The tricks of the legalists

thetruthseeker · Sep 12, 2003

Colossians said:
Datsar,

PLease do not post replies from one thread onto another. That is ridiculous. We can read your reply on the thread it relates to.

Hi Colossians, Datsar,

It is impossible to love Jesus and not be obedient to His Commandments.

I know that I've said this before but all the servants of God in the Bible have always been saying the same thing. Paul is often quoted as saying that the 10 Commandments are nailed to the cross. This is a lie that started in the Catholic church and spread to Protestant churches alike. To keep Sunday is to pay homage to the Catholic church, the Pope. Every Catholic priest will tell you the same thing without flinching. Did Paul every say that the 10 Commandments are void? No. On the contrary He lifted up the 10 Commandments.

Some Christians would have us to believe that the servants of God in the Old Testament were saved by works whereas the servants of the New Covenant are just now saved by grace through fatith. Nothing could be furthest from the truth. Like I've said before, this is not something that just started in the New Testament (testament means covenant by the way). The BIBLE shows that we were always saved by grace through faith (in the both the Old and New Testaments). The people in the Old Testament looked forward to the sacrifice of Jesus while the people in the New Testament looked back to the sacrifice of Jesus.

Paul said the following:

Hebrews 11:4-31 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh. By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised. Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city. By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure. By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come. By faith Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff. By faith Joseph, when he died, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel; and gave commandment concerning his bones. By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months of his parents, because they saw he was a proper child; and they were not afraid of the king's commandment. By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward. By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible. Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them. By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned. By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they were compassed about seven days. By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

Now my questions to you is this: Did these men keep the 10 Commandments of Jesus, yes or no? Is commandment keeping contrary to faith in Jesus?

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Your brother in Christ,
TheTruthSeeker

Achichem · Sep 12, 2003

Well since I am in the habit of responding to all these so called tricks, I might as well respond to some more.

Colossians said:
TRICK NUMBER FOUR

Colossians said:
The legalist will happily agree with you that the law schoolmasters us to Christ (Gal 3:24). "BUT", he will say (there's that "but" again), "Christ then shows us to the law!".

"Right!" says the Christian. Now I get it:

"The law schoolmasters us to Christ,

who then leads us to the law,

which then schoolmasters us to Christ,

who then leads us to the law,

which then schoolmasters us to Christ

who then leads us to the law..."

(and round and round and round we go, where we stop, nobody knows).

Without exception (and I stress without exception), all satanic doctrines are circular.

The end of the line for the law train is Christ Jesus. It is there we disembark and thank God for a train we will never again board.

"Christ the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth".

The law and Christ come from the same place! It would indicate that they if taken how they are intended they teach the same thing; one helps us to know the other, sure, because they teach the same thing!

Keep in mind I said, teach the same thing! For one brings salvation (Christ) and the other does not (law).This is because one is written(dead) and the other living(alive).

How then can they teach the same thing when they have different purposes?

Because the both teach Love, if you say one teaches love and the other does not, then truly you do not understand that love is one, and only comes from one.

Colossians said:
TRICK NUMBER FIVE.

Colossians said:
The legalist maintains he agrees with the Christian Church that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law, as is directly stated in Rom 3:21. But he defines faith in agreement with the following assertion of Ellen White:

Those only who through faith in Christ obey all of God's commandments will reach the condition of sinlessness in which Adam lived before his transgression. They testify* to their love of Christ by obeying all his precepts" (Manuscript 122, 1901, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 6, p. 1118).

*We note how Ellen cleverly uses "testify" rather than "prove", to avoid exposure. It sounds more biblical, and less like a work of the flesh. But we will not refrain from pointing out what the Emperor is wearing: it is really "prove", and not "testify". This use of "testify" is to deceive one into thinking that he keeps commandments because he loves God rather than to prove he loves God, which latter position is in fact the case.)

His definition can be expressed scientifically as:
Faith = Faith + Commandment Keeping.

This is precisely how variables are incremented in computer programs: recursively. Eg: X:=X+1 (incrementing the value of X, redefining itself as it reiterates through a loop).

His faith is therefore not a constant, but a variable, and is therefore undefined. It is not faith.

Now we will show the conclusion of this equation by expanding out the right-hand side of the equation; that is, by substituting "Faith" on the left-hand side for the "Faith" on the right-hand side.

(We abbreviate Faith as "F", and Commandment Keeping as "CK".)

F = F + CK

F = [F + CK] + CK

F = [F + CK] + CK + CK

F = [F + CK] + CK + CK + CK

F = [F + CK] + CK + CK + CK + CK

and as we extrapolate to an infinite number of expansions, we get:

F = CK

So his faith is in fact not that which testifies of itself through commandment keeping; his faith is commandment keeping itself. And that is why he cannot distinguish between the two.

