How to spot a legalist
Legalists are tricky creatures. They slither in the side doors of churches, sign up to lead Bible studies and fill the minds of once joyous believers with rules and requirements of what it “really means” to become a Christian. Ask them how a person is saved and they’ll say, “By grace of course” and then they’ll roll out a scroll across the floor full of checklists to prove your salvation and prerequisites you must abide by in order to receive this “free gift” of grace.
The Apostle Paul had strong words for the legalists of his time. These legalistic Judaizers wanted the Gentiles to accept God’s grace through faith but be required to get circumcised and to keep the law of Moses as well. Paul bluntly wrote about them in Galatians 5:12, “As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!”
Wow.
Today nobody (as far as I know) is seeking to add circumcision to the free gift of God’s grace as a requirement for salvation. No, currently, a far more subtle and sinister movement is creeping into the church. 21st Century Pharisees have replaced circumcision and keeping of the law with a more accepted evangelicalized list of do’s and don’ts. These pious sounding party poopers are getting Christians to doubt their salvation, get discouraged in their salvation and trying to prove, keep and/or earn their salvation. They are robbing believers of the joy that was once theirs in Christ and replacing it with the heavy yoke of legalism (Acts 15:5-11.)
With this in mind here are 10 ways to spot a legalist in your church:
1) They cheapen grace by focusing on what we must do rather than on what Christ has done.
2) They’ll say non-sensical things like, “Salvation is free but it will cost you everything you have.”
3) They are “fruit inspectors” and hypothesize how much spiritual fruit a person must produce in order to truly be saved.
4) They focus on things like turning, trying and crying instead of faith alone in Christ alone for salvation.
5) Their “gospel” could never be falsely accused of being a license to sin (like Paul’s was in Romans 3:8!)
6) They scare others with assertions that, if you preach too much grace, people will run amok.
7) They conveniently avoid or mis-exegete large portions of gospel-centric New Testament books like Galatians, Romans and John.
8) They blend justification passages with sanctification passages and then try to get us to drink a heresy smoothie.
9) They bake the same works-based righteousness cake that Mormons and Muslims do but cover it with evangelical frosting.
10) They use the phrase, “You mean to tell me…” a lot. Then they create worst case salvation scenarios of those who claim to be Christians but abuse the grace of God. “You mean to tell me that someone can be saved and still….?”
But grace that cannot be abused is no grace at all. Grace that is not free is no grace at all. Grace that is not received by simple faith is no grace at all.
I like the way Paul put it in Romans 11:6, “And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.” It’s either by grace or by works. It can’t be by both.
But here’s the crazy thing about grace, once you receive it through faith it begins to transform you. Jesus changes your “wanter” and you become a new creation. Sure we can abuse it and, if we’re honest, often do. But when we let grace do it’s work it “teaches us to say ‘No’ to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age” (Titus 2:12.) God’s grace is not a license to sin but a reason to serve Jesus with reckless abandon…not because we have to, but because we get to.
If we resist, he persists.
If we fail, he forgives.
If we lose our faith, he remains faithful (2 Timothy 2:13.)
That makes me want to serve Him all the more. Sorry legalists, but grace is a better fuel. As for you agitators, I wish you would go the whole way and…cut it out.
23 Comments
-
March 11, 2013 2:08:58 pm
Hey Steven,
Neither James or Paul preached a combo of faith/works for salvation. Sorry dude. That’s a works-based righteousness, no different than my Mormon and Muslim friends preach. James 2 is an awesome passage and is generally mis-exegeted in my opinion. Here’s my take on James 2: http://www.gregstier.org/rants/faith-without-works-cant-save-you/#sthash.86mN9tCF.dpbs Hope that helps! Thanks for piping in!
greg
Steven Reply:
March 12th, 2013 at 1:19 pmOk, so the point of your interpretation (faith without works can’t save you) is exactly what I’m saying. But my point is that faith with works can’t save you either. Jesus saves you. He is the ground of our acceptance before God and not faith or works (or faith with works).
