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

Growing Up Gothard

"You may run from sorrow, as we have. Sorrow will find you." — August Nicholson in The Village

My wife and I (Ted) were in the mood for a '90s movie, so we rented M. Night Shayamalan's The Village, which actually came out in 2004 but is still a '90s movie in terms of its earnestness and desire to be deep. It succeeds (in being deep) inasmuch as it always makes me think about the church, and about trends in the church.

In a nutshell, it's about a group of academics—all of whom have been deeply wounded by life in a fallen, sinful world—who decide to follow one charismatic leader (William Hurt) into forming an 1800s-style commune on a nature preserve. The idea is that if you take away everything modern and broken and hurtful about the world and replace it with floor-length skirts, suspenders, chickens, and primitive farm equipment, then nothing can hurt you. The movie then spins out a wonderful narrative that illustrates how there is no fleeing from total depravity. It finds us because it is in our hearts to begin with.

Utopia will elude humans, because sin causes the dystopia. Yet we still long for utopia and sometimes try like crazy to create it.

Recently, my friend Derek shared about what life was like growing up inside the Bill Gothard movement in the 1980s and '90s. His account was utterly fascinating both in terms of how weird it was, and also how eerily similar it sounds (in some ways) to how some Midwestern Reformed families are rolling today with the homeschooling, chicken-raising, huge-family-having, government-disdaining, and so on. The Gothard movement, as far as I can tell, was part life-coaching, part para-church organization, part-homeschool curriculum, part-subculture, and part-arena show.   Continue at Ted Kluck and Derek Lounds

Moralism is Not the Gospel (But Many Christians Think it Is)

One of the most amazing statements by the Apostle Paul is his indictment of the Galatian Christians for abandoning the Gospel. “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel,” Paul declared. As he stated so emphatically, the Galatians had failed in the crucial test of discerning the authentic Gospel from its counterfeits.

His words could not be more clear: “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you have received, he is to be accursed!” [Gal. 1:6-7]    Continue at Al Mohler

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

Everyday Christianity: A Faith Free From The Accidental Pharisaism of Missional, Radical, Crazy and Other Superlatives

Every day matters. This is the very simple message of what it means to be made in the image and likeness of God and to live one’s life to the glory of God. You don’t need to be “missional.” You don’t even need to be “radical” (especially since radical commonly means “very different from the norm”). 

In fact, the Bible does not encourage superlative adjectives to describe following Christ at all. Adjectival superlatives tend to create new forms of legalism whereby the work and person of Christ is no longer sufficient to be in right relationship with God. The norm is not enough. Although those promoting various adjectives have no intention of doing harm, hearers often embrace the adjective as the basis of genuine faith instead of the language of Scripture.

Young Christian adults are torn in a sea of modern adjectives that tend to become shame-filled and often debilitating burdens. Larry Osborne warns about five tribal communities that may be accidentally doing harm: 

(1) “Radical” Christians, 

(2) “Crazy” Christians, 

(3) “Missional” Christians, 

(4) “Gospel-Centered” Christians and 

(5) Revolutionary and Organic Christians. According to Osborne, each of these tribes has inadvertently created accidental pharisaism because if one does not live out one’s Christian life according to the norms and codes of their respective tribe one will be looked down upon. Moreover, for those within each tribe, it leaves them vulnerable to the arrogant narcissism that believes “our” tribe gets Christianity “right” while the others are substandard.   Continue at Anthony Bradley

Another Look at the Bikini Question

I’m probably treading on thin ice with this article. The wiser part of my conscience told me to leave this issue alone. But this subject bugs me. And I know that it is the bane of many women’s summers—the bikini question. Not just for us, but for our daughters as well.

 

Rachel Clark wrote a thoughtful article challenging women to ditch their bikinis as a sacrifice for all the men around them who cannot control themselves. I respect her decision to wear a tankini or a one piece, but I cringe at telling women that they are not modest if they wear a bikini. As soon as we make it about bikinis and tankinis, I think that we are missing the point. Sure, there are many bikinis out there that are inappropriate. But this is also the case with one-pieces and tankinis.

