Just what is Legalism?

It would seem that a big danger facing the church today is something called legalism And the uniting feature of legalism is everybody throws it around - conservatives and liberals. I've been a Christian long enough to remember when preachers warned of heresy, error, and liberalism. Today, one hardly if ever hears these words much less the warnings. But we do hear of the grave danger of legalism.

But what is legalism?? The word never appears in the Bible and this creates a problem: How do we define this danger when the Bible doesn't speak of it? Consequently, everyone's definition is a little different. Hmmm... This is tricky. Since there is no fixed definition, I decided to present a few scenarios and ask, Is this legalism?

- teaching salvation depends on observing the Sabbath and/or the dietary restrictions found in the Old Testament. Is this legalism? Actually, this would be the textbook definition of legalism. The false teachers told the Galatians that circumcision and keeping the feasts were necessary to salvation - Quintessential legalism.

- using the word "commandments." Is this legalism? No. Jesus, Paul, and Peter all used this very word. Jesus said, If ye love me, keep my commandments. Obviously we need to clarify what commandments, but if I am a follower of Christ I want to know what he said so I can do it.

- teaching people to obey the Word of God. Is this legalism? No. 1 Peter 1:2   Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ  Hebrews 5:9  And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.
One of the marks of a believer is the desire to obey.

- teaching that believers ought to pray, or attend church, or give to the poor, or love one another, or forgive etc. Is this legalism? No. This is exhortation to obedience.

- seeking to apply passages dealing with how women should dress, such as 1 Timothy 2:9-10  I will... that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Is this legalism? No. What many teachers today do is excuse us from having to be concerned about this by claiming that any discussion of how to apply this "is legalistic." No, it's not; it is being spiritual.

- teaching people what to do to please God, and warning them that there are things they might do that would not please God. Is this legalism? No. 1 Thessalonians 4:1 Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more.  2 For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus.  Paul gave the Thessalonians certain commandments and said, Do these things and you will please God. Surely, it's not a stretch to say that failure to do these things will not please God.

- having guidelines concerning clothing, such as, "No two piece bathing suits or speedos at the church pool party." Is this legalism? No. My daughter attended first grade at a Christian school that required girls to wear dresses / skirts. Was that legalism? No. It's called "standards."

- I didn't let my children play video games when they were growing up and kept a tight rein on internet usage and absolutely forbad chat rooms. Was that legalism? No.

- not having a computer or TV because you believe they have an evil influence. Is this legalism? No.

- having set times of prayer, or adhering to a schedule for reading the Bible. Is this legalism? No. It's called discipline.

None of these things constitute legalism. Nor does having standards of behavior constitute legalism.

It's not legalistic if I say, "Stay on the walkway or you will fall in the water."

Well then, what is it?? That's the question, isn't it?

For one million dollars, What is legalism?

It's when I say of my standards and guidelines, "You must do this to be saved." This would apply to those who tell us we must keep the Sabbath to be saved.

Or, "You must only do it this way to get God's approval." I knew a couple once who came to me for counseling because they'd had a major fight that morning. What did they fight about? Their devotions. He said you must read the Bible and then pray and she prayed and then read her Bible. And they had a knock down drag out fight. I'm not making this up. What if you don't have a set time of prayer or a Bible reading schedule? While there is a benefit to discipline, it's not like God will throw you out if you don't pray at the same time every day.

Or, "If you don't follow my practice God will get you." I knew a sister in college who lived in fear that if she failed to have her devotions God would cause her to flunk the test or class. Yes, she needed to be set free. It's not wrong to encourage believers to pray, but it is wrong to teach that God will smack you when you don't and thus turn it into a lucky charm.

I don't think the problem for the church in America is too many standards  Or too much "ought to" preaching. Or excessive holiness. The problem is rather preachers too often excuse our lack of conformity to the Scriptures. Antinomianism seems to be a greater problem. What in the world is antinomianism?

More often than not this is what goes through my mind when I hear a preacher drag out that old boogeyman of legalism.

(I began this on my computer but finished it on my phone, I hope I caught all the mistakes)