The problem is, there isn’t a “second judgment for believers.” The “judgment seat of Christ” is the final judgment for all. There’s no difference. Paul isn’t speaking to non-believers when he says “the just judgment of God, who will repay everyone according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works.” Eternal life to those who do good works. It is a heaven/hell issue at the Last Day.
It is not to hand out the rewards people have stored up in heaven, and it is not “totally different from salvation.” If it were, James wouldn’t have used the word “save.” You’re absolutely right that it’s used in different contexts and in ones that do not deal with heaven/hell issues. But if James is speaking of the judgment only for believers, then there’s nothing to be saved from! A “bad showing on that day” or a “wasted life” can’t be taken from James 2 because he never indicates that’s what he means.
Here’s what you said, “If you just believe the right things, but don’t add to your faith, works, then you have more in common with the kingdom of darkness than the kingdom of light.” How in the world can that mean that those people who have a dead faith be saved from hell? It can’t, unless demons are also saved from hell for the same dead faith. You cannot “scratch out salvation and replace it with purpose” when James himself says salvation!
Your message was awesome, I liked it a lot. But there isn’t a second judgment for believers. We talk a lot about Paul and James on justification, but what about Jesus. When He says, “You brood of vipers! How can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person brings good things out of a good treasure, and the evil person brings evil things out of an evil treasure. I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless word you utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” He’s not talking to believers here, and he’s talking about the future justification, and He doesn’t say they need faith.
Further, of course Paul and James don’t contradict, but because Paul is in line with James, not the other way around. In 2 Corinthians 5:10 Paul isn’t just talking about rewards. He says clearly that “each one may receive recompense, according to what he did in the body, whether good or evil.” At the judgment seat of Christ, recompense will be given for evil, because there is only one judgment.
Even in James, it says we will be judged by the law of liberty, and then it continues right after to say that those who have not shown mercy will be judged without mercy. That cannot be a reward hand out. It is actual judgment, a heaven or hell issue.
Paul says that “For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.” If Paul is focused on the heaven/hell issue, and James on the reward issue, then why does Paul say that the doers of the law will be justified? Paul does not contradict James by saying that justification (heaven/hell) is by faith alone, he substantiates James’ position by agreeing that those who do will be justified.
In Romans 4, Paul isn’t battling justification by (good) works, he’s battling justification by works (of the law). (Galatians 2:15-16). Works of the law are not good works. They are not the same. Works of the law are circumcision, the sabbath, and the kosher laws. The “judaizers” were Jews who were telling people that you needed to be a Jew to be saved. Not that you needed to be circumcised to earn salvation, but that salvation was only for the Jews. Paul combats that in Romans and Galatians, especially in Romans 4 and Galatians 2-3. He is saying that salvation is “first to the Jew (OT), then to the Gentile (NT).” God had opened the covenant family to include Gentiles, and the “Judaizers” were opposing that. You can see it in Acts 10-15 too.
Salvation for Paul is not by works (of the law), but by faith and works working together, just like James. In Romans 14:23 he says that “whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” Works without faith is sin. Faith without works is dead. The two always work together. Both Paul and James are saying that. Faith comes first, like you pointed out with Abraham, but is “completed” by works and is never apart from works. The two go hand in hand, and both are directly from God. So Paul can say, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not from you, it (the grace and the faith) is the gift of God; it is not by works so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has planned in advance, that we should live in them.” (What works is he talking about here? 2:11-13 answers that for us).
I love your ministry, and everything you’ve written is great (including this article). But the necessity of works for justification (heaven/hell) is explicit in James. And no, it’s not “a works-based righteousness no different than . . . Mormons and Muslims.” In those religions your works EARN your salvation. Christianity couldn’t be clearer: your faith and your works are gifts entirely. They can’t earn you anything because Jesus did all of the work. They were given to us, so it is not by them we earn them. Jesus alone is the ground of our acceptance before God and not our faith or our works. I want to guard against the equally dangerous idea of a faith-based righteousness. The basis for righteousness is not faith or works, it is Jesus alone. Christianity doesn’t teach a works-based righteousness or a faith-based righteousness. Christianity teaches a JESUS-based righteousness. It’s what He did and not what we do or have.
Legalists teach a works-based religion. Christianity teaches a Jesus-based religion. We must be careful not to fall into a faith-based religion.
