I’ve been teaching through the Gospel of Matthew on Sunday nights for quite some time now. I mentioned a few weeks ago that the congregation may have picked up on the theme of Jesus being at odds with the legalism of the Pharisees.
Legalism is not solely a religious issue, however, even our relationships with God must occasionally deal with what becomes a sanctimonious shallow reflection of true faith.
In 2006, back on the original SBC Outpost, Marty Duren wrote an article that addresses the subject with an adept touch and the writing style that I miss so much. Then it had a specific context of the roiling SBC Blogosphere that has now passed into something else – something about which I have no desire to publicly opine.
Now, I think the article relevant well beyond the original context as spiritually beneficial for us as we think through the issues of living an organic, Christ centered and Biblically informed faith.
With his permission, I repost it for your consideration:
I believe in the fundamentals of the faith. I believe unashamedly and fully in the verbal, plenary inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture, in the virgin birth of Christ, in His perfect life and complete, atoning death. I believe in His bodily resurrection from the tomb and that He will return visibly at some point yet to come to receive me and His entire bride to Himself.
But, though I once was, I am not now a Fundamentalist.
The purpose of this writing is not to condemn those who are Fundamentalists, but to express some of the reasons why I now reject that label and the extra biblical beliefs associated with it. One way to demonstrate just how far afield it is is to compare it to its first cousin, liberalism. They must be related as they have much in common.
Liberals expunge scripture in favor of cultural whims: women today should be pastors because Paul was a male chauvinist whose writings are woefully behind the times, homosexuality is acceptable if the partners are truly in love and committed to a monogamous relationship, etc. Fundamentalists decried this abuse of scripture (and rightly so) yet in practice they also deny the sufficiency of scripture for daily living, favoring often to appeal to heritage or accumulated practices rather than a dependence on scriptural authority.
Thus we are taught that we shouldn’t attend movies because of Hollywood wickedness, that we shouldn’t play cards because the Joker card represented Jesus, that we shouldn’t listen to secular music because Jimmy Buffet might smoke dope, that being “not of the world” means to withdraw from culture, on and on ad infinitum, ad naseum. Now, while it is obvious to some that these positions are biblical, it is just as obvious to others that there are equally valid biblical reasons to hold opposing positions. Legalism is not an individual having a conviction to abstain from alcohol or not attend R-rated movies or having his hair cut above his ears. Legalism (and thus Fundamentalism) is the projection of that individual’s conviction onto another person who is not in violation of scripture.
In another arena liberals consistently took political positions that were rightly viewed by Fundamentalists as non-biblical: pro-abortion, extreme environmentalism and pacificism were examples of a philosophical system of thought that routinely refused to subject political stances to biblical tenets. Looking at Fundamentalism on the other side, there seems a bent toward the same mistake. Leftover goals from the Moral Majority have left many holding out hope that if we can just “elect the right people” or “get the right judges” we can return to a “Christian America.” Recently high profile spokesmen from our Convention participated in “Justice Sunday I & II” for the purpose of encouraging the affirmation of a supreme court justice held up in filibuster. How can there be a biblical position on stopping a filibuster?
Jesus was reasonably clear that His kingdom was not of this world…that if it were, His servants would fight. When He died His earthly kingdom measured the dimensions of a graveyard, yet when He rose it was beyond the limits of all creation. Both liberalism and Fundamentalism give secular politics a greater role or a greater weight than scripture ever did.
But perhaps the most harmful move of Fundamentalism is the substitution of extra-biblical rules for the working of the Spirit through the Word in the maturation process of the believer. The entire book of Galatians was written to combat this error into which it is easy to slide.
In a recent post, it was stated this way by Joe Thorn:
This is the argument the Pharisees made. They sought to honor God’s law by making additional laws that will (in theory) keep them from transgressing God’s laws. Their motives are great, but this is a form of legalism that falsely binds men’s consciences and produces something other than godliness while placing something other than the yoke of Christ on the necks of brothers and sisters.
Which is worse, a liberal position that denies the sufficiency of scripture or a Fundamentalist position that ignores it? Is it ok to ignore the way of the kingdom of God for the advancement of an earthly kingdom? It is a mistake of both extremes to regard Caesar more obedience worthy than Christ. Paul asked the Galatians if they had been “bewitched” to begin thinking like this. Hardly the work of God.
Liberalism is modern day Sadduceeism, while Fundamentalism is modern day Pharisaism. It is just as errant to “say there is no resurrection” as it is to live as if Jesus never fulfilled the law of Moses. Peter equated the forcing of Gentile believers to live by rules and regulations as “testing God” (Acts 15:10), while Paul said it is the “ministry of death” and “the ministry of condemnation” (2 Corinthians 3:7, 9).
Regardless of intent and claim, Fundamentalists find themselves guiltily smack in the middle of Jesus conversation of Matthew 15:1-3:
Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, “Why do Your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.” And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (NASB)
God save us from both extremes back to a place where His Spirit and His Word are all that we depend upon for vitality and maturity. I don’t want to run my car off the road on the left or the right; I’m reasonably certain, The Italian Job notwithstanding, that we are not supposed to be driving on a narrow road and not through the culverts.