Moralism

Gospel vs. Legalism

/ Dennis Griffith / 3 Comments

Gospel vs. Legalsim

What is the difference between legalism and the gospel?

  • Legalism (or Moralism) says God looks at how well we keep the law.
  • The Gospel says we are hidden in Christ. So God sees how well Jesus kept the Law (perfectly), all his works, and his death on our behalf.  Consequently, because we are hidden in Christ, God sees the work of Jesus when he sees us. The gospel says that, because of God’s grace, all that Jesus is and did is credited (imputed) to us, through faith.  (Colossians 3.3, Ephesians 2.8, Romans 5.2, Galatians 2.20)

So what is the difference between the gospel and legalism? It is the difference between Christianity and every religion in the world.

Fascinations that Lead Away from the Cross

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment
Maze of Fascinations

by Michael Horton

Martin Luther opposed the “theology of the cross” to all “theologies of glory.” The latter can be generally placed into three categories: three types of “ladders” we try to climb in order to see “God in the nude,” as Luther put it. These ladders were mysticism, speculation, and merit. I would like to suggest a few contemporary expressions of the theology of glory along these lines.

Fascination with the Miraculous

As in our Lord’s day, few today who seek miracles are interested in that to which signs point. “A wicked generation seeks for signs,” Jesus said, followed by Paul’s reminder that his fellow Jews were so busy looking for miraculous wonders that they stumbled over the Gospel of Christ crucified. Seeking direct experiences with God without the mediation of Scripture, preaching, and sacraments is a theology of glory. Longing for “power encounters,” we trip over the weakness of the cross. This is also true of our triumphalism, long a problem of evangelical revivalism. With its vision of conquering and reigning, the cross-bearing life of Christ which our Savior graciously allows us to share with him is traded in for a crown before the appointed time. Often, we behave like the disciples during our Lord’s ministry. Philip saw Jesus as a means to an end: “Now, just show us the Father and we’ll be satisfied,” he said. “Philip, have you been with me so long and you still don’t get it? He who has seen me has seen the Father!” Those looking for God in demonstrations of power miss the true appearance of God in the humiliation and weakness of the Suffering Servant.

His disciples never did understand him when he said he must suffer and die, and whenever he brought it up, they tried to ignore it. Or, as in Peter’s case, they rebuked him: “Surely this will never happen to you!” As Satan had offered Jesus a crown without a cross, so even Jesus’ own brothers, impressed with his success as a miracle-worker, anxiously offered a tour of the major cities. Similarly, James and John wanted to call down fire on their enemies, and their mother came to Jesus to ask him to allow her sons to sit on his left and right hand in his kingdom. Everyone was planning for glory, but Jesus was planning for the cross. “You do not know what you are asking,” Jesus told their proud mother. “Can they drink the cup that I am about to drink?” “Of course we can!”, they eagerly replied. Triumphalism ignores the cross, and when the hour of trial (sin, failure, loss of popularity, shame, and abuse) comes, we, like the disciples, flee for cover instead of sharing in Christ’s suffering. The triumphalism of theologies of glory can be discerned in much of today’s popular Christian music. Here the realities of life are replaced with platitudes and sentimentalism, a far cry from the emotional and moving words of the psalmist. Contrast much of contemporary Christian music with the depth of the classic hymns of the Moravians, Lutheran and Reformed hymn writers, Charles Wesley, and the old African-American “spirituals.”

Fascination with the Moralistic

Sadly, evangelicals and liberals often read the Bible in a similar way these days. While the former may be more conservative in their interpretations, both tend to read (and preach) the Bible moralistically: that is, either as positive tips for better living or as scolding for not being what one should be. Thus, the key biblical characters become heroes to imitate rather than figures in a redemptive-historical plot centering around Jesus Christ. Jesus told the Pharisees that in spite of their ostensive devotion to the Scriptures, they did not really understand what they were reading, since he (Jesus) is the point of all of Scripture. Similarly, after his resurrection, he rebuked his disciples for not understanding how his death and resurrection were foretold. So “beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27).

