Three Ways We Say "No" To Law
Tullian Tchividjian Blog | April 24, 2012
I was in New York City this past weekend with some friends at The Mockingbird Conference. Best time in NYC I've ever had. The work and ministry of my friend David Zahl and his crew is simply the best in the biz. And I'm a hard guy to please. If you're unfamiliar with Mockingbird, you HAVE to familiarize yourself with them. What they're doing is unlike anything else.Their mission is to connect the Christian faith with the everyday realities of life--"demonstrating and cataloging the myriad ways in which the Christian understanding of reality (what people are like, what God is like and how the two intersect) is born out all around us. We want to do so in a way that is both comforting and inspiring, taking care along the way to look for new words for the old story." It's gripping and provocative stuff.
They just published a new book entitled This American Gospel: Public Radio Parables and the Grace of God. I read the intro and first chapter last night. I laughed and cried. I felt my desperation and God's deliverance profoundly. I connected deeply with this...I hope you do to.
The Law is shorthand for an accusing standard of performance. Whenever the Law is coming, accusation comes close behind. Whenever an expectation stands before us, we are either condemned by our failure before it, or we become condemners in our fulfillment of it. The Law is unfeeling--it tolerates no excuses, it accepts no shortcuts. The Law is good, in that it proffers a good standard ("You shouldn't smoke", "Love one another", "Spend on the money you have", etc.), but it is received as condemnation when one finds oneself incapable of fulfilling it. It is for this reason--our eventual and consistent failures--that the Law is condemnation's prerequisite.
Failure before the Law always creates a reaction. When criticized, we defend. As Paul Zahl says, it is not so much the Law's demand, but, "its second characteristic, it's inability to produce the obedience it requires...we instinctively fight the law. We use a thousand arguments to criticize it and flour it. Obeying speed limits do not come naturally..."
You are brought to a moment of internal crisis, where something you are is in conflict with something you ought to be.
In the face of judgment, one response is flight. You run from what someone thinks you ought to be. You stop going to the gym, you leave home and experience the world through travel, you don't answer their phone calls anymore, you close your eyes and cover your ears. The idea is: I know the judge isn't leaving anytime soon, so I will. Sayonara!
Or perhaps you attempt to assassinate the judge; it's not flight, it's fight. You know the judge isn't leaving anytime soon, but you're not either, so it's time to put up your dukes. You bicker with your boss about his unrealistic expectations, condescend about the vanity of going to the gym, blame your parents for what they've done to you, or wear leather and turn the speakers up.
Or maybe you appease. The judge isn't satisfied, so you show him how hard you are trying, you're sorry, and it's going to get better. You decide to wear what they wear, apologize needlessly for fear they are mad at you, go to the gym from time to time and justify why you don't go more often, or sit still and mind your manners so you don't get barked at. Appeasement is cowering before the judge, hoping at some point the judge might understand and sympathize with your situation.
When the voice of accusation comes, how do you respond? Run? Fight? Appease? All three?
The deepest fear we have, "the fear beneath all fears", is the fear of not measuring up, the fear of judgment. It's this fear that creates the stress and depression of everyday life. And it comes from the fact that down deep we all know we don't measure up and are therefore deserving of judgment. We're aware that we fail, that what we are is not what we're supposed to be, that "we've been weighed in the balances and been found wanting." One young mother recently put it as honestly as anyone can:
Deep down, I know I should be perfect and I'm not. I feel it when someone comes into my house unannounced and there's a mess in every corner. I know it when my children misbehave in public and I just want to hide. I can tell it when that empty feeling rises after I've spoken in haste, said too much, or raised my voice. There's the feeling in my stomach that I just can't shake when I know I've missed the mark of perfection.