Greg Reply:
March 12th, 2013 at 3:59 pmGuess we differ some on this one. But thanks for your comments!
-
March 11, 2013 3:25:50 pm
Dang, this is good stuff. It’s not hard to SPOT a legalist, I think we all know 1 or 27. It’s hard to COMBAT the legalism. I wish there was a ten-step solution for that
Greg Reply:
March 11th, 2013 at 3:43 pmAgreed! I think that the best thing to do is to learn to see Scripture through grace-filled eyes and people the same. When we have “gospel eyes” we have “Jesus eyes” and we see everyone and everything differently. “Law eyes” condemn but “Grace eyes” forgive. Jesus didn’t come to condemn but to rescue (John 3:17.) There are not 10 steps needed for that…just one…the step that Jesus took from heaven to earth.
Combating legalism with you,
greg
-
March 11, 2013 5:50:16 pm
Nice reference to 2 Timothy 2:13. Good thing you didn’t mention verse 12.
-
March 12, 2013 6:42:44 am
[...] something to their own salvation, or worse yet help save themselves, but how do you spot legalism, This article by Greg Stier may be of some [...]
-
March 12, 2013 11:29:12 am
I grew up in a very conservative church and have always been (perhaps a bit too) reactive to legalism in all its insidious manifestations.
I was with you on all the points you mentioned but one. I’m not sure how I feel about #2. Help me understand.
I don’t believe that I bring anything to the table in regard to salvation. I believe that God accomplished all that was required in Christ at Calvary. I don’t believe that surrender to God, regardless of degree, is responsible for accomplishing, sealing, or finalizing my salvation. I don’t believe that my surrender changes God’s view of me. I believe that all He sees when He looks at me is Jesus.
But I do think I believe that salvation is a free gift that will ultimately cost me everything. I think I do believe that the Holy Spirit, in the ongoing process of sanctifying me, will ultimately be satisfied with nothing short of the complete abandonment of every personal ambition, dream, hope, goal, and plan for my own betterment.
Is that wrong?
Greg Reply:
March 12th, 2013 at 8:05 pmHey Rick, Great question. I would say that salvation gets you on the “team” and surrender gets you off the bench. Paul put it this way in Romans 12:1, “I beseech you therefore brothers in view of God’s mercy offer your bodies as a living sacrifice.” Paul is saying to brothers and sisters in Christ (who’ve already been saved) to go ALL in for Christ. HOpe that helps!
greg
-
March 12, 2013 3:38:29 pm
“2) They’ll say non-sensical things like, ‘Salvation is free but it will cost you everything you have.’”
Really? So the fornicating or adulterous man who is caught up in making and selling pornography doesn’t have to pay the cost by giving up his way of life? He doesn’t have to give up the money? The fornication? His means of life?
Huh. hmmm…
Jim Reply:
March 13th, 2013 at 9:07 amLOL… See #10 above.
Frank Reply:
March 14th, 2013 at 7:52 amFunny, because that’s not what I said. I gave a real life scenario and a case where someone has had to pay the cost of giving up his sinful life (Google search it). The catch is … the men and women get something better by giving it up.
Also, what’s funny, is that Jesus commands a man to give up everything in John 18:18-25. He also relates this to salvation and entering the kingdom of God. By the list above, Greg would be calling Jesus a legalist. I don’t think Greg is doing that, I think clarification is definitely necessary though.
Nobody is saying that they should continue to live in sin. Paul makes this point resiliently clear in Romans 6. Paul also says that as believers we are to “present our members as SLAVES to God” and “to righteousness” (6:13, 18-22).
Sounds legalistic, but when one’s heart is set on loving the Lord with all their heart, it isn’t.
Frank Zimmerman Reply:
March 14th, 2013 at 9:25 amFrank,
Great name by the way. If I am reading this correctly, I can see where the difference in interpretation sits. Legalist (by Greg’s definition) is a person preaching of salvation through forced works, forced giving up of their life in the hopes of becoming saved (meaning of #2). But in reality, that doesn’t work (no pun intended) because Jesus already knows your intentions and whether you’re faking it to make it. But when you’re truly in it to win it, you are willing to give up everything you have to follow and be lead by Christ (different than #2′s meaning)
So, in #2, my interpretation is that it speaks of a giving up of everything through force and not the willingness when you’re absolutely in love with Christ.
