Skip to main content

Legalism, Lawlessness, and Life

Q: In 1 Timothy 4 we read, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth." (vs 1-3). I believe that one could see this in the history of the Catholic church (as an example) in that priests were not allowed to marry and meat was to be abstained from on Fridays.

Is it going too far, and going beyond what Scripture says, to apply this principle to the other extreme? Can, by a seared conscience, a teacher indicate that anything is permissible (opposed to "forbid" and "abstain") as the believer is the 'Righteousness of Christ' and is already forgiven? And when I say "anything", I mean things that are clearly sin (e.g., Galatians 5:19-21). There are also 'name it and claim it' and 'prosperity' gospels being preached regarding health and finances. My question, restated, is are these false gospels the result of the same "deceiving spirits and things taught by demons; teachings coming through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron"?

Frankly, I'm not sure we will see a period within the church where people will be forbidden to marry and abstain from certain foods. Our struggle in the church is more toward things being permissible resulting in less distinction between the church and the culture surrounding it.

A: In the above question, the middle paragraph contains the content of what this post will interact with for the most part but I wanted to include the question in its entirety to keep the context intact.

To begin, the Scriptures certainly indicate that the opposite error will be made in the Church. Instead of forbidding certain things, teachers will arise that will teach indulgence in even inherently sinful behavior to try and lead away those who would follow Christ. But it is my opinion that to take this particular text in 1 Timothy to that conclusion is a misuse of what is being taught.

While interpreting Scriptures, there are many different opinions on how far we can take our conclusions and applications. It is my opinion that we ought not go further than what is written and we must be aware of the danger of extending the application beyond what the text actually teaches if we are to rightly handle the Word of God (2 Timothy 2:15). In this particular question, certainly no abuse is intended and the question is a very good one. But we don't need to extend this particular text (1 Timothy 4:1-3) beyond what it teaches (expressly about those who teach a form of asceticism) to reach the right conclusion that there will also be teachers who go to the opposite extreme, which is explicitly taught elsewhere (e.g Jude 1:4).

In this case, the conclusion is right but the text doesn't actually teach it in 1 Timothy 4:1-3. While handling God's Word, I believe we must not be content to reach right conclusions through wrong means. We should desire to reach right conclusions that are firmly founded upon the Scriptures.

The doctrines of demons and the deception of liars seared in their own consciences does cover both ends of the spectrum of "false gospels." I think a helpful way of looking at this spectrum is to understand that there are two equally deadly (spiritually) and dangerous (spiritually and physically) extremes that must be avoided:
Legalism, Licentiousness, and Life spectrum

While 1 Timothy 4:1-3 is indicating the danger of one end of this spectrum (legalism), the other end is also warned against in the Scriptures (Jude 1:4; Galatians 5:13; Romans 6). The middle is where we are called to live as Christians.

I agree with our questioner above that the danger in the church today seems to be weighted towards the lawlessness end of the spectrum. It breaks my heart when people call obedience to the "rules" given in the Scriptures as "legalism" -- especially since Jesus used a different "L" word to describe obedience to His commands: Love (e.g. John 14:15).

That which is truly life is where we want to be and what Jesus came to give us -- and that is based on living in obedience to God (adherence to the "rules") based on our relationship with the Father through Christ.

By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, "I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked. (1 John 2:3-6)

However, I would caution that the danger of legalism and asceticism is just as real and is perhaps more pervasive than we think. Many groups that claim the name "Christian" teach forms of asceticism in direct fulfillment of 1 Timothy 4:1-3 which can and does cause some to "abandon the faith" (1 Timothy 4:1) by adding to faith in Christ other external requirements of abstaining from various things that are not inherently sinful, but actually good things when enjoyed with thanksgiving towards God.

Certain cult groups and false "churches" could be pointed to as proponents of such doctrines. While it is probably not fruitful to give a thorough examination of these aberrant doctrines at the current time, one example should suffice: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism) prohibits their adherents from eating certain foods (e.g. coffee and tea) which are given by God.

The objection could be raised, "these prohibitions aren't really within the Church, but are limited to groups that are outside of the Church." Really, this objection could be raised in both directions.

A false and counterfeit gospel results in works of lawlessness and wickedness, whether the activities are inherently sinful (as in licentiousness -- turning God's grace into a license to sin) or even outwardly pious but done out of a wrong motive (legalism) of earning God's favor which can only be genuinely received as a free gift through faith (see Romans 14:23: ...whatever is not from faith is sin).