If an obsession with “power encounters” stumbles over the weakness of the cross, the preoccupation with moralism finds the preaching of the cross “foolishness.” How can the wicked be declared righteous while they are still sinful? If I could know right now that nothing I did counted for my salvation, why would I even try to be holy? It’s unfair for God to elect people without basing his choice on anything in or foreseen in those who are chosen. Or, as we have seen already from Feuerbach’s pen: “The Christian theory of justification by faith is rooted in a cowardly renun-ciation of moral effort,” and belief in the hereafter nothing more than “an escape mechanism.” Our fallen sensibilities rebel against the utterly gracious character of God’s way of saving. When sin and grace are replaced with therapeutic, ethical, political, and pragmatic concerns, it is a sure sign that we too have stumbled over the Rock of offense.

The Puritan Thomas Goodwin warns us of our ten-dency even as Christians to attempt to turn faith into a work. Seeing the condition of his ship of faith and obedience, one sets out to rebuild another ship, “so he undoes himself in what he endeavors, and goes to hell by striving to go to heaven.”

Fascination with the Mysterious

As liberal theologian Paul Tillich pointed out (and exhibited), mysticism and rationalism are of one piece. Like Plato, the mystic-rationalist does not care much for this world and wishes to escape the world of “appear-ances” by abstract contemplation of “the Divine.” Christianity is deeply committed to this world (creation, provi-dence, redemption through historical events, restoration of the whole creation at the end of the age, including the resurrection of our bodies), and announces that God cannot be known directly by our reason, but must reveal himself by condescending to our capacity. The mystic-philosopher who attempts to penetrate God’s hidden council, either by specu-lation or claims to secret knowledge of God’s will beyond what is revealed in Scripture, is a theologian of glory. The theologian of the cross is content to know God as he has graciously manifested himself in the Living and written/preached Word.

The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals exists to call the church, amidst our dying culture, to repent of its worldliness, to recover and confess the truth of God’s Word as did the Reformers, and to see that truth embodied in doctrine, worship, and life.

This article appeared in the  July/August 1997, Modern Reformation/ACE

Countering Moralism

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

Probably the most difficult obstacle for ministry I face is moralism.  Despite the obvious declining standard in our culture, licentiousness is not the biggest hurdle. Nor is Biblical and theological illiteracy.  Moralism, which substitutes our becoming good in exchange for God’s grace and glory as the essence and goal of Christianity, is a plague that permeates our area, and even our church.  It is an empty promise; an appealing dead end. Yet, because it is so prevalent, and because it is often the message from pulpits of churches deemed successful, not to mention radio airwaves, it passes as being genuine Christianity.

Richard Lovelace offers this explanation worth considering about the importance of countering this counterfeit Christianity with the power of the genuine and pure gospel:

“Moralism, whether it take the form of denunciation or pep talks, can ultimately only create awareness of sin and guilt or manufactured virtues built on will power.  A ministry which leads to genuine sanctification and growth, on the other hand, avoids moralism, first by making clear the deep  rootage of sin-problems in the flesh so that the congregation is not battling these in the dark, and then by showing that every victory over the flesh is won by faith in Christ, laying hold of union with Him in death and resurrection and relying on His Spirit for the power over sin.  Presented in this context, even the demand for sanctification becomes part of the Good News… Ministries which attack only the surface of sin and fail to ground spiritual growth in the believer’s union with Christ produce either self-righteousness or despair, and both of these conditions are inimical to spiritual life.”

Moralism Trap

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

To reach people in our day, the gospel will have to be distinguished from moralism, because moralism is what most people outside the church think Christianity is all about – rules and standards and behavior and cleaning yourself up.  Millions of people, both inside and outside the church, believe that the essential message of Christianity is: “If you behave, then you belong.”  From a human standpoint, that’s why most people reject Christianity.