I hope that was clearer and hopefully I represented everyone correctly!
-
March 12, 2013 5:28:19 pm
You include “turn” in your list of things that a “legalist” teaches. Are you referring to repentance? Is there no need to turn to the giver in order to receive his gift? Luke 13:3, 1 Corinthians 7:10 etc.? Help me understand why the Bible so clearly includes a dimension of repentance in the overall definition of saving faith, but teaching repentance makes one a legalist and an enemy of the Cross.
-
March 12, 2013 6:38:31 pm
Why do people constantly take James out of context? James was conveying that our faith will be demonstrated by our charitable works. He used the example of a brother who has a need. Rather than meet the need, the brother is told that God will provide. James was saying that you will demonstrate your living faith by meeting the need of your brother. Saying “God will provide” is nothing more than lip.service and a display of dead faith.
-
March 12, 2013 8:14:04 pm
Jesus is the one who gave everything up to save us. We receive it by grace through faith so that “no one can boast” (Ephesians 2:8,9. ) We brag on Jesus and his finished work that saved us. Then we can joyfully surrender everything to Christ out of gratefulness, not requirement (Ephesians 2:10.)
-
March 13, 2013 11:17:47 am
I John 5:10
“He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believeGod has made Him a lier, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given His Son”
These words should probably have been placed in parentheses. They constitute a brief side comment before the “witness of God” is actually stated.
The phrase “believe in” reflects an expression which is extremely common in the gospel of John (cf. John 1:12; 2:11, 23; 3:15-16,18, 36) and is a standard way for John to convey the idea of faith in Jesus for eternal life. The idea of “believing in” Jesus is identical in force with the idea of “believing that” Jesus is the Christ” (John 11:27; 20.31; cf. 8:24; 13:19). This is shown by the fact that either Greek construction can be said to express the means of receiving eternal life (cf. 20:30-31 with John 3:15-16, 18).
The person that exercises this faith, John says, has the witness in himself. That is to say, God’s testimony about His Son, which John will state in the next verse, is internalized when a person believes in the son of God.
By contrast the person who does not believe God, for all intents and purpose makes God out to be a liar. This is true because he is saying, in effect, that God’s testimony is false. It is clear that the issue for John is very simply the truth or falsity of what God says about his Son. Neither here nor anywhere else does John introduce the complications often proposed by theologians. There is nothing here about “head or heart belief,” or about a “faith that yields to God as over against mere intellectual assent,” The Bible does not complicate faith like that. Once we have understood the message, the issue is: IS IT TRUE OR FALSE? DO WE BELIEVE IT, OR DO WE NOT?Now notice God’s testimony about His Son.
” And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has life; He who does not have the Son of God does not have life”.
Zane Hodges
For me the issue is very clear…..I BELIEVE.
-
March 13, 2013 2:42:56 pm
One thing many miss when they point to Jesus’ call to “Follow me” as the equivalent of Jesus’ call to “Repent and believe” is this…
Peter and Andrew’s story doesn’t begin in Matthew 4 where Jesus invites them to follow him and they drop their nets at once to be fishers of men.
John 1 reminds us that John the Baptist, Jesus’ cousin, was sent to prepare the way for the messiah and actually had his own disciples. In John 1:35 we see that John the Baptist is with two of his disciples. When Jesus passes by, he points his disciples to Jesus and calls him the Lamb of God. Those two disciples of John the Baptist then went with Jesus and spent the rest of the day with him.
In John 1:40, we see that Andrew, Peter’s brother, was one of the two disciples of JB that spent the day with Jesus. He runs to Peter and tells him to come, because he has found the Messiah. On initially meeting Peter, Jesus looks at him and tells him he will be called Cephas.
We don’t learn who the second of JB’s disciples was that met with Jesus. Often when John writes, if he doesn’t mention someone by name, he is actually referring to himself. It could be that the two disciples of JB that went to Jesus were actually Andrew and John. It’s also possible it was Philip, who comes up in the story in John 1:43.