Our faith, however, is not a variable, but a constant. It is faith unappended-to, and varies not.

And being a constant, it declares of itself that it is "the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen".

With our faith constant, we have this assurance, this evidence of salvation.

With his faith variable, he has neither. (And that is why he does not declare either, but contingency instead.)

As you may have or may not have noticed, Colossians has a tendency to trace all followers of the law (still do all the law says) to this Ellen White (who I didnt even know existed till a thread a read about her here recently), however this is like sourcing Christianity back to the year 600 and then never go back any further.

Not All Follower of the Law base back to the SDA, most build on the original apostles and their records given to us in acts, and the letters.

My church, the UCG disagrees with the SDA on many points.

For example :

The SDA so not also follow the Law of Moses. We do.

The SDA on the Sabbath, make standards of what can and cannot be done on the Sabbath. We do nothing of the sort; we say that is between God and you.

The SDA, say they are the one church of God, we say that their could be many other s, and most likely are, who love God will all their heart and with all their soul, which is all that matters.

Colossians said all follower of the law say

Faith = faith + keeping the commandments

I say sure, some! But not all.

We think: Faith = Loving your of God with all your heart and with all your soul.

Why do we say follow the commandments? Is it to say how righteous we are? Certainly not. We say follow because if that is not your mindset( the mindset that you would do anything the God asks you) truly I say that is a sinful mindset, and how can the Lord live with you (in you) if you live in sin of the mind, body and soul.

Of course Colossians says God told us not to do his commands? But I said to him, you miss the context.

What do I mean by context.

Surely if the Lord said out right to all peoples: Faith does not contain in it, the law then I would say Colossians was right.

Yet, the Lord never said that!

What did he say, Law is not of faith, in rebuttal to a bunch of legalists (Pharisee minded). Do you realise this is not the first time he said this to this same type of people! He always told the Pharisees that their law was not of faith, many times.

Why? Because they justify themselves by their acts, not by their mindset (faith, belief). For surly Jesus would not of had to tell them that. if their mindset had been love God, with all your heart and with all your soul.

You can follow in law with a mindset of love God, with all your heart and with all your soul. Is it possible to not know the laws of God and still have this one thing? Theoretically, yes! But is that the case! Or do you know that the Lord spoke on the mount and through Moses, all that was good, and put it in the stone, and then it into books called the Torah. Notice no man before Jesus even entered heaven, that is because the law of stone could not bring life. Life can only bring Life. Yet all that was on that stone was written by life (God) and is a reflection of the fruits of Life.

So now, after Jesus we have been given the spirit (Salvation) to change all that is the root (plant, our selves), so we can enter life (salvation)! But truly I say to you, can a bad tree produce good fruits, or a good tree bad fruits?. So look at the fruit, not because the sweetness of the fruit (actions of a man) matters, but because they reflect the plant (the mans heart).

But then the question arises, if the law is nothing more then a list of fruits then what use to it for a person that has life (good plant).

Truly I say to you, that if we were nothing but the spirit then truly we would have no use for the law! However within us is much more then just the spirit!

For we have the body, mind, soul and spirit.(if you would like to argue one please offer an alternative)

But the spirit is not like the others for it is pure good and pure righteousness and in so it cannot do sin (produce and bad fruit).

Yet our mind/soul is who we truly are, this what has the opportunity for eternal life. (can be manipulated by the other two.)

The body is death! It is bond to this earth and does not abound in what is Good (God).

The battle that happens is that we must live in the spirit and not in flesh! Remember you can only have one master.

If you use the law to see if you are living in the spirit then you know 100% it is in the spirit you live, if you fall short you can stop the act so that the spirit can live in you again.

So are we under the law! No! But does that make the law useless? No!

If that is what you consider logic of a legalist then fine, but surly I tell you, that we are not based on this because we feel ourselves righteous in are acts!

God bless,
DaTsar

Colossians · Sep 13, 2003

Colossians said all follower of the law say
Faith = faith + keeping the commandments
I say sure, some! But not all.
We think: Faith = “Loving your of God with all your heart and with all your soul.”

Well you're obviously in the "some", for we know what the right-hand side of your equation entails don't we?

Colossians · Sep 13, 2003

The law and Christ come from the same place!
So do a car and a garage.

And in continuing on with your being dishonest to yourself, not protecting yourself from the receiving of a doctrine which does not conform to logical and philosophical universals, you once again turn a blind eye to the circularity of Christ's returning us to a law which brought us to Him in the first place.

Colossians · Sep 13, 2003

TRICK NUMBER SIX

I recently debated for 3 hours by phone with a legalist who revealed, in the end, his fundamental problem. He said "I haven't died" (verbatim).