Is stomach exposure really the issue? Are you really making a sacrifice for the guys around you when you are wearing a flattering tankini? And let’s face it, none of us want to walk around the beach in an unflattering swimsuit. Of course, this also begs the question, If a woman looks good in her bathing suit, is that being immodest? There’s also the question that I’ve asked before, Can a man admire a beautiful woman without sexually fantasizing about her?    Continue at Aimee Byrd

Legalism or Love? Religious or Radical?

If you’re struggling with legalism, don’t fight it by quitting your quiet times. That’s the good advice I remember once hearing from a pastor.

In other words, there’s a temptation to presumably fight legalism by running away from good things, whether Bible reading or acts of love, because we mistake them to be part of the problem.

We women are susceptible to this temptation. We are bombarded with choices. Between schooling options, birthing styles, what we should wear, and even what we should or shouldn’t eat, it is easy to confuse principle and practice. A confusion can set in on whether we are really living for God’s glory, or if we’re shackled to legalism. But I think where the confusion starts is with the definition of legalism.

What Is Legalism?

Legalism is pursuing good works with the intention of earning God’s favor. The point is to save one’s self. It is good works without believing that God justifies us by faith alone. John Piper explains it this way: “The essence of legalism is when faith is not the engine of obedience” (“The Anatomy of Legalism and the Discipline of Prayer”).

When we work hard for God in order to earn his favor, we are not operating with faith. Instead, we are saying that we must add to the finished work of Jesus on the cross. His work wasn’t enough, and therefore we must work to make him happy — we must take it into our own hands to be accepted by God.    Continue at Trillia Newbell

The Heresy of Perfectionism

An ancient heresy of the distinction between two types of Christians, carnal and Spirit-filled, is the heresy of perfectionism. Perfectionism teaches that there is a class of Christians who achieve moral perfection in this life. To be sure, credit is given to the Holy Spirit as the agent who brings total victory over sin to the Christian. But there is a kind of elitism in perfectionism, a feeling that those who have achieved perfection are somehow greater than other Christians. The “perfect” ones do not officially—take credit for their state, but smugness and pride have a way of creeping in.

The peril of perfectionism is that it seriously distorts the human mind. Imagine the contortions through which we must put ourselves to delude us into thinking that we have in fact achieved a state of sinlessness.

Inevitably the error of perfectionism breeds one, or usually two, deadly delusions. To convince ourselves that we have achieved sinlessness, we must either suffer from a radical overestimation of our moral performance or we must seriously underestimate the requirements of God’s law. The irony of perfectionism is this: Though it seeks to distance itself from antinomianism, it relentlessly and inevitably comes full circle to the same error.    Continue at R. C. Sproul

Will the Real Pharisee Please Stand Up!

So, what exactly is a Pharisee, anyway?  Every Christian has some idea; in fact it has become the Christian version of “Nazi” – you win any argument by being the first to call the other guy a Pharisee.  But do many Christians know what a Pharisee is?

There are a number of passages in the Gospels which speak of the Pharisees, but one brief interaction summarizes the major elements of their theology and practice.  It is found in Matthew 15:

¹ Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, ² “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” ³ He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? ⁴ For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ ⁵ But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,” ⁶ he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the wordof God. ⁷ You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:
⁸ “‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me; ⁹ in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”

And what do we learn about the Pharisees from this?

