Are Apostolic Pentecostals Legalists?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

Legalism defined — and why the new birth is not works

• The question posed (in the host's frame): those of us who are in the organization, and the movement, the frame names — we have, at some point in our lives, encountered someone who accused us of being a legalist. It seems like that criticism gets leveled at us a lot, because of our teachings on personal Holiness. But I'd like you to Define what that term, legalism, even means. I think it gets thrown around a lot. But what does it mean? And how do you respond to this criticism? Are we legalists (as the question is put)? The answer: if you want to boil the question down to its essence ('blow the question down', as spoken) — let me first of all give you a reference. I wrote a book that addresses this — has an entire chapter on this subject. It's called practical Holiness a second look (as titled in the answer). So if you want more study in this regard, I recommend that book. But let's define legalism. Legalism, in the Christian context, means: Salvation by works. You think you can be saved, by your good works. Or by keeping the law. That's legalism. And we absolutely deny legalism. We do not believe in legalism. I think, our Common Ground: we can go back to Ephesians chapter 2, verse 8 and 9. It says: by grace are you saved, through faith. It's the gift of God. Not of Works — unless anyone should boast (as the saying stands in the letters). So we agree on that. But I would also add verse 10: for we are created in Christ Jesus, unto good works, which God has before ordained, that we should walk in them. So: while we're not saved by works — we're saved by faith. But it's a living faith, that will produce good works. That will lead us into good works. So legalism, then: we would deny the charge, that we think we're saved by works. We think we're saved by grace. It's a gift of God, through faith — trusting in God. And I think, in other podcasts, I've talked about that: sometimes, people accuse us of legalism, because of our emphasis on water baptism, and the Holy Spirit. But let me explain very clearly: we do believe, that the New Testament Plan of Salvation is stated in Acts 2:38. Repent of your sins. Be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Receive the holy ghost — or the Holy Spirit. And when you do, there will be this initial sign, of speaking in tongues. So some people say we're legalists, because you believe in these works. Well: let's look at water baptism. Water baptism is not our work. We can't save ourselves. The preacher doesn't take away our sins. The water doesn't take away our sins. Our act doesn't take away our sins ('our act doesn't take a rare sense', as the letters stand). But what happens is: God takes away our sins. So we are just submitting, to God's plan. God is the one, who washes away our sins. And, by the way: actually, the majority of Christian churches, of various denominations, have taught that. Of course, the Roman Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church. The Lutheran Church — which, Luther was the one who started the Protestant Reformation, on the statement of 'the just shall live by faith' ('the judge to live by faith', as heard). But the lutherans actually still believe baptism is necessary, and it's for the remission of sins. Other Protestant groups do as well: like the Churches of Christ, and different ones. So to say that we are legalists, because we preach water baptism: first of all, we're just doing what the scripture says. Second of all: it is not our work; it's God doing the work. And likewise, with the holy spirit: it's expressly the gift. It's a gift. And when we speak in tongues, that's not us manufacturing it, teaching it, making it happen. That's God doing it. And I like to say: look, don't blame me, for speaking in tongues. I didn't choose that. God's the one who does that. I just tell people: to have faith in Jesus, repent, seek God. He's the one, that causes them to start speaking in tongues. Not me. So the new birth, as I've just defined it — Acts 2:38, in its own place in this section — is not our human Works, to save us. I do not regard repentance, water baptism, and the Holy Ghost, as works that save us. Rather: God is the one who's doing the work. Even repentance: we can have a New Year's resolution — but that's not really repentance, and that's not very effective, either. Repentance is actually a work of the heart, where we submit to God. But God is the one who changes our desires, who breaks the habits of sin, in our lives. So I look at repentance, water baptism ('water baths', as heard), the holy spirit: that is our expression of faith in God. But God is the one, who bestows Grace, to enable us. At repentance: we show up. We say: Lord, I Surrender. And he's the one who turns our heart. At water baptism: we show up, and say: I'm just here, because you told me to be here. I'm asking to wash away our sins — my sins. And he's the one, who washed away our sins. By the way: that's why we always call in the name of Jesus Christ. Because we realize: we're not taking away our sins. Only Jesus could do that. And if he doesn't do it, we're not going to have our sins taken away. And then, when we receive the Holy Spirit: again, we're just showing up, Opening Our Hearts, praising God ('ordering praising God', as the letters stand), saying: Lord, here I am. Fill me. But God is the one who fills us. I give an illustration like this. Let's say: could you use a hundred thousand dollars? I'm assuming you could. So let's say I tell you: tomorrow morning, at 10 o'clock, meet me at Bank of America. I'll give you a hundred thousand dollars. Now, I'm assuming you really want that. If you truly believe that would happen: what would you do? (The host's one-line reply stands in the verbatim layer only.) You would be there. And you wouldn't wait to the last minute. You wouldn't Google, and see: takes 15 minutes to get there, so I'll just leave 15 minutes [before]. No: you would go there an hour early. Whatever. Now, if you show up: I would draw the money. I give you a hundred thousand dollars. You didn't earn it. You didn't do any, you know, amount of work. If, at the last minute, I said: you know, I changed my mind — you can't sue me. There's no contract. You didn't work however many hours, it would take to earn that. So: when I give you the money, that's Grace. It's a gift. When you receive the money, that's Faith. You believe me. If you didn't believe me, you wouldn't have been there. You wouldn't have received it. Because you believe me, you trusted me. Notice: faith can involve, meeting the conditions of the promise. Faith Can involve obedience. Faith Can involve showing up. But just meeting the conditions of the promise — or just obeying the terms of the promise — is not itself a good work, that earned your salvation. That gives you a claim — a legal claim. So I think a lot of people, that say we're legalists ('say we're illegalists', as heard): they just assume: well, any kind of response would be legalism. Well, not so. Even a simple prayer would be a response. And of course, there are some who believe in unconditional eternal security, will say: yes, you know, God just picks you, apart from your — any response. Of course, that totally wipes out the biblical concept, of faith and repentance. And I've addressed that in a different podcast. But even if you're willing to concede, that a person needs to generally respond in faith: well, you're basically seeing — conceding — the point that I am. It's just a question of: what response does God expect? And some Protestants, when pushed, they'll even say: you don't have to repent. There was a debate over lordship salvation, among conservative evangelicals. That some say: well, you have to accept Jesus as your lord, and savior. So by acceptance — the Lord — you're repenting. You're promising to obey him. Even if you don't perfectly fulfill it, your heart has a desire. And so we're saying: no — that will be work; that would be legalism. You just — the bare bones: say Jesus is my savior. He died for my sins. And I want him to save me. But I have no intention, of living for him. He's not my Lord. I'm not going to obey him. I'm not going to repent. I'm gonna keep living in sin. But I want him to save me. And some people say: that itself is salvation. Requiring anything more — even repentance — would be legalism. Well, you can see how absurd that becomes, when you push it to that extent. So: that's the one ground, where I think: we preach the apostolic Doctrine — a new birth. That's not legalism. That is the new birth experience.