When we feel this weight of judgment against us, we all tend to slip into the slavery of self-salvation: trying to appease the judge (friends, parents, spouse, ourselves) with hard work, good behavior, getting better, achievement, losing weight, and so on. We conclude, "If I can just stay out of trouble and get good grades, maybe my mom and dad will finally approve of me; If I can overcome this addiction, then I'll be able to accept myself; If I can get thin, maybe my husband will finally think I'm beautiful and pay attention to me; If I can help out more with the kids, maybe my wife won't criticize me as much; If I can make a name for myself and be successful, maybe I'll get the respect I long for." But, as is always the case, self-salvation projects experientially eclipse the only salvation project that can set us free from this oppression. "If we were confident of ultimate acquittal", says Paul Zahl, "judgment from others would not possess the sting it does."
This is what makes the Gospel such good news. It announces that Jesus came to acquit the guilty. He came to judge and be judged in our place. Christ came to satisfy the deep judgment against us once and for all so that we could be free from the judgment of God, others, and ourselves. He came to give rest to our efforts at trying to deal with stinging accusation on our own. Colossians 2:13-14 announces, "And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross."The Gospel declares that our guilt has been atoned for, the law has been fulfilled. So we don't need to live under the burden of trying to figure out whether we need to run, fight, or appease. In Christ the ultimate demand has been met, the deepest judgment has been satisfied. The atonement of Christ frees us from the fear of judgment.
Comments:
May 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM
Perfectly said, PAUL.
Let's go on walking 'in the Grace of God', so that 'the Holy Spirit's fruit of joyful giving will come out of us naturally'. Yep, brother!
By the way, I am reminded of a German Jewish religious scholar (Ruth Lapide) who explained that the Jews gave the tithe first and foremost to provide support for the fatherless and the widows. This was the way God cared for His people. Very often we can read in the OT that God wanted this provision to be done (e.g. Dt 10:18 and Ps 68:6), and He was very concerned about it (f.i. Jer 49:11 and Mal 3:5). Since God never changes there is also a hint at this issue in the NT (Jas 1:27).
May 2, 2012 at 07:31 AM
Steve said: "A ‘tithe’ is calculated.
Christians give freely from the heart. No calculating".
Paul St, what are the Shepard's rights and who gave it to them. There was only one group of priest that had rights to the tithe and that was the Levite Priest. Unless your Shepard can trace there lenage back to them, there is no other rights given. Paul spoke about people giving generously from a heart of joyful giving but never demanded any giving by law. If someone is called and excepts to become a Shepard there proper aditude is to live by faith not demand. If we walk in the Grace of God the Holy Spirit's fruit of joyful giving will come out of us naturally and the Shepard and those in need will be well cared for. God Bless
May 1, 2012 at 05:32 PM
I will not push the tithe. But I will say the Shepard is well within his or her rights to derive benefits from the flock.
April 26, 2012 at 09:52 AM
@Paul
I believe that Abraham was the one who set a precedent on given of tithes. The law of Moses was not set up.
In my opinion given of tithes is not mandatory for our salvation but we do it out of love for our Lord.
April 26, 2012 at 08:43 AM
Pastor Tullian, would appreciate a post in the future about saying no to a part of Law that usually puts a lump in any a pastor's throat but I feel puts most Christians in bondage. Biblical Tithing or joyful giving. Below is a quote from one of Luther's sermons I found interesting.
Martin Luther, the founder of the Protestant Christian faith, rejected the idea of tithing and taught against tithing as it pertained to the Gentile believers. Martin Luther in his sermon on August 27, 1525 titled “How Christians Should Regard Moses” spoke of the Law of Moses as being only for the Jews and not for the Gentiles. Martin Luther states in his sermon, “The Law of Moses binds only the Jews and not the Gentiles. Here the Law of Moses has its place. It is no longer binding on us, because it was given only to the people of Israel. And Israel accepted this law for itself and its descendants, while the Gentiles were excluded.” “Moses has nothing to do with us. If I were to accept Moses in one commandment, I would have to accept the entire Moses.” “We will not regard him as our lawgiver - unless he agrees with both the New Testament and the natural law.” “For not one little period in Moses pertains to us.” Martin Luther’s viewpoint in this sermon was due to the fact that the Jews were subject to the Law of Moses, and the Law of Moses included the tithe.