Nevertheless, Peter’s and Andrew’s encounter with Jesus in Matthew 4 is not their first encounter with him. John the Baptist had been telling them of the coming Messiah. Their hearts were prepared. Then, when Andrew met Jesus, he spent several hours with him. We don’t know what their conversation was (perhaps like the conversation Jesus had with followers after his resurrection on the road to Emmaus). We do know that enough was said and understood that Andrew was convinced that Jesus was the Messiah. We could make the case that it was at this point that Andrew and Peter believed in (put their faith in) Jesus as the Messiah and were saved.
By looking at the Harmony of the Gospels, it seems to indicate that Matthew 4 happens 12-18 months after Jesus’ baptism (Luke gives us the “orderly account” and John writes years later to fill in some of the gaps). And amazingly, when we look at Matthew 4 and assume that Peter, Andrew, James and John followed Jesus from that point on, we are again mistaken.
Luke 5 shares the account, which is separate from Matthew 4, where Jesus is teaching by the Sea of Galilee and the crowd forces him into the water. He climbs in Peter’s boat and teaches from there. Then he asks Peter to take the boat out and drop his nets. They’d caught nothing all night, but did as Jesus asked. It tells us here that James and John are now Simon Peter’s business partners. In Matthew 4, they were still in the boat with their father Zebedee, apprentice fishermen. Now, it seems, they have developed a relationship with Peter and Andrew because they are all friends of Jesus, their Messiah. After the miraculous catch of fish, Jesus tells Peter he will now catch men. This is the point where Peter, Andrew, James and John follow Jesus intently. But of course, after the resurrection, they go back to fishing again until Christ commissions them.
Jesus first invitation is to Come… this is Salvation for the lost.
Then, Jesus calls them to follow… to grow in their faith.
As they follow, he will make them fishers of men… equipping them as disciples to make disciples.
Finally, they are to bear much fruit… making disciples to the ends of the earth. -
March 14, 2013 7:54:02 am
I’ve always found James 2 to be quite telling and proves Greg correct. Although many people don’t use James 2 when teaching against legalism, I found that it’s very helpful in establishing a major fact about eternal salvation. When someone says that faith MUST include works for salvation they are actually right. James is a great study on faith although James is not discussing eternal salvation in James 2. What James teaches about faith and works proves legalism to be in vain.
The issue has NEVER been no works for salvation. The issue has been WHOSE works for salvation. The entire Bible tells us that JESUS did the work for our salvation. The faith in Jesus for eternal salvation is based completely on the WORK that JESUS did for our eternal salvation.
Our faith is hopeless if our faith is placed in OUR works. Faith in anything is only substantiated by the results of the work that was done. According the Bible, our works are worthless when it comes to eternal salvation.
If we have faith that our car will get us to our destination but the car breaks down. Our faith was in vain. However, if we have faith that our car will get us to the destination and our car gets us to our destination… our faith was valid.
More fitting to the chapter of James, if we have faith that someone will feed and clothe the poor and needy… but the poor and needy continue to go hungry and unclothed… our faith was in vain.
Eternal salvation required a PERFECT SACRIFICE. THAT was the work needed. This is the ONLY work that was needed or required by GOD. Just like Cain and Abel. God is very specific about his requirement. Cain worked hard but his works were not accepted. Abel just offered the required lamb that God had required.
Not one work we could muster could ever meet that perfect sacrificial requirement by God and we are utterly pathetic when we try and pretend our works are of any use whatsoever. We are hopelessly lost on our own. Only JESUS could do the work required for our eternal salvation. That work was was done. It is finished. Jesus said so. All that is left is the faith. There is no more work to do for eternal salvation.
Do we believe in the work JESUS did for our salvation? Or do we believe in the works WE do trying to prove to ourselves and others that we have faith in Jesus while basing that faith completely on our own works?
All faith requires works for it to be valid. The work for eternal salvation has been done.
John 19:30 – “When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”
The question is this… Do we believe Jesus did the work? Do we believe that what Jesus did on the cross paid for our sins? Do we believe it is finished? If we say our faith is in Jesus, then it must be the work of JESUS that we place our faith. If we claim our works are included in our eternal salvation, than the work of Jesus was not enough. Our faith is in US and Jesus. It cannot be in both.
