LEGALISM

I have been kicking around the thought that much of what we in the church, as a whole, call discipleship could be viewed as legalism. I want it to be understood that I believe in making disciples. I also know that the One we are supposed to disciple people to is Jesus. I wonder if we do not, in a lot of cases, disciple people to a system or to ourselves “I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas”

1 Cor 1:12-13 (ESV)

 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.”
13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

It also seems to me that walls are put up when we (in the name of discipleship) put people through a long process and take the position that until they have reached a certain state of maturity (that we have determined is appropriate) they can not be used or allowed to have a place in the Kingdom. If we are not careful I believe we can put up walls that Jesus is not putting up and keep people out. This speaks to me of a heart of legalism, and it stinks of death.

2 Cor 3:5-6 (ESV)

5   Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God,
6 who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.  

 

 I believe that those that make it past those walls can take on a hardness about them that comes across as haughty, even prideful. Take a look at what Jesus said to the Pharisees about their “disciples”.

 Matt 23:15 (ESV)

15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte (convert-disciple), and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.

 These people were Pharisees, they were “lawyers” They were “legalistic” and the people they discipled they discipled to themselves and the result was that the people they discipled became more legalistic than they were! I just believe that we need to be careful to whom we disciple people. I also believe that we need to be careful of the way that we handle people’s spiritual development, and the manner in which we present ourselves as leaders while we help them navigate through God’s process. If we present ourselves as having arrived and now we will help them get to where we are (if they are willing to “submit to the process”) then I wonder if we should examine ourselves to see if we are putting ourselves in the place of the “Lawyer” and the “scribe”. My view is that people do in fact need to be discipled to Christ. The view of discipleship and even leadership that I am most comfortable with is that of helping people on a journey that we are taking together. I have not arrived yet and neither have they. I may be a few steps ahead of those I lead and together we will help each other reach the goal of becoming like Christ. 

What are your perspectives? Does this make any sense?

 

 

 

Generational Relevance & Responsibility Part 2

I wanted to continue along the theme of relevance & responsibility. One of my core beliefs is that of cultural relevance. Now I know a lot of people dislike the concept and will see it as a compromise of the Gospel, but that is not what I am talking about. What I am talking about is “speaking the language” of the people you are trying to reach. Not being defined by the evil in culture but by being what Paul talked about.

1 Corinthians 9:19 -23
“19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.”

What I am talking about is putting the Gospel in terms that a certain target can understand and buy into it. I believe we should put it in terms that are “relevant” to that target. When you consider it, in previous generations people had very different lives with different responsibility levels, sensory input, communication methods etc. etc. Think about it this way if you went to rural China or Zimbabwe would you try to go and reach those people groups without taking into account the differences in language, customs and all the differences between the way you are used to doing “ministry” and what persons in one of those target groups were able to “relate” to? What I am trying to say is that when we try to reach persons in a postmodern culture with methods that sometimes did and sometimes did not work 25 years ago we are doing the same thing. We are asking people to respond to a language they don’t understand and come to Jesus through methods that have no meaning or relative comparability to the lives they lead. Why not try to speak the language of those we are trying to reach? Why not try to meet their felt needs? I know there are persons who see this differently and I want you to know that I respect their point of view, but this one is mine.

Any thoughts?

See what happened was………….. I caved again!

I am having trouble descerning whether I willfully sinned or whether it was just a simple mistake? Then again there seems to be a pattern of this addiction in my life. I am only glad that I can approve or disapprove the comments I will get from this post.:-)