Scriptures: Ephesians 2:8-10; Acts 2:38

Practical holiness — the checklist test, and the wrong question

• Okay: the second reason is, because we teach practical Holiness. We teach people, you know, to dress modestly. We say: don't smoke. Don't drink. Don't watch pornography — or other, you know, even things that may not be pornography, but reading, and watching, and viewing, and searching things, that are immoral, and explicit. So these are the kind of examples. And so they'll say: that's legalism, because you think you're saved, by your works. And I would hasten to add: if you think, that following a checklist can earn your salvation — yes, you're a legalist. But we don't believe that. So if you say: okay, I go to church every Sunday. I pray once a day. I don't smoke. I don't drink. I wear modest clothing. I don't curse. So I deserve to go to heaven. God has to let me in. No: that would be legalism. We don't believe that. Now: some — when we teach Holiness, sometimes people may carry it to such an extreme. But I would always — and then you could ask: well, what if I violate one thing? What if I smoke one cigarette? What if I drink one beer? What if my dress is a little too short? What if a woman trims a little bit of her hair? You know: she going to hell? And I would always like to turn the question around, to say: we're saved by grace, through faith. We're saved by our relationship of faith in God. Not by our good works. But if you do have faith: faith will lead to obedience. Where you will desire to do God's word. And you will, in fact, do it. Because you believe it's right. So what does it say about you, if you deliberately disobey what the Bible has taught ('what the Bible is taught', as spoken)? It means: you really don't believe. And if you really don't believe, then yes: that calls into question, your relationship with Jesus Christ — which is the basis, of your salvation. So: while I'm not going to go into, well, if I do this one thing, am I going to hell? If I do this one thing? If I don't follow this, don't follow that? I am going to say: wait a minute. You're asking the wrong question. Go back to the foundation. Are you truly living by faith? That's the base, of your salvation. But if you are living by faith: you will obey God's word. And if you deliberately refuse to make — to obey — God's word (as the sentence stands): and maybe, if you make a mistake, and sin. Or you don't realize something, that is wrong. And you study, and you realize what God wants. And you repent. You correct that. Okay, fine. But if you're deliberately disobeying God's word: that tells me, you're not living by faith. And if you're not living by faith, then yes: your salvation is in question. Not because of your performance, or non-performance, of certain Deeds. But because salvation is by grace, through faith.

