Free In Christ — Chapter Two

In the second chapter of his book, Free in Christ, Hook stated that the principle is broader and greater than the command, and suggested that our tendency has been to emphasize the lawful demand of the command while minimizing, or failing to discern, the principle behind the command; reminding us that this is a facet of legalism. 

Another author insists that law keeping is not legalism, but depending on law keeping is; suggesting that legalists do not overtly deny the gospel, they deny it inadvertently by looking within rather than to Christ for saving grace and assurance.   

A third author suggests that legalism is a motive, or attitude, that leads us to establish or seek to improve our standing before God by our activities.   He emphasizes that legalism is not the deed itself; but is rather the motive or attitude behind the deed. 

As Hook reminds us, throughout his ministry Jesus spoke against those who sought justification by keeping legal requirements, chastising the scribes and Pharisees on several occasions because they sought to keep the technicality of the law rather than focusing on the principle, or purpose, behind the law.   In other words, we should not perform just to obey commands, but also for the value to be received from what was commanded.   

Legalism is not obeying God’s commands, because obedience is good.   Legalism is obeying God’s commands with the wrong motive.  

As one author writes, a legalistic spirit says, “What action of mine will make me right with God?  What behavior of mine will improve my standing with God?  What else can I do so that God will love me more?  What can I do so I can get more of God’s grace? 

Let’s be honest, haven’t we all struggle with this at times?   I know I have, and at times still do! 

The reason legalism is do damaging is because it assaults what God has done in Christ.  Legalism says, I am not satisfied with my standing before God based solely upon Christ’s righteousness, because it isn’t good enough, I need to add something to it, I must add to it. 

Hook realizes this truth and seeks to remind us that laws are not only designed for the benefit and protection of the governed, they are also based on some good or moral principle.   It is this good or moral principle that must be our focus, living this principle as an extension of our faith walk with Christ, not seeking to be justified by the keeping of law. 

Another person, just yesterday, stated that laws may be able to restrain people, but they can’t transform people.    This all leads us, as Hook expresses, to a striking and exciting conclusion: it is the principle that should rule our conduct rather than the command.  Our approach will determine whether we gain the approval or denunciation of our Savior. 

It is at this point that Hook sacrifices a sacred cow by informing us that no examples are binding.   For those reared on a diet of direct statement, necessary inference and approved example this statement is quite a shock, and probably borders blasphemy. 

Although I am not totally sure where I stand with this statement, at this time, I have to admit that much of what he says makes sense and would serve as the perfect launching pad for more discussion of this chapter throughout the week.  But, for the moment let’s focus on a couple statements that require honest introspection.    

First, Hook states those who bind examples are very selective in the examples they choose to bind.   Is there any truth to this statement?   Are we selective?    Do we choose to bind the day of the week, while choosing to ignore the washing of feet? 

Don’t misunderstand my question.  I am not challenging the first day of the week, just our choosing what we bind.   We bind the first day of the week based on example and inference, but ignore foot washing which was commanded by Christ.   The reason often given for not binding foot washing is that Jesus was teaching a lesson on humility and service, not binding a ritual to be observed by the church.   Interestingly enough, this is the point Hook has been making in this entire chapter, the principle behind the command is broader and greater than the command itself.  

Are we being consistent? 

Second, another statement worthy of our consideration is that we do not commune to obey commands and follow examples but to remember that Jesus died for our sins.    Jesus pronounced a woe upon the scribes and Pharisees for their misdirected purpose.  The question is, will he be any more pleased with us than with them when we follow their pattern?   Good question, Hook. 

So, were you shocked by his second chapter?   Did you find yourself agreeing with his words?   How do you feel about his comments regarding no examples being binding? I look forward to your comments and thoughts.

Homemade Brownies

 I apologize for being absent the past week or so.  I will be back to posting in the very near future.   As for today, enjoy the following sent to me by my wife.    

Last week, I walked into my office to find a sandwich bag on my desk containing three chewy, tasty, homemade chocolate brownies.

Some thoughtful and anonymous person who knew my love for tasty homemade brownies had placed them there, along with a hand written short story.

I immediately sat down and began eating the first chewy, tasty, homemade brownie as I read the following story:

Two teenagers asked their father if they could go the theater to watch a movie that all their friends had seen. After reading some reviews about the movie on the Internet, he denied their request.

“Aw dad, why not?” they complained. “It’s rated PG-13, and we’re both older than thirteen!”

Dad replied: “Because that movie contains nudity and portrays immorality as being normal and acceptable behavior.

“But dad, those are just very small parts of the movie! That’s what our friends who’ve seen it have told us. The movie is two hours long and those scenes are just a few minutes of the total film! It’s based on a true story, and good triumphs over evil, and there are other redeeming themes like courage and self-sacrifice. Even the movie review websites say that!”

“My answer is ‘no,’ and that is my final answer. You are welcome to stay home tonight, invite some of your friends over, and watch one of the good videos we have in our home collection. But you will not go and watch that film. End of discussion.”

The two teenagers walked dejectedly into the family room and slumped down on the couch. As they sulked, they were surprised to hear the sounds of their Father preparing something in the kitchen. They soon recognized the wonderful aroma of brownies baking in the oven, and one of the teenagers said to the other, “Dad must be feeling guilty, and now he’s going to try to make it up to us with some fresh brownies. Maybe we can soften him with lots of praise when he brings them out to us and persuade him to let us go to that movie after all.”

