KJV) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.The first statement, in the original, is ginomai, which means 'to come into being'. When he had become man, he 'resided' among us. God takes up residence in human beings by His Spirit as a result of regeneration, but God did not take up residence (reside) in Jesus. In Jesus, the Word became flesh, and then 'resided' with the human race as part of it.A rhetorical question doesn't usually expect an answer; the answer is supposed to be obvious. The Son was communicating with the Father; is that complicated? That is not a rhetorical question.

A Rhetorical Question: Ron, during the time Jesus was on earth (God became fully human, as you say.) who was Jesus communicating with when He prayed?Bubbaguy,Do you hold to a modalist view of the Godhead?