Shooing Away the Legalism Boogeyman: What Graceless Legalism Isn’t

Robust discussion has resurfaced these past few weeks regarding the law-gospel issue and the relationship of sanctification with justification, being fueled, in part, by Tullian Tchividjian’s removal from TGC’s blogdom. In light of that, the Cripplegate is reposting an article from last year on identifying common legalism misconceptions.

The “L” word. It’s one of the ugliest of all words: legalism. Defined as the idea that we can earn right standing with God, it does violence to the glorious gospel of Christ. It says, “No, sorry, it’s not enough,” to the substitutionary atoning work of Christ. It confuses the way to forgiveness, it tarnishes the gospel of grace, it lays up heavy burdens that no one can carry, it crushes hope, and fuels despair. It declares that man possesses finesse to propitiate the just wrath of God due our sin. For that, legalism is deadly and must be opposed at every level. Paul called it another gospel whose proponents are condemned (Gal 1:8-9).

Consequently, labeling something/one legalistic ought to be done with caution. To bring the charge is to say that this thing or person is in danger of propagating an unsavable system and trampling the cross of Christ. So if we label something legalistic, we better thoroughly understand the gospel, the definition of legalism, and what exactly is happening with what we are labeling as legalistic. Otherwise, we are sinning by erroneously labeling something in opposition to the cross of Jesus Christ.    Continue at Eric Davis

See also:  Where the Sanctification Controversy Lies

10 Ways to Delegate But Not Frustrate

I remember my first day on a new job I had been trying to get for a while. I was nervous, excited, young, but eager to get my fledgling career going on a big project under the oversight of my new bosses. The project manager drove me out to the nearly 1000-acre job site, at which basically a small town was being constructed. We visited what, to me, seemed like a mad frenzy of contractors, over-sized haul trucks, trackhoes, upset foremen, all scattered about with no rhyme or reason. The next day my boss said something like, “Well, we’re going to throw you in the fire. Here are some documents. Have fun!” Needless to say, as time went on, I made some costly mistakes and grew frustrated, both at myself and the lack of direction and communication from my new leadership.   Continue at Eric Davis

Caring Enough to Wonder if What Just Happened, Happened

Mark Driscoll’s recent apology has provided for some thoughtful and edifying discussion.

And as we discuss, it’s best for us to remember a few things: We need to love and pray for him. We need to remember that we’re not omniscient. And we need to hope for the best and pray accordingly.

And in doing so, the church as the opportunity to grow from this. Questions are being raised. Ideas are being circulated. But there have been too many erroneous assertions and objections in the mix.

Here are a few categorically unhelpful ideas buzzing throughout evangelicalism regarding the Driscoll apology:

1. “Concern for the genuineness of one’s repentance is equivalent to a refusal to forgive.”

Continue at Eric Davis

Shooing Away the Legalism Boogeymen

The “L” word. It’s one of the ugliest of all words: legalism. Defined as the idea that we can earn right standing with God, it does violence to the glorious gospel of Christ. It says, “No, sorry, it’s not enough,” to the substitutionary atoning work of Christ. It confuses the way to forgiveness, it tarnishes the gospel of grace, it lays up heavy burdens that no one can carry, it crushes hope, and fuels despair. It declares that man possesses finesse to propitiate the just wrath of God due our sin. For that, legalism is deadly and must be opposed at every level. Paul called it another gospel whose proponents are condemned (Gal 1:8-9).

 

Consequently, labeling something/one legalistic ought to be done with caution. To bring the charge is to say that this thing or person is in danger of propagating an unsavable system and trampling the cross of Christ. So if we label something legalistic, we better thoroughly understand the gospel, the definition of legalism, and what exactly is happening with what we are labeling as legalistic. Otherwise, we are sinning by erroneously labeling something in opposition to the cross of Jesus Christ.   Continue at Eric Davis

10 Ways to Delegate But Not Frustrate

I remember my first day on a new job I had been trying to get for a while. I was nervous, excited, young, but eager to get my fledgling career going on a big project under the oversight of my new bosses. The project manager drove me out to the nearly 1000-acre job site, at which basically a small town was being constructed. We visited what, to me, seemed like a mad frenzy of contractors, over-sized haul trucks, trackhoes, upset foremen, all scattered about with no rhyme or reason. The next day my boss said something like, “Well, we’re going to throw you in the fire. Here are some documents. Have fun!” Needless to say, as time went on, I made some costly mistakes and grew frustrated, both at myself and the lack of direction and communication from my new leadership.