About that time I began eating the second brownie from the sandwich bag and wondered if there was some connection to the brownies I was eating and the brownies in the story. I kept reading…

The teens were not disappointed. Soon their father appeared with a plate of warm brownies, which he offered to his kids. They each took one. Then their father said, “Before you eat, I want to tell you something: I love you both so much.  “The teenagers smiled at each other with knowing glances. Dad was softening.  “That is why I’ve made these brownies with the very best ingredients. I’ve made them from scratch. Most of the ingredients are even organic. The best organic flour. The best free-range eggs. The best organic sugar. Premium Vanilla and chocolate.”

The brownies looked mouth-watering, and the teens began to become a little impatient with their dad’s long speech.  “But I want to be perfectly honest with you. There is one ingredient I added that is not usually found in brownies. I got that ingredient from our own back yard. But you needn’t worry, because I only added the tiniest bit of that ingredient to your brownies. The amount of the portion is practically insignificant. So go ahead, take a bite and let me know what you think.”

“Dad, would you mind telling us what that mystery ingredient is before we eat?”   “Why? The portion I added was so small. Just a teaspoonful. You won’t even taste it.”   “Come on, dad; just tell us what that ingredient is.”  “Don’t worry! It is organic, just like the other ingredients. “ 

“Dad!”

“Well, OK, if you insist. That secret ingredient is fresh organic…dog poop.”

I immediately stopped chewing that second brownie and I spit it out into the wastebasket by my desk. I continued reading, now fearful of the paragraphs that still remained.

Both teens instantly dropped their brownies back on the plate and began inspecting their fingers with horror.   “DAD! Why did you do that? You’ve tortured us by making us smell those brownies cooking for the last half hour, and now you tell us that you added
dog poop! We can’t eat these brownies!”

“Why not? The amount of dog poop is very small compared to the rest of the ingredients. It won’t hurt you. It’s been cooked right along with the other ingredients. You won’t even taste it. It has the same consistency as the brownies. Go ahead and eat!”

“No, Dad…NEVER! ”

“And that is the same reason I won’t allow you to go watch that movie. You won’t tolerate a little dog poop in your brownies, so why should you tolerate a little immorality in your movies? We pray that God will not lead us unto temptation, so how can we in good conscience entertain ourselves with something that will imprint a sinful image in our minds that will lead us into temptation long after we first see it?

I discarded what remained of the second brownie as well as the entire untouched third brownie. What had been irresistible a minute go had become detestable. And only because of the very slim chance that what I was eatingwas slightly polluted. (Surely it wasn’t..but I couldn’t convince myself.)

What a good lesson about purity! Why do we tolerate any sin? On the day of the Passover, the Israelites were commanded to remove every bit of leaven from their homes. Sin is like leaven – a little bit leavens the whole lump (1Corinthians 5:6,7), faith and sin, don’t mix.

Free In Christ – Chapter One

If there is one lesson we should have learned from the Old Testament it is that law keeping doesn’t make one righteous before God.   Paul, a self-proclaimed former law keeper, informs us that no one can ever be made right in God’s sight by doing what his law commands (Rom 3:20).   Yet, just as the people of Jesus’ day, many are still seeking a righteous standing with God through law keeping.

The problem with this law keeping mentality is that it is divisive in nature and contrary to the freedom that is offered in Christ.   Simply consider the Pharisees’ binding of incidental details, such as eating with unwashed hands and tithing of the smallest herbs, which had become more important than loving the Lord God with all the heart, soul, mind and strength; or loving ones neighbor as himself.   Rather than understanding that eating with unwashed hands could never defile or make one unacceptable to God the Pharisees bound age-old traditions, replacing God’s commands with man-made doctrines.   As Hook suggests, in developing such issues they became hair-splitters serving a God of quibbles.

Is it possible that we are guilty of the same hair-splitting, law keeping mentality?   Have we become guilty of judging others faithful based on acceptance or rejection of age-old traditions that we have deemed necessary?  

More than likely we have not placed eating with unwashed hands and loving God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength in the same basket for we see the absurdity of such.   Yet, one can not deny the division existing in the church today over things that are just as absurd, with lines of fellowship and salvation being drawn and observed. 

Hook states, no two of us agree on everything.   We can not evade this point; even in our neatly divided little groups.  Therefore, unity based on total doctrinal agreement is seemingly impossible; especially whenever one considers the hundreds of issues over which individuals have disagreed, and over which lines of fellowship may or may not have been drawn. 

In his book, Hook lists 100 issues over which individuals have disagreed.   Some of the items listed include capital punishment, lifting hands while singing, fasting, foot washing, smoking, bussing children to the services, dress code for men serving the Lord’s Supper and so on.  

I would love to survey congregations, both conservative and liberal, to see what percentage of members agree on each of the 100 listed issues.   

Is it possible that in developing such issues we have become hair-splitters serving a God of quibbles?   Is it possible that we are guilty of limiting the liberties of others, and thus preventing the unity for which Jesus prayed and Paul encouraged? 

Unless we change our perspective and stop seeking a righteous standing before God through law keeping, we will become modern day Pharisees who are guilty of the very same actions and attitudes condemned by Jesus. 

Can we boast, then, that we have done anything to be accepted by God?  No, because our acquittal is not based on our good deeds.   It is based on our faith.   So we are made right with God through faith and not by obeying the law.  (Rom 3:27-28)

So Christ has really set us free.  Now make sure that you stay free, and don’t get tied up again in slavery to the law.   (Gal 5:1)