April 26, 2012 at 08:34 AM
John Dunn, Wow your last post started my day off Set Free. A lot of the discussions hear are very weighty but then there's the one's that are pure simple Gospel and gives us Freedom. God Bless
April 26, 2012 at 08:02 PM
A 'tithe' is calculated.
Christians give freely from the heart. No calculating.
Jesus told us (anyway) that a true gift, as the widow's, is everything. Not merely a measly 10%.
April 26, 2012 at 02:48 PM
Hi PAUL and Paul St,
For I have been in a church that urged her believers regularly to give the tithe by at least monthly quoting Malachi 3:10, insisting on the point of view that God would not bless anybody who refuses to give it, I was very relieved by reading a very simple explanation, why we as Gentiles need not give the tenth.
THE COUNCIL’S LETTER TO GENTILE BELIEVERS
Acts 15:24-25; 28-29
‘Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord […]
For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.’
Here we can see no requirement for giving the tithe that clearly belonged to the Old Covenant.
Maybe, this could be helpful too (BTW, the Luther quote was very suitable).
Blessings,
Susanne
April 26, 2012 at 01:15 PM
Paul St said:In my opinion given of tithes is not mandatory for our salvation but we do it out of love for our Lord.
Did Jesus and the Disiples tithe and if not did the not love the Lord? God Bless
April 26, 2012 at 01:02 PM
Abraham...Abram at that time... went to war on behalf of Sodom (SODOM, mind you), to rescue his nephew, Lot. He then gave 10% of these spoils of war to Melchizedek, and allowed Sodom to keep 90%, while he himself kept NOTHING!
In this one single event Abram vowed not to keep any of the spoils of war. Of all the things written about Abraham seems this was a one time giving and not of his personal possesions but from the spoils he took from others.
April 25, 2012 at 11:41 PM
"The atonement of Christ frees us from the fear of judgment."
And keeping in step with the Spirit of Christ who reigns abundantly within us [who is the realized eschatologcial "law" of the new covenant - Rom 8:1-4, 2 Cor 3:3] completely frees us from all obligation to servile and condemning law-code obedience!
(Rom 7:6, Gal 5:16-25)
For freedom Christ has set us free! Therefore, let us walk in the radical new freedom of the Spirit of God, producing his fruit of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control . . . against such Christ-like qualities there is NO law!
For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking [code-based externals!] but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. (Rom 14:17)
Embrace the Spirit of Christ and enjoy true Gospel righteousness, peace, and joy!
April 25, 2012 at 09:25 PM
My point is simply this: to be “Biblically balanced” is NOT to allot equal airtime to every Biblical theme. To be Biblically balanced is to let our theology and preaching be proportioned by the Bible’s radically disproportionate focus on God’s saving love for sinners seen and accomplished in the crucified and risen Christ. Tullian
Luma, this talks to the site you posted. God Bless
April 25, 2012 at 07:53 AM
Tullian,
I so much wanted to meet you at the Mockingbird Conference in NYC last week but was never able to connect. It was great getting to know Paul and David Zahl. Mockingbird is amazing and has been a spring of fresh water to a very thirsty man!
The article in Modern Reformation that was an excerpt from your book, "Jesus + Nothing = Eveything" was incredible to me as I can relate so much to what you have gone through and I resonated with it (bought the entire book at the conference.
Thanks again. The gospel contnues to change me and liberate me from the accusations of the "Law" and "law". Hoping there will be another time we can meet some day.
Mark
April 25, 2012 at 04:19 PM
"Striking the Biblical Balance". This was a title pulled out of the blog site that Luma attached above. I think Pastor Tullian wrote an article about this very same issue. God BLess
April 24, 2012 at 10:36 AM
There are a lot of great gospel centered churches and groups out there. The more the merrier.
They have part 1 down pat. Part 2 (the pure gospel that comes to us in tangible, visable form) they don't quite see yet.
