I. Legalism: Defined

[Farmgal]

Clothing styles change. They also vary from one culture to another. God does not specify the style of clothing to be worn. The only time He did so was when He designated the types of garments to be worn by the priests, under the Law of Moses. (By the way, they wore under-shorts (breeches), girdles, bonnets, and coats, along with their robes.) The same people who command women to wear dresses usually also condemn men's wearing of shorts! Yet some of those same people will quote Exodus 28 as proof that the men are to wear the britches (breeches), and not the women. Should the men also wear girdles and bonnets, but not the women?

Fallacies of the “dresses only” arguments:

(1) We do not live by commandments from the Law of Moses.

(2) The Jewish women wore robes, not European/American style dresses.

(3) The Jewish men wore robes, not pants.

(4) Katastole translates as “to send down”, not as “long & flowing”.

(5) Even if it did, how long is long? To the knees? Below? To the ankles? Or floor?

(6) The context is for godly demeanor, not cut of cloth. Fallacies of the “dresses only” arguments:

(1) We do not live by commandments from the Law of Moses.

(2) The Jewish women wore robes, not European/American style dresses.

(3) The Jewish men wore robes, not pants.

(4) Katastole translates as “to send down”, not as “long & flowing”.

(5) Even if it did, how long is long? To the knees? Below? To the ankles? Or floor?

(6) The context is for godly demeanor, not cut of cloth.

The arguments are endless, as it always is when we choose legalistic arguments rather than trying to understand the spiritual message. Some argue that culottes are not acceptable, while others who press for “dresses only” say that they are a type of a dress. Some say that skirts and blouses may not be worn, because blouses are form-fitting, not long and flowing. Others say that blouses are merely men’s shirts renamed to make them acceptable.

Then there is the argument that pants are God’s authorized clothing for men. The scriptures indicate that the Israelites wore robes, not pants.

Exodus 20:26 "Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.”

Was God concerned that someone might look up the priest’s pant-legs—or up his robe?

For those who claim that “pants” are God’s designated form of outerwear for men, a quick study of the history of pants will set the record straight.

Godly men and women should conduct themselves in purity and humility—this includes how they dress. That is what God demands. Let us not go beyond what is written regarding “modesty” by defining for God a cut of cloth that He did not define for us.

Above is a copy paste...but I agree with the authors words

To those who would like to condemn a woman because she wears slacks, have you considered that you should be wearing a robe?

With no underwear?

How far do legalists want to take it? No wonder Paul asked the Galatians who had bewitched them

The other concern, is why do some people immediately assume that the disallowance for legalism is an automatic door to allow sin?

This is an erroneous conclusion. The entire Bible should be taken into consideration.....and the NT is very clear that being free

in Christ does NOT mean free to sin

Perhaps one should stop trying to make an issue out of something that does not exist in order to defend legalism

At any rate, hitting on others and being abusive in language and demeanor and trying to intimidate is just not acceptable

irregardless of what you are wearing

If this post is because I mentioned clothing, sorry, I was only using an example of how God might convict someone to be "set apart" for Him. I do believe He does do this, as He calls people to remote areas of the world as a missionary. We are all part of the same Body, we all have different gifts for the edification and building up of the Body.

On the other hand, we ARE to be set apart from the world, we ARE to be Holy, and we are not to look like the world. These are rules to follow are they not? If God calls us to not look like the world, and they do not look like the world, is this legalistic?

Legalism has been taken way too far in Christian communities to say something it is not, and what those communities are saying is: we are free in Christ, therefore we can do whatever we would like, dress however we like, hang out with whoever we like and go wherever we like - all because we are not legalistic.

Jesus was extremely legalistic with our definition of it today, and please, I am not talking about living under the Jewish laws, although with Christ the laws are fulfilled in us so that we might carry them out perfectly as we abide in Christ.

[Farmgal]

I posted this in another thread, but that thread was locked...

Improper use of the law is the misunderstanding the law has been done away with, that it is no more, which is not true.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid yea, we establish the law.

So how are we supposed to establish it, if we think it's disappeared and we are no longer adhering to it?