The first element of Phariseeism is clearly implied, and Jesus makes it even more clear elsewhere: Pharisees were moralists.  That doesn’t just mean that they believed in morality; if that were so, every member of every religion ever would be a Pharisee.  Rather it means that they saw personal morality as the path to redemption.  It is why they became so adept at popping up in every situation to point out perceived sins.  Only a moralist could be concerned with whether or not Jesus’ disciples washed their hands.  This central element of their theology is what Jesus had in mind when He told the parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector.  The one saw that righteousness was unobtainable and relied on the mercy of God.  But the other – the Pharisee – thought his own moral character was enough for him to draw near to God.    Continue at ChantryNotes

Modesty Q&A with Tim Challies

Last month The Book Club at Desiring Virtue read Modest: Men and Women Clothed in the Gospel by Tim Challies and R.W. Glenn. Toward the end of the month I asked you, the readers of Desiring Virtue, to share your questions on modesty (either from the book or on the topic of modesty in general). I sent five of these questions off to Tim who was kind enough to reply to each of them.

 

I would like to thank everyone who submitted questions (you made it really hard to choose just five!) and also of course thank Tim for taking the time out of his busy schedule to address Desiring Virtue’s readers. So, without further ado, here are your questions and Tim Challies’ answers…

I really liked how, in the book Modest, you discussed modesty as a heart issue, rather than simply giving a list of dos and don’ts. I could tell from the tone of the book that you were trying very hard to avoid making legalistic statements, but I was left wondering–how would you describe a modest heart? -Amy

Thanks for the kind words, Amy. It has been interesting to me that one of the most common critiques of the book is that we did not provide that tear-out list of do’s and don’ts that could be taped to the mirror or stuck to the fridge. Somewhere in all of us is the lazy legalist that really just wants to cut to the chase and deal with rules.    Continue at Desiring Virtue

The New Legalism: Missional, Radical, Narcissistic, and Shamed

Anthony Bradley, Associate Professor of Theology and Ethics at The King’s College in New York City, has an excellent article today over at the Acton Institute’s Power blog. He starts with an observation he made recently on Facebook and Twitter:

Being a “radical,” “missional,” Christian is slowly becoming the “new legalism.” We need more ordinary God and people lovers (Matt 22:36-40).

He goes on to explain his comment:

I continue to amazed by the number of youth and youth adults who are stressed and burnt out from the regularly shaming and feelings of inadequacy if they happen to not being doing something unique and special. Today’s Millennial generation is being fed the message that if they don’t do something extraordinary in this life they are wasting their gifts and potential. The sad result is that many young adults feel ashamed if they “settle” into ordinary jobs, get married early and start families, live in small towns, or as 1 Thess 4:11 says, “aspire to live quietly, and to mind [their] affairs, and to work with [their] hands.” For too many Millennials their greatest fear in this life is being an ordinary person with a non-glamorous job, living in the suburbs, and having nothing spectacular to boast about.

Dr. Bradley goes on to explain two major factors in how this happened:   Continue at Rachel Miller

The Moralists Will Be Back

It is an historical fact that moralism (the confusion of justification with sanctification) never dies, it just goes dormant periodically. The Reformation defeated 1000 years of moralism only to see forms of it re-emerge in the Protestant churches even before Luther died. It resurfaced in the Remonstrant theology, in Richard Baxter (and in those orthodox Reformed whom he influenced), in the Scottish neonomians in the 18th century, in the Oxford (Tractarian) movement in the 19th century, in Charles Finney, and has more or less dominated American Protestantism (whether “evangelical” or liberal) for most of American history. 

 

Over the last few years in the NAPARC world and in satellite groups, the orthodox have won several strategic victories in the courts and assemblies of the Reformed churches. The following denominations or federations have rejected the Federal Vision/NPP and related forms of moralism (justification by grace and cooperation with grace) in no particular order (from memory):   Continue at Heidel Blog

See also:  Can You Be a Christian and Not Love Jesus?

Don't Sanitize the Psalms

In some churches, if our public worship and prayers echoed what we find in the Psalms we might find ourselves called before the church board for correction. Unlike the stoic legalist or safe churchman, the psalmist expressed the full range of emotions in worship. He felt no need to pretend that he had it all together. He did not limit himself to safe clichés about God.