~ Tullian Tchividjian, from Jesus + Nothing = Everything

Deconstructing the Twin Enemies of the Gospel

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Perhaps the two of the most effective enemies of the gospel within the Church in North America are the twins: Moralism and Legalism. While there are other enemies at work, such as Relativism and Licentiousness, these are far more obvious in their opposition to the gospel.  Moralism and Legalism, however, are so potent, especially among conservatives, because they stealthily fly under the radar.  In fact, they are such subversives that they are often embraced as if they are part of the gospel, or at least partners with it.

Here is something Tim Keller offers to combat these sneaky, deadly foes:

Some claim that to constantly be striking a ‘note of grace, grace, grace’ in our sermons is not helpful in our culture today.

The objection goes like this: “Surely Phariseeism and moralism is not a problem in our culture today. Rather, our problem is license and antinomianism. People lack a sense of right or wrong. It is ‘carrying coal to Newcastle’ to talk about grace all the time to postmodern people.”

But I don’t believe that’s the case. Unless you point to the ‘good news’ of grace, people won’t even be able to bear the ‘bad news’ of God’s judgment. Also, unless you critique moralism, many irreligious people won’t know the difference between moralism and what you’re offering.

The way to get antinomians to move away from lawlessness is to distinguish the gospel from legalism. Why? Because modern and post-modern people have been rejecting Christianity for years thinking that it was indistinguishable from moralism. Non-Christians will always automatically hear gospel presentations as appeals to become moral and religious, unless in your preaching you use the good news of grace to deconstruct legalism. Only if you show them there’s a difference–that what they really rejected wasn’t real Christianity at all–will they even begin to consider Christianity.

3 Lane Escape from Moralism

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

I am thankful to Joe Thorn for concisely clarifying an issue that I believe confounds many well intentioned Christians.  The problem addressed is the confusion of moralism with the gospel.  In many case moralism is an attempt to take seriously both God and the Christian faith.  Nevertheless, moralism is off track.

In a post titled Killing Moralism, Thorn observes:

Many Christians have grown up in the church on moralistic preaching; that is, preaching that calls for obedience without connecting the commands of God to the cross of Christ.

Thorn goes on to suggest:

This disconnect is dangerous, potentially leading hearers into either self-loathing or self-righteousness. Moralistic preaching is often the ground in which the devil sows the seeds of legalism.

The more I study the more I am amazed by how cohesive the Scriptures are – both Old Testament and New Testament.  Christ is central to both, as together they unfold God’s awesome plan and work of redemption. 

But Thorn is right, too much of what we hear from our pulpits fails to make the connection.  And sadly that has all too often been true of the pulpits I have stood in through the years.  Oh, the Word was proclaimed. The teaching was faithful. Often rich truth was expressed: doctrinal, devotional, and dutiful.  But too often the cross – which is the crux of the whole Bible – was not clearly tied in.

In recent years I have labored to remedy that. But it is still a work in progress.

In his post Thorn suggests three observations we should look for to draw more deeply from the Scriptures for our preaching, teaching, and personal formation:

  • See the God of the Command
  • See the Grace Behind the Command
  • See the Gospel Above the Command.

To practice this observation Thorn wisely instructs us to remind ourselves of three truths:

  1. Jesus atoned for our failure in this command. (Colossians 1.3; Colossians 2.13, 14; Ephesians 2.16; Romans 5.9)
  2. Jesus fulfilled this command for us. (1 Corinthians 1.30-31; Romans 5.19; Philippians 3.9)
  3. Jesus empowers us to live out this command. (Philippians 2.12-13; Ephesians 6.10-20; 1 Peter 4.11)

The more we embrace these principles the better we will become in “preaching the gospel to ourselves”.  And living in light of the gospel is the key to escaping well intentioned but ultimately vapid moralism.

3 Ways

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

There is a difference between the Gospel and being good.  But I am not sure the average person understands this – neither in the church nor outside the doors.  In this short video Tim Keller explains the difference between:

  • Gospel
  • Moralism
  • Irreligion

The Gospel Saves From Morality

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

It sounds like a contradiction, doesn’t it?  The Gospel saves you from morality.  Can this be true?

It is true. And it is an important truth.  And understanding what John Piper is saying in this video can free people from the crushing weight of trying to be good. For others it will free them from self-righteousness, which is a cancer that eats away at the spiritual sensitivity system.