Jesus told us the law and the prophets are hung on loving God and your neighbor as yourself. If you love God and others, when you do this and you look at the law, we can see how the requirements of the law are met (in us through Christ). We are told to love as God loves, there is no other way to do this, but abide in Christ, and inner workings of Him, through Him we are able to establish the law in us, it is fulfilled in us and by His grace we are able to live it out perfectly.

Jesus said those who love God will keep His commandments. We love by obeying.

It is all about BOTH the law and grace, you can not have one without the other, the law establishes the standard, grace is the empowerment we are given to get there.

[OneLight]

I believe we should have a comedy forum for the cartoonist. It is hard to keep a serious thread on track with all the jokes ...

I believe the light heartedness keeps the serious from turning to sinful remarks... it is good to be serious but always

with grace! We struggle with this as well you know... I just try too temper it in joy and freedom we have in God... If you feel it is

more negative than positive I will indeed stop! Love, Steven

Not for me to say one way or another. I have noticed that people have a gift with graphics and it would be nice to see a forum for this. Though I can respect the abilities and humor, it does seem at times like a hijack. Being human, I could very well be wrong.

[enoob57]

I believe we should have a comedy forum for the cartoonist. It is hard to keep a serious thread on track with all the jokes ...

I believe the light heartedness keeps the serious from turning to sinful remarks... it is good to be serious but always

with grace! We struggle with this as well you know... I just try too temper it in joy and freedom we have in God... If you feel it is

more negative than positive I will indeed stop! Love, Steven

Not for me to say one way or another. I have noticed that people have a gift with graphics and it would be nice to see a forum for this. Though I can respect the abilities and humor, it does seem at times like a hijack. Being human, I could very well be wrong.

I understand brother and certainly could be true and our Lord's Word says-

Mt 18:16

16 But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that 'by the mouth

of two or three witnesses every word may be established.'

NKJV

I am of the heart that if two come to me about anything,-unless it is clear cut Scripture-, with complaint

my love then for you two should be more than for me! As another thought it a distraction ... so I have

said that it will stop! I am glad for the freedom in my heart to love others more than myself! So know

I am increased by this and am glad to love you both in this way as I believe it honors our Lord... Your brother, Steven

[Sevenseas]

IMO....

You say this a lot sevenseas... Does this mean International Mathematical Olympiad? Or what?

It's an expression I picked up on Christian boards actually....in my opinion and BTW is by the way...maybe it's geographical? I don't know

[Sevenseas]

farmgal:

If this post is because I mentioned clothing, sorry, I was only using an example of how God might convict someone to be "set apart" for Him. I do believe He does do this, as He calls people to remote areas of the world as a missionary. We are all part of the same Body, we all have different gifts for the edification and building up of the Body.

On the other hand, we ARE to be set apart from the world, we ARE to be Holy, and we are not to look like the world. These are rules to follow are they not? If God calls us to not look like the world, and they do not look like the world, is this legalistic?

Legalism has been taken way too far in Christian communities to say something it is not, and what those communities are saying is: we are free in Christ, therefore we can do whatever we would like, dress however we like, hang out with whoever we like and go wherever we like - all because we are not legalistic.

Jesus was extremely legalistic with our definition of it today, and please, I am not talking about living under the Jewish laws, although with Christ the laws are fulfilled in us so that we might carry them out perfectly as we abide in Christ.

No...it has to do with butero stating that women who wears pants are an abomination. Nothing to do with what you stated.

I very much disagree that Jesus was legalistic. I think that the attitudes of the heart were far more of a concern to Jesus than

what people ever wore to church back then or now

I have spoken to all kinds of people and shared Jesus with them...their clothing never was a consideration before salvation

and after salvation is the territory of the Holy Spirit

[Sevenseas]

I posted this in another thread, but that thread was locked...

Improper use of the law is the misunderstanding the law has been done away with, that it is no more, which is not true.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid yea, we establish the law.

So how are we supposed to establish it, if we think it's disappeared and we are no longer adhering to it?

Jesus told us the law and the prophets are hung on loving God and your neighbor as yourself. If you love God and others, when you do this and you look at the law, we can see how the requirements of the law are met (in us through Christ). We are told to love as God loves, there is no other way to do this, but abide in Christ, and inner workings of Him, through Him we are able to establish the law in us, it is fulfilled in us and by His grace we are able to live it out perfectly.