Yet God's people's deeply cherish the Psalms because they openly express many of the emotions we feel. Sometimes the psalmist expressed deep anxiety and fear; other times he was plagued with a sense of despondency and discouragement. He vented anger over injustices and admitted a loss of perspective when he envied the prosperity of the ungodly.

The psalmist reminds us that the language of lament is permitted in worship. Christopher J. H. Wright suggests,

It is precisely those who have the closest relationship with God who feel most at liberty to pour out their pain in protest to God---without fear of reproach. Lament is not only allowed in the Bible; it is modeled in abundance. God seems to want to give us as many words with which to fill out our complaint forms as to write our thank-you notes. (The God I Don't Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith)

The Psalmist's Full Range of Emotions

Although the psalmist pondered dark questions out loud---even expressing feelings of helplessness and despair---more often, he overflowed with joy and praise to the God who is his "mighty rock and refuge" (Psalm 62:7). His astonishment at the compassion and unfailing love of God resounds throughout the psalms as one amazed that God "does not treat us as our sins deserve" (Psalm 103:10).   Continue at Steve Cornell

Predestination Destroys Legalism

Predestination destroys legalism. If salvation is by Christ alone, it leaves no room for boasting or trusting in ourselves, even a little. It strips us bare and forces us to abandon all hope in our efforts or rules ... man-made rules non-predestinarians tend to make to demonstrate they are more worthy than others of God's grace (an oxymoron). The Scripture declares: "It is because of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” (1 Cor 1:30-31)

This is not to say that Reformed people cannot be legalistic. Human beings find any way possible to do so, Reformed included. It means to say, rather, that if UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY the doctrine of Grace ALONE in Christ ALONE will have the real effect of stripping us of legalism etc. Again only God's grace can do so. This likewise was not an attempt to show Reformed superiority but the effect of a true understanding of the Bible will have on someone who beholds the majesty of God and is struck down by the fact that God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy.

----------------------

After I wrote this, I had the following discussion ensue which I believe worth posting.

Visitor: Please explain to me what you mean by God will have mercy on who he will have mercy on. Would you try to say that God would send someone to hell without a choice of accepting and serving Him?

 

Response: Thank you for your question. First, "He will have mercy on whom he has mercy" is not my words but a direct quote from Scripture (Romans :9:15, 16). That being settled, let me answer your question.... everyone who hears the gospel are presented with the command or summons to believe.   Continue at Reformation Theology

Avoiding Legalism in Our Sabbath-Keeping

The position of Day One¹ regarding the abiding validity of the fourth commandment is essentially the position of the Westminster Confession of Faith, which states that God, 'by a positive, moral and perpetual commandment binding men in all ages . . . has appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto him' (WCF 21.7). This day of rest and worship was, in the Old Testament, appointed on the last day of the week, but is now, by virtue of Christ's resurrection, appointed on the first day of the week.

This position recognises that some things did change from Old to New Testaments, while other things remain the same. Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfil it, and to keep it, and to set us an example in keeping it too. The new birth results in a new heart, on which the commandments have been written, and in which there is a new impulse to obey God out of a willing love and in devoted service.

Now what . . .?

 
Not everyone agrees with this position, of course, but let's leave that for the moment. Even when we have granted the principle that the fourth commandment continues to be relevant, and that the Lord's Day is God's new holy day, how are we keep it holy? And how are we to avoid the peril of legalism in deciding what may or may not be done on the Lord's Day?

I suspect that for most Christians, this is the most challenging issue. Much of what Jesus said about the Sabbath he said in the context of arguing with the Pharisees who had become over-scrupulous in their attempt to keep the commandments. As a result, they accused Jesus of breaking the Sabbath when he healed, or when he performed some other miracle.

The question for us then becomes - how can we ensure that our Sabbath-keeping is like that of Jesus, and not like that of the Pharisees? How can we avoid being legalistic and Pharisaic in our Sabbath observance?