It's really a shame, because part 2 is part and parcel of part 1 and makes part 1 stick. It is the real liberating and defining aspect of part 1.
I think they fear it because to them it appears to be 'Roman Catholic'. It is catholic, that's for sure, but gives so much more than the Roman version of it. It actually carries the freight and gives REAL assurance. Something which is quite rare in Christianity, these days.
April 24, 2012 at 08:12 AM
Another response, rather than fight or flight, is to freeze. To bear the weight of judgment and allow identity to be defined by other's hierarchy.
April 24, 2012 at 07:13 PM
Yes, but of course I resonate with this. I finally allowed myself to write a comment on the effort vs. rest business here: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/04/23/carson-and-zaspel-rest-in-the-gospel-or-strive-unto-holiness/?comments#comments#comment-28632
I'm telling you because I wanted you to know that your "effort" in driving home the gospel of grace over and over again has not turned us into antinomians, quite the contrary. We have indeed found ourselves "free" to "work out" our salvation, but from a gloriously and qualitatively different orientation altogether: God working in us for his good pleasure. And that new orientation, came from a better understanding of Romans 6:14.
Thank you,
Luma
April 24, 2012 at 04:29 PM
Other ways to say no . . .
Say by faith to that yonder Law Mountain, "Be thou removed and be cast into the sea! We now worship at the foot of Zion's holy mount from whence we have received the Spirit. "
Or, "Get thee behind me Law, and crawl back to thy eternal tomb from whence thou hast been put to death with my Lord, who has triumphed over you in His death and has arisen in your place as our new living Righteousness!"
April 24, 2012 at 03:48 PM
'Failure before the Law always creates a reaction. When criticized, we defend. As Paul Zahl says, it is not so much the Law’s demand, but, “its second characteristic, it’s inability to produce the obedience it requires…we instinctively fight the law. We use a thousand arguments to criticize it and flour it. Obeying speed limits do not come naturally…”'
I would say that we react against the law not because we cannot keep it (though we can't) but because we have hearts that are opposed to it - we do not want to keep it. In some ways this point highlights my problems with Mockingbird statements - they often sound good but are wrong.
Take the following:
'The Law is good, in that it proffers a good standard (“You shouldn’t smoke”'
If the Law is considered as the Mosaic Covenant then there is no such command. Taking the most generous view that Law is any command that carries a curse or blessing of an eternal nature we must ask does 'You shouldn't smoke' come with such baggage. It may. If someone says 'You shouldn't smoke or you will come under eternal judgement' then this command comes near to law. However, even here it is not quite law for failing to smoke would also need to carry a promise of life.
My point is that inaccurate and loose definitions of 'law' lead to confusion (though I agree undertaking duties simply to merit acceptance is essentially legalistic).
There is much that I agree with in this post. I simply think from a biblical perspective 'law' is not the right word and creates confusion. IIMO 'responsibility' rather than 'law' is the word that ought to be used. Responsibility exists whether there is a 'law' or not. Only when responsibility is enshrined in an explicit command with accompanying sanctions does it become a law.
We see this distinction in our own society. We may feel it is wrong to smoke in public places blowing smoke into the face of another. We may feel responsible not to do so and may or may not act according to what we believe is right. However, only when a bill is passed making it illegal to smoke in public places on pain of punishment does it become a law. When it becomes a 'law' the trespass increases in magnitude (sin becomes more sinful as an explicit prohibition is now being defied...It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure), human nature more deeply resents and resists it (the law excites all kind of rebellious sinful desire... But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead)and disobedience is exposed as law-breaking and requiring judgement ( For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death...). See Roms 7.
Mike
May 5, 2012 at 10:23 AM
Great article PT, truly good news and I never get tired of you saying it, but hard to really believe, but my observation is that most of your TGC, T4G guys are not saying this, their all for grace "but" most messages they give are in fact "you're not doing right, your not believing right, you need to follow the imperatives if your truly one of the elect, calls to holiness and more holiness, the true elect are obedient etc., Mike