Jesus said those who love God will keep His commandments. We love by obeying.

It is all about BOTH the law and grace, you can not have one without the other, the law establishes the standard, grace is the empowerment we are given to get there.

The pendulum swinging too far either way is wrong. Who needs grace when the law is the measuring stick and not just the law, but every

bondage that Jesus died to break us out of

You are free to observe anything you want. I must have had a wonderful childhood because I had to come to this forum to find out how

unreasonable legalism is and that those who measure the heart by the length of the skirt seem to think that those who do not agree

with them, are fair game and perhaps even unloved by God

I have read a number of articles by people who have left congregations like that and they thank God to be free of them

I don't see any point in going over your post in response because the question is settled for me and I don;t know if you are actually

questioning or trying to convince me to see things your way

You should know I have already done my time in an abusive ministry and I know the signs and I know how people talk

and I want nothing to do with any of it

I really have nothing to add to anything because I don't agree with your position or reasoning and I guess I was

overly hopeful when I though we had something to agree on

Legalism is a very real and I am afraid very dead subject

[Farmgal]

I posted this in another thread, but that thread was locked...

Improper use of the law is the misunderstanding the law has been done away with, that it is no more, which is not true.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid yea, we establish the law.

So how are we supposed to establish it, if we think it's disappeared and we are no longer adhering to it?

Jesus told us the law and the prophets are hung on loving God and your neighbor as yourself. If you love God and others, when you do this and you look at the law, we can see how the requirements of the law are met (in us through Christ). We are told to love as God loves, there is no other way to do this, but abide in Christ, and inner workings of Him, through Him we are able to establish the law in us, it is fulfilled in us and by His grace we are able to live it out perfectly.

Jesus said those who love God will keep His commandments. We love by obeying.

It is all about BOTH the law and grace, you can not have one without the other, the law establishes the standard, grace is the empowerment we are given to get there.

The pendulum swinging too far either way is wrong. Who needs grace when the law is the measuring stick and not just the law, but every

bondage that Jesus died to break us out of

You are free to observe anything you want. I must have had a wonderful childhood because I had to come to this forum to find out how

unreasonable legalism is and that those who measure the heart by the length of the skirt seem to think that those who do not agree

with them, are fair game and perhaps even unloved by God

I have read a number of articles by people who have left congregations like that and they thank God to be free of them

I don't see any point in going over your post in response because the question is settled for me and I don;t know if you are actually

questioning or trying to convince me to see things your way

You should know I have already done my time in an abusive ministry and I know the signs and I know how people talk

and I want nothing to do with any of it

I really have nothing to add to anything because I don't agree with your position or reasoning and I guess I was

overly hopeful when I though we had something to agree on

Legalism is a very real and I am afraid very dead subject

The problem for you is, everything I have said is scriptural and you chose to ignore the scripture I have provided and doing exactly what was stated earlier about when people walk the walk, they are deemed legalistic. If that is the case, Jesus was legalistic in your opinion.

You have never, not once, commented on this scripture:

Romans 8:4 the righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in us

Can you please explain what this means if the law is no longer in existance?

You also have chosen to ignore this verse all I have gotten is "IMO", we should not be concerned about another's opinions, we should be concerned about what God's Word says.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid yea, we establish the law.

Please, again, explain why "we establish the law" when the law is no longer available. I am not speaking of living "under the law" as a Judaizer as I have pointed out to you prior to this post.

Also ignored were the commandments Jesus gave us, and in these two commandments, through grace we are able to fulfill it (as stated in Romans 8:4)

Love the Lord God with all of your heart, mind and soul and your neighbor as yourself.

We are able to love as he loved (Ephesians 5:2) by abiding in Christ (please read John 15 - all of it), as we abide in Christ we are able to fulfill the law (again as stated in Romans 8:4). It also explains that apart from Him, we can do nothing, which brings us to:

Matthew 19:26 with man this is not possible, but All things are possible with God.

Where one is walking in the Spirit, there is love, it is not legalism, it is what God has said in His Word.

[Sevenseas]

farmgal:

The problem for you is, everything I have said is scriptural and you chose to ignore the scripture I have provided and doing exactly what was stated earlier about when people walk the walk, they are deemed legalistic. If that is the case, Jesus was legalistic in your opinion

Quoting scripture is not the equivalent of authority over others nor does it mean you alone have the capacity to understand it.