Defining legalism

 
Perhaps we need to begin with definitions. If something is 'legal', that means either that it concerns the law or that it is permitted by the law. 'Legalism' is the term that is used when someone is more concerned about the strict letter of the law rather than its spirit.  Continue at Iain D. Campbell

What Christian Modesty Looks Like

We live in a world that is very concerned about how women dress. But we live in a culture that is not at all concerned about immodesty. C. J. Mahaney describes immodesty this way: “Immodesty, then, is much more than wearing a short skirt or low-cut top; it’s the act of drawing undue attention to yourself. It’s pride, on display by what you wear.” And that can be pride in your looks, your taste, or your purchasing power.  

 

Often, Christian women are motivated to modesty by a fear of causing lust and fear of display. But that is an unChristian understanding of modesty. It is so easy for modesty to merely external, and to fall into legalism because our clothing is not an expression of a heart that is in love with Christ and seeks to bring good to other people. Modest clothing is motivated by a desire to bring God glory and to bless others.

John MacArthur asks, “How does a woman discern the sometimes fine line between proper dress and dressing to be the center of attention? The answer starts in the intent of the heart. A woman should examine her motives and goals for the way she dresses. Is her intent to show the grace and beauty of womanhood?…. Is it to reveal a humble heart devoted to worshiping God? Or is it to call attention to herself, and flaunt her…beauty?  Or worse, to attempt to allure men sexually? A woman who focuses on worshiping God will consider carefully how she is dressed, because her heart will dictate her wardrobe and appearance.”   Continue at The Christian Pundit

The Steps of Biblical Sanctification

You probably hear a lot about God’s sanctifying work in your life through His Word. But what does that process look like? How do you know if the living truth of Scripture is actually at work in your life? How do you know that God’s Word has actually taken root in your life?

To help you understand your own spiritual growth and how God’s Word works in your life, I want to highlight the key steps in the process of sanctification with three simple words.

The first is cognition. God’s pattern for spiritual growth starts with understanding what the Bible says and what it means. The meaning of the Scripture is the Scripture—if you don’t know what it means, you don’t have the truth. So the process of spiritual growth starts with understanding what the Bible says.

Many years ago as a child, the importance of knowing and understanding God’s Word was impressed upon me. I began to read my Bible repetitiously—day after day, over and over. The further I went, the more connections I was able to draw from book to book. After a few years, I was overwhelmed with the understanding that the Bible is its own interpreter. And you can see that conviction borne out in my teaching to this day.

True sanctification begins with renewing your mind. You must know the truth, plain and simple. There’s no premium on ignorance in sanctification. You’re not going to get there through some emotional or mystical experience. Spiritual growth won’t happen by osmosis—it requires the discipline of constantly putting God’s truth in your mind.

Don’t confuse childlike faith with childish thinking. There are no shortcuts in sanctification—a lack of biblical knowledge will always retard your spiritual growth. Apart from the truth of Scripture, there simply is no mechanism to restrain your sinful flesh. Legalism can’t do it. Pragmatism can’t either. The same goes for mysticism and sacramentalism. The only certain method for true spiritual growth starts with absorbing God’s eternal truth.  Continue at John MacArthur

Legalism or Obedience?

Try to imagine it. You are playing a game of Monopoly, and your opponent throws a ten with the dice. Then he picks up his player marker and begins counting his steps. Immediately you realize he will land on the corner — “Go to Jail!” Well, he doesn’t want to land there, so he stops just one step short, on New York Avenue. Immediately you cry foul. But he responds indignantly, “I only stopped one step short. What’s the difference? Don’t be such a legalist!”

Will you feel ashamed? Will you now feel that you have been too persnickety and legalistic? Too careful to obey the rules? Or will you feel that you have been cheated?