Followers of Christ: Be on your guards against false teachers and false gospels! We are called to holiness because of our relationship with Christ. We cannot form a relationship with Christ through our personal holiness. We are not exempt from the call to holiness because God has loved us and sent His Son to redeem us from death and Hell.

1 Corinthians 10:31.


P. Scott said…
Very Interesting. I believe that proper balance is essential when handleing the Word...otherwise, we end up tilted way off "center". Great question... Nice picture too!

Popular Posts

Prayer vs. Petition

Q: What's the difference between prayer and petition? Phil 4:6 for example.

A: An excellent word study question! When attempting to study words from the text it is necessary to analyze the word being studied in the original language (in this case Greek) as attempting to look up the words in English will often produce erroneous results.

For example, in English the word petition has within its range of meanings things that are certainly not within the scope of meanings for the Greek word (i.e. “a sheet that is signed to demonstrate agreement with some principle or desire for some social action to be taken” is part of the range of “petition” but not of the Greek deesis from which “petition” is translated).

The word most commonly translated as “prayer” in our English Bibles is proseuche, which appears 36 times in the New Testament (NT) in one form or another (for the purposes of this study, we are only examining the usage of these words as nouns – the verbal forms will not be included…

Christianity Isn't Moralism

Do this. Don't do that.

Shop here. Don't shop there.

This is acceptable. That is an abomination.

Don't get me wrong. Christianity does have a moral code. That's undeniable.

And that moral code is not popular. Not by a long shot. The Bible is clear that the moral code is contrary to the flesh. By definition it goes against the grain of fallen human nature.

But Christianity isn't moralism.

The moral code is not the end. It's only a diagnostic. The Bible calls for rebels against the King of heaven and earth to be reconciled to Him through His Son, Jesus the Christ. The Bible calls for people to turn from their rebellion and live for Him. This means that we stop pursuing the various lusts and impulses of our flesh. It means we start living in obedience to our King. We live for the glory of His name.

The diagnostic helps us to see that we are off track. But living according to some external sort of rules is not the end goal. That was the mistake the Pharisees made. Yo…

Christ Died For Our Sins

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures
(1 Corinthians 15:3)
The truth of the gospel includes this important phrase: Christ died for our sins.

You've probably heard it before. Many times.

Sometimes familiarity leads to a diminished sense of importance. The more you hear about something the more ordinary it may seem. Common. Ho-hum. Boring.

But this truth is anything but common.

Another difficulty arises with this truth. Beyond being common. It may happen in your ears without you even realizing it.

When the truth is declared that Christ died for our sins, you may think you hear the truth. But what you really hear is a diminished version. A partial truth.

Instead of hearing that Christ died for our sins you may hear a slightly different version of this truth. You might hear this: Jesus died for your sins.

Do you see the difference? You should.

These statements are similar. Both may very well be true…

Hallowed Be Thy Name

Growing up, I said the Our Father prayer a lot.

A lot. Multiple times a day.It was part of my religious tradition. Most of the time, I mumbled it as quickly as I could.

For what it's worth, my Dad tried to help me understand that mumbling the prayer without understanding what it really meant wasn't the goal. He wanted me to understand it. He wanted me to mean it.

I remember sitting with him in the car one afternoon while we went through every phrase. He did his best to explain to me what the terms meant. Why we would say these things. Why it mattered.

It didn't take.

Although I became better equipped to describe the meaning of the phrases, I still mumbled them as fast as I could so I could move on to the next part of my day.

Fast forward many years. After being born-again by the grace of God I started to read my Bible. I desired to know God and His Word. I remember when I stumbled upon Jesus teaching the disciples to pray the Lord's prayer in Matthew 6. I was both excit…

Self-Centered Theology

I have a problem.

Maybe you do, too.

I bet you can at least relate.

I'm self-centered.

By nature, I think from my perspective. Often, more often than I'd usually like to admit, I pursue my agenda.

I like to do, what I like to do, when I like to do it, where I like to do it, how I like to do it, and with whomever I like to do it.

I think you do, too.

Sometimes we are good at hiding this self-centeredness. I believe that it is possible to have genuinely altruistic moments. Moments where we put others self-interest above our own well-being. Sometimes powerful emotions like love, hate, and disgust, can cause us to act contrary to our self-centered notions.


As Christians, we are given the gift of God's grace through His Son, Jesus Christ. We receive this gift when we repent of our self-centered ways and trust in Christ alone. In the noise that is "Christianity" - if you take the time to really listen - you will often hear a false gospel that appeals to the …