Anyone can quote scripture. I have ​certainly posted enough of it in my time on these boards. You are pulling out verses

to suit your beliefs. That is not good biblical exegesis.

Your statement that Jesus was legalistic in my opinion is really not my opinion at all. It appears that making statements on

behalf of others is a common way to make a point in some circles, but it really does nothing to present the truth.

I have never made such a statement....yet twice now, you have tried to present that as my belief. Jesus was not legalistic...in fact,

that word has rarely been a part of my vocabulary.

You have never, not once, commented on this scripture:

Romans 8:4 the righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in us

I answered you in post 78 and you actually quoted my answer in another post. My guess is that I did not give the answer you

wanted.

Can you please explain what this means if the law is no longer in existance?

See post 78......Jesus is the fullfillment of the law. I never said the law was no longer in existance.

You also have chosen to ignore this verse all I have gotten is "IMO", we should not be concerned about another's opinions, we should be concerned about what God's Word says.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid yea, we establish the law.

Again, you are adding to anything I previously stated as I have never in my entire life thought the law was void. However,

I seem to have the good sense to believe that scripture states that I cannot keep the law.

Please, again, explain why "we establish the law" when the law is no longer available. I am not speaking of living "under the law" as a Judaizer as I have pointed out to you prior to this post.

You know, you really cannot make a point about anything I have stated as you are too busy trying to prove something I never said.

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,^a 2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature,^b God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering.^c And so he condemned sin in sinful man,^d 4in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

V4 does not say what you are trying to make it say, when viewed in the context in which it was written. You cannot dress up the Holy Spirit

in the law. The law is kept in us by Jesus sacrifice and that is how God views us and that is why we are now acceptable to Him

The verses above CLEARLY state that we...at least I know I am.....FREE of the law of sin and death. That, is a Hallelujah statement

if there ever was one. We cannot keep the law and we do not fulfill it. The law brought only death (v2) God condemned sin in us

to meet the righteous requirements of the law (v3) the requirement that is righteous is the penalty of death. WHICH is why

we must walk by the spirit and the Holy Spirit does not fulfill our own sinful lusts.

Choosing one verse and building a doctrine on it does not work. The verse you are referring to does not mean what you want it to men

VERSE TWO ACTUALLY STATES THAT THE LAW WAS POWERLESS TO ACHIEVE WHAT GOD REQUIRED OF US

Also ignored were the commandments Jesus gave us, and in these two commandments, through grace we are able to fulfill it (as stated in Romans 8:4)

Love the Lord God with all of your heart, mind and soul and your neighbor as yourself.

Judge jury and verdict. Legalism. You know nothing about me so I guess you are just going by what you might perceive as your

ability to know the hearts and minds of other believers. That, is typical of legalism. Another ploy of legalism, is to twist the words

of those who disagree with the viewpoint of the legalist and to make false statements against them and accuse them of ignoring

scripture.

The Bible is not a rope with which to hang those who disagree with your (apparent) desire to present the law as just a little edge over those

who know that only Jesus can keep it and has kept it on our behalf.

We are able to love as he loved (Ephesians 5:2) by abiding in Christ (please read John 15 - all of it), as we abide in Christ we are able to fulfill the law (again as stated in Romans 8:4). It also explains that apart from Him, we can do nothing, which brings us to:

Matthew 19:26 with man this is not possible, but All things are possible with God.

Where one is walking in the Spirit, there is love, it is not legalism, it is what God has said in His Word

Well good then. We are not on the same walk, but I am sure your faith is just as valid to you as anyone elses.

I don't judge you...that is not my place. Mercifully, I also apply that the other way.

I will be only sticking with the topic of this thread and will only address that and no further attempts to try

and show that I have called Jesus a legalist or have done away with God's law and must now be living

as a hedonist

[GoldenEagle]

IMO....

You say this a lot sevenseas... Does this mean International Mathematical Olympiad? Or what?

It's an expression I picked up on Christian boards actually....in my opinion and BTW is by the way...maybe it's geographical? I don't know

Sorry I was just messing. I did google it and figured it meant "in my opinion."