Only he who believes is obedient — faith as a relationship

• Now: Dietrich Bonhoeffer — who was a German Theologian, actually was executed by the Nazis — he made a powerful statement, which I think can be applied to conversion, but also to the life of Holiness. He said: only he who believes, is obedient. But only he who is obedient, believes. Now, I think this is a scriptural concept. Was — what we're wrestling with, in our Western culture: we separate believing something, from obeying something. So I can believe something in my head, even though I have no intention of following it. But in the Bible: the test of your belief is what you do. It's not what you say. So: if, let's say, you really value your life, and you smoke incessantly — which, as we all know, brings high risk of various diseases, including lung cancer: what — over four hundred thousand Americans die, every year, because of smoking cigarettes. So, you know: if you're smoking away, and you say — do you believe that's bad for you? Yeah, I believe it's bad for you — for me. But I want to do it. So we can separate, what I believe, from how I act. But I would say, more fundamentally, biblically: if you really believe that, you wouldn't be smoking. So: it depends on how you approach it. So I would say: saving faith is a relationship. Not just a mental acknowledgment, of something. And so you're going to act, according to your deepest belief. So: if you're pursuing Holiness, that's a good indication, you're really committed, to that. If you're not pursuing Holiness — no matter what you say, intellectually — that's a good indication, you're not committed. So: Faith involves trust. Reliance. Commitment. Obedience. That's the bottom line. And it's a relationship. The just shall live by faith. Now, I don't have time to go into all that. But I'm just making the connection: only he who is obedient, believes.