I personally believe Jesus paid it all for my eternal salvation. My faith is in the works of Jesus. God required a perfect sacrifice and I admittedly cannot pay that price. The work of Jesus was the only acceptable payment for my eternal salvation.
The work has been done.
-
March 15, 2013 8:04:02 am
I’ve never met Greg, but by reading the article above, I wouldn’t gather that he is telling everyone to go have sex with whomever they want while snorting cocaine off a Bible because there is grace to cover it. My generalization of it all is that it seems Greg just wants people to trust Jesus over their own works.
He didn’t even throw out works. The whole closing statement was his biblical understanding that, God, in His grace, saves us and makes us new creations that now desire to do works in response to that grace, instead of for selfish desires of personal growth and salvation. God knows everything right? Than he knew if we had anything to do with salvation, any merit at all, we would make it all about us. So created a different path, one that saves us while we “were yet sinners.” He saves us in a way that rebirths us first and then teaches about all the other stuff. If there were any merit to our works outside of God simply loving His people, Christ would have died in vain.
Does that mean sin all the more? Nope, and that’s not what Greg is saying either.
Leave a Reply
Blogroll
Facebook Likes
Search
Archives
RSS
Subscribe to the RSS feed.
Meta
© 2012. Dare 2 Share Ministries www.dare2share.org All Rights Reserved.
So is James not a “gospel-centric” book when he says we are justified (not sanctified) by works, using the same OT passage Paul does in both Romans 4 and Galatians 3? What about 2 Corinthians 5:10 when Paul says “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive recompense, according to what he did in the body, whether good or evil.” Or in that “gospel-centric” book Romans when he says: “By your stubbornness you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, who will repay everyone according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness.” (2:5-8).
Is that blending of justification and sanctification into a “heresy smoothie?” No, because every passage deals explicitly with justification according to a person’s whole life and their works, which includes primarily faith. So Calvin: “The faith that justifies is never alone.”
So why is that scary? Because we’ve made justification sola fide into the gospel when it’s not. The gospel kerygma is that God was faithful to His promises and will be faithful again. In the “gospel-centric” book of Romans Paul defines the gospel as: “the gospel of God, which He promised beforehand through His propets in the Holy Scriptures, the gospel about His Son, descended from the seed of David according to the flesh (God was faithful), but established as the Son of God in power according to the spirit of holiness through [the resurrection of dead persons](He will be faithful to His promise of resurrection at the last day), Jesus Christ our Lord.” And he says in 1 Corinthians 15: “Now I am reminding you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you . . . That Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; that He was buried; that He was raised in the third day in accordance with the Scriptures (God was faithful).” And the logic of the whole rest of the chapter is that since God was faithful, we know that He will be faithful. That is the gospel, and not sola fide.
We preach a message that can be confused as a license to sin, but sola fide alone is not that message. We also need a message where we can say to that accusation “How can we who died to sin still live in it?” How did we die to sin? Through God’s faithfulness, and why won’t we live in it? Because God will be faithful to His promises.
Preaching that works are necessary is not heresy, nor is it a denial of the gospel. It is in accord with the New Testament authors themselves. That does not mean this preaching cannot be abused (and more often than not it is), but it needs to be held in light of Christ, as with all preaching and teaching. Our works do not earn our salvation any more than our faith earns it. Jesus bought it on the cross and that means He bought our faith and our works. Jesus alone is the grounds for our acceptance before God, and not our faith or our works. Our faith is in Him and our works are in Him. Which is why Paul can say, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not from you, it (the grace and the faith) is the gift of God; it is not by works so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has planned in advance, that we should live in them.” That our faith and works are sourced IN Jesus by God could not be clearer.
All in all, I’m just as adamantly against legalisms who think we need to earn grace. But that doesn’t mean we should condemn those who let us know that works are as necessary as faith (like James and Paul). We just need to be sure to articulate that we can’t earn grace AT ALL. Neither by our faith or works. Now isn’t that good news?
Reply to this comment