Too often church leadership teams can treat dear saints this way in the local church. What can happen is people, who love Christ, will take initiative, or respond to requests, to function as a body part and be obedient to use their giftedness. They have the humility to fill a need as a ministry leader, yet existing can often say, “Great, we’re going to throw you in the fire, have fun!” without clear task definition and encouragement. Understandably, serving under this type of leadership can easily result in frustrated sheep.   Continue at Eric Davis

Why Reformed Pastors Need Not Be Charismatic – Part 2

In yesterday’s post, I introduced some of the popular misconceptions about cessationism from the recent Desiring God conference session, “Sovereign Grace, Spiritual Gifts, and the Pastor: How Should a Reformed Pastor Be Charismatic?”

In it, Pastor Tope Koleoso asserted that Reformed pastors “should” and “must” also be charismatic. The bulk of his message implied that cessationism is an insufficient position for pastors to hold because it: fears the work of the Holy Spirit; preaches a deficient gospel; is pragmatic; does not rely on or believe in the Holy Spirit; and cannot rightly do battle against Satan and demonic forces (among other things). The first three misconceptions were addressed yesterday. Here are the remaining two:

Misconception #4: Cessationists do not rely on, believe in, or think they need the Holy Spirit.   

Using Christ’s ministry as the starting point, Koleoso remarked:

“The Spirit came upon [Jesus] and this triggered the beginning of his ministry… I want to submit to you that if he needed the Holy Spirit, it’s nothing short of arrogance for us to think, ‘We’ll just go, we’ll be fine.’ The plan is not just for you to go. The plan is for you to go and be fruitful.”

Koleoso obviously assumes that cessationists fail to do ministry “by the Spirit,” or–worse–do not even believe in the necessity of the Spirit.

He is not alone in this wrong assumption. Scott Thomas, a former president of Acts 29, commented on cessationism by saying, “We [Acts 29] believe it’s not God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Bible. And we don’t believe it is God formerly known as God the Holy Spirit. May he rest in peace.”    Continue at Eric Davis

See also: This is why charismatics are simply not Reformed

The Disastrous Consequences of Heavy-Handed Leadership

I remember the evening with shameful regret. One of our leadership teams was experiencing some normal ministry struggles resulting in a period of disunity. Though the situation was not disastrous, you may not have known it from my response in the moment. In prideful pomp, I said some regretful words out of a heavy-handed spirit. Later, a brother graciously confronted me. I was amazed at the destructive leadership of which I was easily capable. At that time, God pressed upon me the danger of heavy-handed leadership. It’s subtle, all too prominent, often sinfully excused as “righteous anger,” and, if gone unchecked, will leave a path of carnage.

It is the unmistakable symptom of a kingly motive, looking for any way to build one’s little kingdom. No man is exempt from the intoxicating influence of a little power. Anyone is an easy victim to it. Power is a dangerous thing for a mere man to have; especially a young man new to ministry.

In his younger days, it’s possible that Peter made similar mistakes. Perhaps for that reason, God penned the mandate to future leaders: biblical leadership means not “lording it over those allotted to your charge” (1 Peter 5:3).

To “lord it over” carries the idea of “exercising dominion against someone, for example, to one’s own advantage” (Werner Foerster, TDNT, 3:1098), or, a “heavy-handed use of authority for personal enlargement that is seen in the desire to dominate” (D. Edmond Hiebert, 1 Peter, p. 305). The word is also used of the demon which attacked and “subdued” the seven sons of the high priest in Acts 19:16.  Keep Reading >>>

Church-Planting and Idolatry

My daughter has this book about a lizard named Lucas. Lucas has a dilemma. He lives in a zoo with many other animals. Because he is little, and can’t catch air like the dolphins or roar like the lions, poor Lucas is tormented with an inferiority complex. So what does he do? One night while lying in bed, he dreams up a myriad of tricks, like dancing on his hands (do lizards have hands?), balancing a cane on his nose, with a top hat in his hand to conquer his complex. He’s so excited, he can hardly sleep. Sure enough, the next day, his exhibition eclipses his rivals. Lucas lives happily ever-after as he finally slays his complex by securing the spotlight and so, his own self-veneration. I don’t like the book. It’s teaching my daughter a radically egotistical and enslaving worldview that will only fertilize her already depraved heart. And at the same time, it’s piercingly convicting into my own sin I’ve seen in my church-planting ministry.

In a previous post on church-planting and pragmatism, I mentioned that something deeper is going on beneath pragmatic tendencies in our ministries. One of the most painfully convicting moments that God, in his grace, has brought upon me was when I finally saw what fueled my whatever-works-idolatry. I had the same egotistical bent as Lucas; veneration of self; a blinding lust for self-affirmation cloaked in “doing ministry.”