To make the point another way, I have never yet met a parent who complained that his child was a legalist because he obeyed too much. In fact, it would be impossible for any parent to imagine how his child could obey too much.

Yet, find a Christian who is careful to obey God in everything, and we won’t have to look far to find another Christian to call him a legalist. What do we make of this?

It’s a word we all hate, but exactly what is legalism? Legalism is that attempt to establish or maintain a right standing with God by means of our own efforts. The Jews of Paul’s day, for example, thought they could be saved by keeping the law. Anyone claiming to be Christian knows better than that, but even among believers there is sometimes found that attempt to maintain a right standing with God by means of personal efforts. They seem to think that having been saved by grace they must maintain that salvation by works. Legalism.

Still more broadly the term is also used of those Christians who insist on extra-biblical standards of behavior and judge godliness accordingly. For some it is zippers instead of buttons. No hair touching the ears for men. No jewelry for women. No slacks for women. No movies. No playing cards. And so on it goes. I’m sure you’ve heard of them. Extra-biblical standards of behavior are used to measure godliness. Legalism.   Continue at  Fred G. Zaspel

Modesty: Legalism, Antinomianism, or Obedience?

Over the weekend, the Aquila report linked to an article by Matthew Tuininga on modesty, which has been a hot topic for the past few years in evangelicalism. The article argued that “the problem with an issue like modesty is that one can always take a stricter, more modest position than the next person” and that in discussing modesty or enforcing certain aspects of it, we “fall into the trap of implicitly viewing women and their bodies as evils that are to be avoided or hidden”. We have all been around women who dress in a way that hides the fact that they are women; they behave as though breasts, waists, and hips are an embarrassing necessity instead of part of God’s good creation. This error is not helpful.

But neither is the error that modesty is a relative issue, that each woman can come up with her own standard. And even in conservative churches, the tendency to antinomianism when it comes to women’s clothing is just as prevalent and dangerous as legalism is. I know of a conservative, Reformed congregation where the elders decided to keep the sanctuary uncomfortably cold this summer so that women would be forced to wear cardigans instead of baring so much skin in worship. A little while ago I was speaking to a young woman from a church that is full of legalism but who looked more like a soap opera actress than a professing believer. Even for conservative Christians, immodesty is still an issue.  Continue at Rebecca VanDoodewaard

Youth Ministry's Tendency Toward Legalism

Editors' Note: Everyone has an opinion about youth ministry. Parents, pastors, and the youth themselves have expectations and demands that don't always overlap. But the rash of dire statistics about the ineffectiveness of youth ministry has prompted rethinking in these ranks. So we devote one day per week this month to exploring several issues in youth ministry, including its history, problems, and biblical mandate. The Gospel Coalition thanks Cameron Cole and the leadership team of Rooted: A Theology Conference for Student Ministry for their help in compiling this series. Cathedral Church of the Advent in Birmingham, Alabama, will host their 2012 conference from August 9 to 11. Speakers Ray Ortlund, Timothy George, and Mary Willson will expound on the conference theme, "Adopted: The Beauty of Grace."

**********

I have walked for ten years with Allen, who was my closest Christian friend in high school. During our senior year we were "on fire" for God and set out to walk with Christ throughout college. After our freshman year, I watched my poor friend weep often about why he did not experience Christ in a real way. His youth ministry had sold him a message that faithful obedience before God would yield an experiential intimacy and spiritual euphoria, which he failed to encounter. In spite of tireless religious striving, Allen felt as if his pursuits resulted in a tumbling spiral into a deep, dark void.

Not surprisingly, Allen became disenchanted with Christianity and the church. Only after ten years of courageous waiting and honest reflection has he been able to re-engage church without resentment and wounding. He synopsizes his youth ministry's message with a story, which his youth pastor used to tell kids. The story basically involved a sad man, sitting in a corner, disappointed and hurt by his children, who he wished would come pay attention to him.  Continue at Cameron Cole

 

IMAGE