What is the Gospel?

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

Gospel means “good news.” The good news is: you (and I) are more sinful and flawed than you (or I) ever dared believe, yet you (and I) can be more accepted and loved than you (or I) ever dared hope at the same time, because Jesus Christ lived and died in our place. As the apostle Paul said, “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Corinthians 5.21)

That paradoxical statement is a simple formulation of the gospel.

More thoroughly we could say that the whole Bible is the gospel. It is a book about the God who rescues people from their moral and spiritual rebellion against him. The teaching of the Bible can be summarized under four headings: God, Man, Jesus Christ, and Our Response. 

Firstly, the gospel teaches that God is our creator. Thus he has the right to rule and command us as he does in his law. God is also holy, that is, he is absolutely pure morally, and he hates and punishes rebellion on the part of his creatures. He is more holy than anyone would ever imagine. 

Secondly, the gospel teaches us about human beings. We are creatures made by God and for God. We were originally created to live in relationship with God and we were morally pure. But because our first parents rebelled against God (just as we also all have done), human beings are now cut off from relationship with God and are subject to his condemnation. We are more sinful than we ever dared believe.  

Thirdly, the gospel teaches us what Jesus Christ has done for sinners like you and me. Jesus became a man and lived a life of perfect obedience to God’s law, and then died as a sacrifice in our place under the judgment of God. He was raised from the dead and now reigns in heaven. The condemnation that he suffered takes away the necessity that we suffer judgment for our own sins- “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us.” The righteous life he lived is credited to us, not because we are actually righteous, but because of God’s mercy and grace- “in him we might become the righteousness of God.” 

Fourthly, the gospel teaches us how to respond to the good news. We turn away from our rebellion and put our trust in Jesus Christ. Despairing of our own worthiness to stand before God, we believe the promise that those who trust in Jesus Christ will be forgiven and declared righteous. Those who put their faith in Jesus Christ are accepted as loved sons and daughters of God, and God sends his Spirit to live in them. 

Counterfeit Gospels

 Martin Luther said that “a sinner trying to believe the gospel was like a drunk man trying to ride a horse; he will always be falling off on one side or the other”. The two errors that the sides of the horse represent are

  • legalism or moralism, and
  • pragmatism or relativism or antinomianism.  

Moralism is the view that a person is made acceptable to God through his own attainments. Moralists are usually very religious, and often very conservative in their religion. Legalism tends to stress truth without grace. Moralists are usually very rules oriented, and depending on their success in keeping the rules they will be either arrogantly self-righteous or depressed and morose. If they go to Jesus for forgiveness, it is just to ask him to fill in the gaps they have left in their own religious performance. For the moralist, the cross is not the only basis for acceptance by God, but is an adjunct to our performance. 

Pragmatists are often irreligious, or prefer more liberal religion. They tend to stress grace over truth, assuming everyone is accepted by God and that we each have to decide what we think is true for us. Often relativists will talk about God’s love, but since they do not see them selves as deeply sinful people, God’s love for them costs him nothing. For them the cross is not the necessary condition of our acceptance by God. 

The gospel holds out to us a whole new system of approach to God. It rejects our attempts to justify ourselves before God, to be our own saviors and lords. It rejects both our pragmatic presumption and our religious attempts to earn our way into God’s favor. It destroys the perception that Christianity is just an invitation to become more religious. The gospel will not let us think Jesus is just a coach to help us get stronger where we are weak. To be a Christian is to turn from self-justification of all sorts and to rely exclusively on Jesus’ record for a relationship with God. 

Christians and non-Christians both stumble over the two counterfeits of the gospel. Many Churches are deeply moralistic or deeply relativistic. Christians who understand the gospel very clearly still look like the drunk man on the horse, as the desire to justify ourselves and trust in our own performance continually reappears. 

The gospel tells the pragmatist that he is more flawed and sinful than he ever dared believe. The gospel tells the moralist that he is more loved and accepted than he ever dared hope.