Yet, you'll accept McKim's "seems to me" definition of legalism?The first thing I'm going to state is I'm not going to accept James' assumptions, and "seems to me" definitions.
Donald McKim, in his Dictionary of Theological Terms, defines Legalism as, "A relationship or ethical system that is governed primarily by obedience to prescribed laws or rules."
---------------------------------------------
Reformed said:James makes the following statement:
JamesL said:It would seem to me that a legalist is someone who thinks of Christianity in a primarily legal fashion. In other words, someone who is more focused on following rules, laws, commandments rather than being led by the Holy Spirit.
Reformed said:A Legalist subscribes to Legalism. All that has to be done is just to add the pronoun to McKim's definition.
So, in essence, a Legalist believes that "obedience to prescribed laws or rules" justifies a person before God. The Legalist either formally, or practically, de-emphasizes grace and the work of the Holy Spirit.
But that's not what your quote of McKim says. There's no mention of justification in your quote of him. I don't know the man or his writings. But your quote of him sounds almost exactly like my "seems to me" definition. He said - a relationship that is GOVERNED primarily by laws or rules.
I wrote: "someone who is more focused on following rules, laws, commandments RATHER THAN being led by the Holy Spirit"
I don't know if you are able to catch what we both were saying, and how it is the same - When he says that the relationship is GOVERNED by rules, he is relating this to believers. Not establishing of the relationship, which is where you would find justification
When I say RATHER THAN by the Holy Spirit, I am relating this to believers. Unbelievers cannot be led by the Holy Spirit
So you disagreed with me AND the guy you thought you agreed with
That's going to depend on one's definition of legalism and Antinomian. There are two possibilities for eachI think it will be helpful to point out the opposite of Legalism; Antinomianism.
That's extremely biblical, as you'll see in about 7 seconds.....McKim defines Antinomianism as, "The view that there is no need for the law of God in the Christian life....."
Not this one. I am an avowed antinomian, in a purely biblical sense. 1Timothy 1:9 says plainly that the law is not for a righteous man, but for sinners and unholy desecrators.Reformed said:Antinomianism over-emphasizes grace, mercy, and forgiveness and de-emphasizes obedience and personal holiness.
We become the righteousness of God, in Christ (2Cor 5:21)
The law is the ministry of death (2Cor 3:7)
the law is the ministry of condemnation (2Cor 3:9)
Galatians 3:10 says - For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.”
Christ is the END of the law for everyone who believes (Rom 10:4)
This isn't overemphasizing grace, this I simply recognizing that the Law has been abolished in Christ. He didn't COME to abolish the Law, He DIED to abolish it (Ephesians 2:15).
The Law was an old covenant, or testament. Now we have a NEW one in His blood. Hebrews 9:15-17 tells us that the New covenant could not be established while the one making it lives. Just like a "last will and testament" today is in effect when the one who make it dies
But just to be clear, I don't believe scripture sets Law against Grace. Grace can be found throughout the scriptures. What scripture does contrast is Law versus Spirit.
We are no longer to be led (or governed) by rules and regulations found in the ministry of death, we are to be led by the Spirit, who dwells in us. If you don't get that, you just might be a legalist
I think that's enough for one post. I'll try to get another bit in tomorrow night. It might take a while, but I'm willing to tough it out