The alternative to legalism is love — stricter than the law

• So once again: we're not saying, you can perform certain deeds ('certain needs', as heard), to earn your salvation. There are Muslim people, who dress modestly, who don't drink, who have a lot of restrictions. Doesn't mean they're saved. Their faith is not in Jesus Christ. But, you know, it's interesting: legalism can also be defined, as living by rules and regulations. Living by law. And if that's the way we pursue Holiness, I will say: that's wrong. We have to live for God, out of love. Jesus said, in John 14:15 (as he cites it): if you love me, keep my Commandments. We pursue Holiness, out of Faith. Because we believe God's word is true, and we should follow it. Faith issues forth in obedience ('Faith issues fourth and obedience', as the letters stand). We pursue Holiness, because we love God. We want to please him. But here's the main point, I'll make, in that regard: for some reason, people think: well, if we get rid of legalism, the alternative is license. In other words: everybody, do whatever you want to do. But the Book of Judges — the last verse — tells you what happens, when everyone does right in his own eyes ('everyone does write in his own eyes', as heard). The result is not Holiness. The result is gross sin. And you can read the Book of Judges, to see how terrible all those sins were. So the Bible does not depict that, as the solution. But I would say: the alternative to legalism is love. Because love imposes an internal law, which is more strict on you, than the law. So: when we say we don't — we're not legalists, but we pursue Holiness — some people assume: oh, you're a legalist, because you have all these teachings. But really, all Christian groups do that. If you teach that fornication is wrong. If you teach that abortion is wrong. If you teach that adultery is wrong. Those are rules, right? So we don't think, following those rules, saves us. But following those rules does tell us a lot, about: are we living by faith? And are we living out of love, for God? And if the answer is no, then yes: our Salvation is in Jeopardy. So, in essence: the people that call us legalists — because we teach modesty of dress, or gender distinction in dress, or ladies letting their hair grow long, men cutting their hair short — they call that legalism. Well: what about their rules? Are they willing to throw out all rules? Are they willing to support transgenderism? Are they willing to say, men should wear dresses? Or, you know, are they willing to say, adultery should be a personal choice? If drunkenness should be a personal choice? So: if they're not willing to say that — then, by their own terms, they are legalists. But I would argue: following Holiness is not legalism. And here's why: you replace legalism — you replace the law — by love. And Love Actually is more strict on you, than the law would be. To illustrate: to have a Biblical marriage, and have a good marriage, you must obey the rule: Thou shalt not commit adultery. That's the law. But just keeping that law — while it's necessary, to have a good marriage — it's not sufficient. I could be abusive, verbally, physically. I could disrespect, disregard, and fail to care for my wife. Neglect her. And still keep that law. So I could keep the law, and have a very unhappy, and dysfunctional, marriage. But if I love my wife: that — then — I'm going to cherish her. Respect her. I'm not going to beat her. I'm not going to yell at her. I'm not gonna mistreat her. And if I fail in anything, I'll repent. And why? Because of love. Not because the law demands it. You know: if my wife wants me to do something, I'd say: well, I didn't promise that, in our marriage agreement. That's not the point. The point is: do I love her? I'm going to take her concern seriously. Am I going to respect her? So, in this illustration: love causes me to be far more strict on myself, than the law could ever do. So actually, the law is a minimum requirement. The law is good. It's not bad. If all else fails — in a moment of Temptation, or carnality — that law, do not commit adultery, could stop me from destroying my marriage, and my relationship with God. But just that law is not going to give me a good marriage, and good relationship — with — God. It takes something more. It takes love. And so, the same thing, in my relationship with God. So: if I say, well — you know — what's the minimum, I can get by with, and be saved? That's legalism. What's the minimum I can do, by — get by with — in singing in the choir? Or teach Sunday school? Or be a voting member? You know: how can I drink one beer? Or maybe one sip, of one beer? Or how many is too many? Can I drink — smoke — one cigarette? Or how many do I select (as spoken), before I go to hell? If the pastor says: wear your dress here. If I go a half inch, do I go to hell? Well, if that doesn't suit me to hell (as the letters stand). What if I go a half inch above, that half inch? You know: you can argue yourself out of anything. And so, in the practical application of Holiness: you might say, some lines are arbitrary — in the sense that, you know, it's not everything is Heaven or Hell. There's a line here. But legalism says: I want to get as close to the line, as possible. Which means, of course: I'm going to fall on the wrong side, often. Or I may misjudge it. Love says: I'm not talking about, how close the line — to the line — I get. I'm talking about, how close to God, I can get. So: if I'm looking at it legalistically: can I approve — if you smoke one cigarette, you're going to hell. Well, there's no scripture for that. But if I look at it from love: if I really love God, I wouldn't want to harm my body. I would not want to do something, that addicts me. I want to be submitted, to the Holy Spirit. I would not want to set a bad example, for others. If I love my kids. If I love my neighbors, that I'm trying to save. Then I'm not going to do things, that are questionable, or borderline. Or be a bad example. So love removes that whole debate. Now we're not talking about: what's the scripture, for doing this one thing? Rather, it becomes: what does the whole of scripture say? What is the will of God, for my life? What is the choice, that draws me closer to God? What is the choice, that blesses my family? That sets a good example, for my kids? That helps me Be an Effective Soul winner? So really, most of the issues of Holiness become very easy, when you approach it from the point of view: what does love ask of me? So I would absolutely deny the charge, that we're legalists ('that we're a legalists', as spoken). I would caution us, not to allow ourselves to slip into legalistic thinking — that we sometimes can do — or not to teach and preach in a legalistic way. But when it comes to the Plan of Salvation: it's The Obedience of faith, that is the key. And it's God doing the work, not our work ('not arguing work', as the letters stand). When it comes to the pursuit of Holiness: again, it's — we're serving God, out of Faith, which leads us to obey what God's word teaches. And we serve God, out of love, which leads us to draw closer to him — more than required, so to speak. More than what the law would dictate. We're not interested in the law. We're interested in going far beyond the law, to seek the will of God, for our lives. If we have that attitude: then we can have confidence, that we're saved by grace through faith. We don't live under condemnation. We live under the grace of God. But if we are trying to pursue our selfish will: then yes — at one point, or the other — we're going to live a disobedient life. Which means, we're not living by faith. Which means, we don't have the Assurance of Salvation. We're not legalists. Instead: we have Assurance of Salvation, as we walk by faith, and follow the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Scriptures: John 14:15; Judges 21:25

Scripture index: Ephesians 2:8-10; Acts 2:38; John 14:15; Judges 21:25.