The legalist will tell you that your having come to Christ has given you a new nature. So he says, whereas your old nature did not obey the Ten Commandments, your new nature now should.
(Note here his lack of confidence in this new nature: if he really believed it was a new nature, he wouldn't be telling you what your new nature should be doing - you'd be doing it automatically. Thus the new nature in his mind is one that is induced, not imparted. Important point).

Now in Golgotha, Romans had a habit of nailing people to trees. However, as good as they were at doing this, they never perfected the art of nailing a nature to a tree. Never once did "Crucifixion Travel" show its tourists to a crucified nature. They were always persons.

This then is why Paul tells us that our old MAN was crucified with Christ, and not merely our nature.
The legalist reduces this to "nature" so that he might convince you there is no way to disengage yourself from the jurisdiction of the law. (You are the same entity as before, simply with a new nature, which now should keep the law.)

This is the fundamental problem of all legalists: they have not died with Christ, and therefore they have no way of disengaging themselves from a law which should have crucified them.

Scripture is clear - we are not the same entity that we were prior to conversion. The literal Greek of 2 Cor 5:17 means "a new creature THAT HAS NEVER EXISTED BEFORE".
Consequently we proclaim with Paul: "It is no longer I that live, but Christ", and recognise the cult of the legalist for what it is: non-Christians religiously masquerading in the name of Jesus Christ.

Colossians · Sep 14, 2003

TRICK NUMBER SEVEN

This is what we shall refer to as "Semantic Nesting".

Basically it runs like this:
If there is a plain statement, the legalist tells everyone he agrees with it, but only within a (to-be-synthesised) larger syntactic structure.

A secular example:
Suppose you and I had an argument over whether science was better than art.

(Now I will be the legalist).
I use an example that says "Vincent Van Gough's paintings are better than the telephone!!".
You then reply, ah but "art is not of science".
I as the legalist will then reply, "Ah! Art which is not of science is not of science! There is art which is of science."

With this technique, the legalist can literallly nest his arguments in an infinite number of 'layers' of semantic/syntactic structures. As wells as "Semantic Nesting" we might also call it "Semantic augmenting".

How do we deal with this?
Quite simple:
1. Recognise that by virtue of the design required to implement this trick, that it is very deliberate.
2. Ignore the debater, and move on to one who is teachable. Since the scripture tells us we are not to add to it, God will deal with his deliberateness in due course.

InGodweTrust · Sep 22, 2003

Truthseeker when the Lord convicts me of worshipping on Sundays through his Holy Spirit I will stop. I have felt no such conviction. You worship the Lord on Saturday because you love the Lord, I worship on Sunday because I love the Lord. I do not condemn you, do not condemn me. Paul said let every man be convinced in his own mind. We should devote our energy to spreading the Gospel, not arguing over the Sabbath. The Sabbath saves no one, Jesus Christ does. Lets worship and praise him everyday!
God Bless!!!!

~Wisdom Seeker~ · Sep 22, 2003

Legalism means when anyone adds to salvation to make it valid. Check your Bible for the explanation of legalism. I believe it is in James. Remember when the gentiles were saved and the Jewish Pharasees said that they had to be circumsised or they weren't saved? They were rebuked for this. Because you can not add to salvation to make it valid. That's the true sense of legalism.

The modern interpretation of legalism is when a church adds rules to church membership etc. Which comprise of their possition on the interpretation of scripture and then proports them to be doctrine. This is authoritarian in nature.

ie: the scripture says

1Tim.2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

The legalism would be "woman must wear loose fitting dresses that are at least to the knee or below, that are high cut in the neckline, and are not provocative in their style or fit. Woman must not wear jewelry or makeup of any kind.

People take this legalism very far in some cases. This sort of legalism is not Biblical, but it stems from a seemingly Biblical standpoint. That is probably why so many people blindly follow "those who know best" or the authorities who make the rules. When all they need to do is read what the Bible says themselves.

PaleHorse · Jun 1, 2005

Legalism means when anyone adds to salvation to make it valid.

Well, let me pose the question; what does salvation save us from? Specifically.

Theophorus · Jun 2, 2005

All legalists are tricksters? That is the implication right. I thought this was general theology, GT, not general stereotype, GS.

Maybe I should start a thread on the tricks of the slanderers, accusers.

But thanks for the warning on "legalist"...whatever that means.

Theophorus · Jun 2, 2005

Wisdom Seeker said:
Legalism means when anyone adds to salvation to make it valid. Check your Bible for the explanation of legalism. I believe it is in James. Remember when the gentiles were saved and the Jewish Pharasees said that they had to be circumsised or they weren't saved? They were rebuked for this. Because you can not add to salvation to make it valid. That's the true sense of legalism.

The modern interpretation of legalism is when a church adds rules to church membership etc. Which comprise of their possition on the interpretation of scripture and then proports them to be doctrine. This is authoritarian in nature.

ie: the scripture says
The legalism would be "woman must wear loose fitting dresses that are at least to the knee or below, that are high cut in the neckline, and are not provocative in their style or fit. Woman must not wear jewelry or makeup of any kind.

