Sunday, June 26, 2011

Ignoring Paul

Summary: Many justify teaching of law by applying "Legalism" only to salvation, and ignore Paul's teachings of forbidding self-righteousness of obeying law as only for an unbeliever. Ironically, they take the teaching of Christ before His death as wholly applicable to a believer's walk after being saved. It should be reversed.

The time line is this: Jesus, cross, Paul. The gospel of grace was not birthed until the resurrection of Christ. Jesus taught the unbelievers and Paul taught the believers. Jesus taught repentance by elevating the impossibility of law (self-righteousness) so one may come to grace. But Paul has already repented from law (his previous identity) and into the light of grace. What he teaches is for ones already saved on how to live out the victorious identity Christ has already given them by grace. Every bit of Paul's teaching is applicable to our lives as believers -- and he spends an extraordinary amount of time and writing to expound on the danger of law for a Christian.

No, according to Paul, legalism is not only unacceptable before salvation, it continues to be unacceptable after, and actually voids faith and frustrates grace. Let's not ignore the central message of this great man of God.



Paul's teaching is plain and clear on the ineffectiveness -- even detriment of obeying law to be justified. This is indisputable, and in agreement by those who say that obeying law is necessary (required) for a believer.

How can such apparent contradiction exist in the minds of these believers as non-conflicting, and embraced as the complete gospel to teach obedience to law?

It is because they define "Legalism" as a no-no only in term of salvation, but not for personal sanctification. They proclaim correctly that salvation is only the work of God, and nothing of man's work can earn Him a place in heaven. The righteousness Isaiah counted as "filthy rag" and Paul as "dung" are rightfully applied when it comes to trying to be saved.

However, once saved this is no longer the case, they say, and that it is then a believer needs to walk even closer to the Lord by obedience to the law and personal holiness. Grace then becomes the justification for ever more stringent requirement of law (discovering boundaries), making it a favor we need to pay back with effort, and the support that "helps" one's walk toward holiness. (These are not found anywhere in the writing of Paul or New Testament.)

When one thinks about this a little more it becomes evident that, by turning back to obedience of law as central to one's "practical" Christian walk, grace is no longer pillar of one's faith but man's work, and that Jesus living inside is not the end goal of rest for us, but still a mean to help us get better and sin less. 

The focus then (both long term and daily) is not anymore on the finished work of Christ, but by the constant reminder and teachings of sin and obedience it shifts ever so imperceptibly toward overcoming sin and achieving holiness on our part -- essentially "finishing" the work for Christ.

For those who see no problem with this "balancing" of law and grace, they conveniently justifies the inconsistency with Paul's teaching by shoveling the illegality of legalism to pre-salvation times that applies only to those needing repentance from sin and good works to be redeemed.

Although there is not one shred of Biblical support for balancing law and grace or adding man's effort to God's finished work under the new covenant, they continue to teach such by ignoring Paul's warning as no longer applicable after salvation, and only glean those scriptures that paint a holy picture of what God had already accomplished in man as a standard to live up to.

Yet they often go back to Jesus in quoting scriptures that justifies keeping the law. It is a bit ironic, that the words used to dilute grace is taken from the One who shed blood and died a most horrible death to birth it.

Nevertheless, let me point out the irony: Paul came after the death of Jesus Christ. All the warnings of law and judgment were spoken by Jesus to bring one to the end of himself for having no ability to live up to such high standards, and repent of self-reliance in an exchange for receiving grace. It was all law and no grace in His direct teachings (although grace is implied richly), for Christ had not yet gone to the cross.

It is true then that legalism has no part in our salvation, and we must repent not from sin (Jews have been doing that for thousands of years) but from trying to justify salvation with our own righteousness so that grace can be received by the mind and heart. This part we are all in agreement.

And if the majority of of Jesus' teachings were to bring an unbeliever (of grace, the Messiah) to repent from law -- not to continue living by his own righteousness, how then can these be used to justify a believer's walk now that grace is given? It only brings confusion when the teachings of Jesus is not put into the context of bringing one to grace, but once we are under grace these cannot be applied any longer.

Jesus said He didn't come to bring peace (agreeing with the law) but division (grace overtaking law), and caused such division among the Jews that it drove them to persecute Him on the cross. He did not destroy the law but fulfilled (died for our transgression of law, not just obeyed fully) it on behalf of man so that we might not taste death.

Christ fulfilled the requirement and terms of the law, and by it He tore up the contract (veil) on our behalf, so we must not go back under it again!

Remember Paul came after Christ? He is now a leader for believers, and his teachings have direct application to anyone who have already received the gift of grace. And by such one cannot say that the legalism Paul refers to is only for pre-salvation unbelievers. Paul is a dramatic example of repenting from law and into grace. Repentance is to turn away completely and not just partially. For someone like Paul to come to grace it is not a balancing act but total transformation into the light of grace.

And what Paul tries to say over and over again is to not come under the bondage once again under law. He is referring to the Christian walk of pure grace, no law. And one cannot conveniently shove his teachings to before accepting Christ as savior; but by the gospel of grace be not ashamed of living solely the life of Christ, no longer under the ministry of condemnation and death in constantly monitoring oneself of sin.

This is the essence of kingdom living -- no more bondage by the freedom in Christ. Let us throw away the crutches of reliance on law, and be lame no more, but stand up and walk the grace walk!

Amen

No comments:

Post a Comment