A desire for ministry, and especially church-planting, should never be thought of as a sanitized, neutral desire. On the contrary, there are not many more dangerous means of laboring for self-approval than ministry. It seems so innocent, so noble, to plant a church. And don’t get me wrong, it is a fine work the planter desires. However, precisely because it seems so noble is why it can be so dangerous. And the more you scan the current evangelical landscape, the more you will see that church-planting is hijacked as a cloaked way to secretly feed the craving for approval.   Keep Reading >>>

Church-Planting and Pulpit-Priority

If you have tuned in to church-planting chatter lately, you may have heard something along these lines: “We’re more about community, you’re about a Sunday event.” “We’re more about being missional, you’re more about a pulpit.” It’s an emphasis on community and/or mission, over preaching.

Similarly, I recently heard this advice: “If you are on your way to the Sunday gathering and see your neighbor painting his fence, forget the gathering, turn around, go home and get your paintbrush.”

Now, serving our neighbors for the gospel is faithful, no doubt. Painting your neighbors fence could be in-roads to sharing the only message that saves. 

Genuine biblical community is a non-negotiable for the local church.

Dangerous Dichotomies

Even so, among church-planting discussion, there seems to be a false distinction between “community” and “missional,” and the ministry of the pulpit. There is a temptation to consider the pulpit a less fashionable, or even an optional, accoutrement to real, church-planting ministry.    Keep Reading>>>

Church-Planting and Pragmatism

I remember that evening clearly. It was during the first year of the church-plant. I was on edge, feeling like I couldn’t take it anymore. Through a variety of humbling circumstances, attendance went from 10 to 50 and back to 13. It drove me crazy. In an act of desperation, I insisted our church put on a community dinner ministry, on a different day than our corporate gathering, with hopes that more would come to us. An elaborate meal was made, much money spent, chairs and table set up, and our core-team ready to bombard anyone who came in to “build a relationship.” The time came and no one showed up. I ran into the bathroom, closed the stall door, sat on the toilet, and begged God with a neck-vein-popping prayer to bring someone. I think two or three people came.

And we never saw them again. I was humbled, weak, and desperate for someone to help me get the church off the ground. Our core-team was working tirelessly and faithfully. I was looking for some way, any way, for the church-plant to get traction. And that was precisely the problem. I was looking for a way; I was on my own little hunt through the labyrinth of church-plant methods to just get the thing growing. No, a desire for growth in one’s church-plant is not wrong. But when the goal becomes to get something going, above ordinary faithfulness to be a good servant of Christ Jesus (1 Tim 4:6), we’re off the mark.    Keep Reading...

Church Planters and Missionolatry

I heard a pastor say recently: “If you know Jesus, I am sorry to break it to you: this church is not for you.” He continued by addressing those who came to know Jesus the previous week at the church: “Last week was the last week that [this church] existed for you.” Though maybe not to this degree, I think many of us fledgling-planters have erred on the side of an “its-all-about-mission” philosophy of ministry.

Certainly it is exciting when droves of souls are genuinely converted to Jesus Christ. No doubt, the church always needs a zeal for evangelism and I frequently see a lack thereof in myself, rooted in pride and laziness. Repentance is needed. Insofar as doxological zeal exists in church-planters, we ought to praise God.

However, grave consequences result among young church-planters and pastors who—even unknowingly—embrace an “all-about-mission,” “this-church-is-no-longer-for-you,” and “the-gospel-causes-us-to-look-up…not-in-to-ourselves-and-how-we’re-doing,” philosophy of ministry.

The error is that sanctification gets sacrificed on the altar of mission. It is an error I have made in my ministry, being so fixated on getting people in, I have neglected those who are already there.     Keep Reading>>>

Cautions for Church Planters

There can be no doubt that the fulfillment of the Great Commission is disciple-making, and that should result in the planting of local churches. Not long after the church was born on Pentecost, church-planting became the chief endeavor for the Apostle Paul and his team as they were chased around the Roman Empire. If evangelism is the flower of the church, it is seen blooming when new churches are planted.

Thankfully, there is a church-planting movement in evangelicalism today, for which we ought to praise God.

Church-planting is a unique opportunity for many reasons. Your planting team gets to set the doctrinal direction and philosophy of ministry from ground up. Simultaneously there is an unmatched excitement in seeing Christ build his church first-hand.

But the reality is that with this trend, church-planting is becoming a glamorous ministry fad. It’s fashionable to be identified as a “church-planter.” With all the excitement and rush to get new churches off the ground, the movement is becoming hasty and careless, both from pulpits and in pews.   Keep Reading>>>