People take this legalism very far in some cases. This sort of legalism is not Biblical, but it stems from a seemingly Biblical standpoint. That is probably why so many people blindly follow "those who know best" or the authorities who make the rules. When all they need to do is read what the Bible says themselves.

Legalism is a term of slander in the context of this thread.

Theophorus · Jun 2, 2005

Colossians said:
TRICK NUMBER FIVE.

His definition can be expressed scientifically as:
Faith = Faith + Commandment Keeping.
This is precisely how variables are incremented in computer programs: recursively. Eg: X:=X+1 (incrementing the value of X, redefining itself as it reiterates through a loop).
His faith is therefore not a constant, but a variable, and is therefore undefined. It is not faith.

Now we will show the conclusion of this equation by expanding out the right-hand side of the equation; that is, by substituting "Faith" on the left-hand side for the "Faith" on the right-hand side.
(We abbreviate Faith as "F", and Commandment Keeping as "CK".)

F = F + CK
F = [F + CK] + CK
F = [F + CK] + CK + CK
F = [F + CK] + CK + CK + CK
F = [F + CK] + CK + CK + CK + CK

and as we extrapolate to an infinite number of expansions, we get:

F = CK

So his faith is in fact not that which testifies of itself through commandment keeping; his faith is commandment keeping itself. And that is why he cannot distinguish between the two.

And this is a perfect example of irony.

cygnusx1 · Jun 2, 2005

didaskalos said:
legalists.... puhh

you gotta watch them every minute.

yeh , there should be Laws against em !!!

PaleHorse · Jun 2, 2005

Theophorus said:
Legalism is a term of slander in the context of this thread.

I agree - and like you I also have to wonder why this topic is under the Theology group since it's not really theology as much as it's an attack on other's approach to the entire body of scripture rather than a precise topic to be studied.

According to Colossian's definition I am a "legalist". But I have to ask, why is it considered legalistic to follow God's will?

You see, the root of this whole debate stems from one point of confusion; that being if the Ten Commandments were part of the Old Covenant or not. Colossians and I have already had this argument at a different forum site. Upon seeing my supporting scripture for my belief that the Ten Commandments were not part of the Old Covenant, and thus were not nailed to the cross, his argument was reduced to his saying that God was intentionally being deceitful in His words in Exodus 34:1. I reminded Colossians that Satan is the deceiver, not God, but Colossians sticks with his position anyway. Also, he was unable to reconcile a large number of verses that oppose his position.

If we want to turn this thread into an actual Bible study on this topic I would be happy to contribute.

hindsey · Jun 3, 2005

Did this thread really get "resurrected" from almost 2 years ago?

Be Happy · Jun 3, 2005

What is this thread about.....Spiritual anarchy?

FaithAlone · Jun 3, 2005

Notice the clever connection of "should" with "love"? What he is trying to slip in to your mind is that although you are not required to keep the law for salvation, if you don't keep it out of 'love', then you obviously don't love God. And of course we all know what that means don't we ....!

Have you ever read 1 John? Also every one of the 10 commandments was restated by Christ in the New Testament except for honor the Sabbath day and keep it holy. But anyway we are under the law of liberty and if we are Christians then God will show us what to do through His word and through prayer so I'm good

PaleHorse · Jun 3, 2005

FaithAlone said:
Have you ever read 1 John? Also every one of the 10 commandments was restated by Christ in the New Testament except for honor the Sabbath day and keep it holy. But anyway we are under the law of liberty and if we are Christians then God will show us what to do through His word and through prayer so I'm good

This is mostly true - for Christ also spoke of keeping the Sabbath at a time that would be 40 years after His death and resurrection:
Matthew 24:20 - But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

This was in regards to Christ foretelling of the destruction of Jerusalem. Notice that even after His resurrection He was still concerned that people would observe His Sabbath day.

Christ also taught, as any good teacher would, by example. We know that Christ kept the seventh-day Sabbath so for Him to have to restate it would have been redundant. All 10 stand today just as they did at creation.
What is the law of liberty, specifically?

Dark_Lite · Jun 3, 2005

This simply furthers my idea that threads inactive for 3+ months should be automatically deleted (or at the least locked... if someone wants to find an old post or something).

PaleHorse · Jun 3, 2005

Dark_Lite said:
This simply furthers my idea that threads inactive for 3+ months should be automatically deleted (or at the least locked... if someone wants to find an old post or something).

Why is that? A good topic is a good topic no matter the date.

The tricks of the legalists

Active Member

Faithful

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Active Member

INFP the Healer

Veteran

...

...

...

Jacob the twister.....

Veteran

Regular Member

Active Member

+Jesus is Good but He is not Tame+

Veteran

Chewbacha

Veteran

Similar threads