re-li-gion // noun // A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.
“Christianity is not a religion, it is a relationship.” If you have been around the Christian faith for any amount of time, you have probably heard this phrase in one way, shape, or form. It is so widely used in the American Church, it may be the most popular modern colloquialism. This raises the question, just how biblical is this expression? Should it remain a staple in ‘Christianese,’ or should it be excommunicated along with other phrases like “God helps those who help themselves” and “God won’t give you more than you can handle?”
All cards on the table, I want it to be clear I am not a huge fan of the statement at hand. However, I do not think it is entirely unfounded. Through the course of this short treatise, I expect there will be disagreements on certain points, but my hope is the net outcome is a greater love and understanding of what the Cristian faith is. I will first examine why the phrase has good intentions behind it and search out the truth of the beauty of a relationship with the Living God. The sentiment does have its shortcomings and I will examine why it can be so damaging to an unbeliever and immature believer’s perception of an upright Christian life. Thus, given there exists both good and bad in this train of thought, we must conclude by doing the ugly work of reconciling the two. In this reconciliation, I want to do a brief exposition of a New Testament book. Stick around, the book I choose may surprise you!
Note: On last week’s episode of Born to Reign, we discussed this same subject. This post is not a transcript, but rather a supplemental perspective on the subject.
The Good
Psalm 139 gives us a beautiful understanding of the intimate relationship God the Father has with his creatures. He is a God who is at hand, knowing and knowable. David starts and ends the psalm on the same note, “search me and know me.” The Psalm overflows in the middle notes with a God who is lovingly present in the life of his beloved. Even in pondering such a concept, David exclaims, “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it” (Ps. 139:6). It is indeed a great comfort to be created, known, and loved by such a marvelous God. But there is more richness even in this, it is not a one-way mirror. Not only does God know us, but we, his image-bearers, know him. Because God has made himself known in creation, men are without excuse. Jesus promises blessedness to those who are given to the Son by the Father, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (Jn. 17:3). There is life in the relationship with God, eternal, glorious life. Without relationship, there is no life.
The verse from John’s Gospel is appropriate to examine further, it is the High Priestly prayer of the Lord Jesus. What was Jesus doing? Or rather, what is Jesus doing? He intercedes on behalf of his people before God the Father. The prayer of Christ in John’s Gospel is a peek into the ongoing prayer Christ makes for his people. He is the ultimate High Priest. This does not seem directly relational. Jesus is leaving his saints behind him, is he not, to go into the holy presence of the Father? Yes. But why? Why does Jesus go first into the presence of God? We, in our sin, have no right to come before the great and sacred throne. It is by Jesus’ intercession and sprinkling of his own blood that access is granted to us to come before the throne; not as enemies or slaves, but as children, dearly loved and precious. We who were once far off now stream gladly into the presence of our Father, “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water” (Heb. 10:22). It is in the beauty of this relationship we are promised rest, life, peace, and forgiveness. It is the ultimate condescension for a holy God to invite us in. Those who have been washed need not fear the wrath of God, they are welcome to dine with him.
Christianity is a relationship. This is good news. We are not slaves, we are free. The main emphasis of the phrase in question is that very word, freedom. It expresses a release from bondage into the freedom we have in Christ. We are not just chums with Jesus, not classmates or coworkers. We are siblings. He is the firstborn, we are co-heirs with him. When we gather on Sunday mornings and sing praises, we look down the aisles left and right and see brothers and sisters. We sing the praises of our Father, we hear the triumphant story of our Elder Brother, and we share a family meal together. We are free when we wake up, free when we lie down, free when we walk along the way. Sin no longer has a rule over us because we have been adopted. As any good adoption story goes, the child is happy to have a new father who cares for their needs, loves them, speaks to them, and hears them. Our Father hears us and answers us and it is a fantastic thing to ponder.
The Bad
In the understanding we are adopted sons and daughters, it is important to remember a very important thing: there are still house rules. On Mount Sinai, God gave the law to Moses. This was to be the binding constitution of the nation of Israel. The law included everything from dietary laws, sexual codes, and even what to do if you find a bird’s nest on the road. What’s more, the laws not only came as a prescription but also with the consequences of violation all the way up to the death penalty. God was meticulous, especially in the realm of worship and sacrifice, about things being done his way. Any perversions, shortcomings, or alterations were considered high treason and worthy of death.
A dangerous line of reasoning behind distinguishing between religion and relationship is, I believe, an attempt to distance New Testament Christians from the mean, vindictive Old Testament God. The New Testament tells us we are not under law but under grace (Rom. 6:14). Whether explicit or implicit, the line of reasoning leads down a path that compromises the character of God. The Christian doctrine of immutability, that God does not change, is a doctrine that must be defended and one for which we must not apologize. The gracious God who gives us his Spirit is the same God who killed people for burning incense the wrong way (Lev. 10) and for lying about the proceeds of a private sale (Acts 5:1-11). I will revisit the Mosaic Law in the next section in seeking to resolve the tension. For now, I want to examine what makes some of the implications of the statement so egregious.
To say “Christianity is a relationship, not a religion,” is to attempt to marry the beautiful reformed doctrine of the perseverance of the saints with a heretical antinomian licentiousness. The term “legalist” is brandished as an ugly club to anyone who believes in a stricter adherence to the law of God. A wise professor once told his students, “The essence of Christian theology is grace, and the essence of Christian ethics is gratitude,” so to be clear, legalism is a sin. However, what is often branded as legalism is often simple obedience to God’s commandments. Dr. R.C. Sproul in his book ‘How to Develop a Christian Conscience’ defines, quite aptly, three types of legalism. The first separates the law from the character of the One who gave it. It is to bind men’s actions without conversion of the soul, I will revisit this in the next section since it deals specifically with driving a wedge in our relationship with God. The second form of legalism is to follow the letter of the law while violating its heart. This form of legalism Jesus addresses by saying, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matt. 5:27-28). While someone may view themselves as holy for not committing one sin, they have failed to keep the law by violating the heart behind it. The third type of legalism is to add commandments to the law of God. Jesus dealt with the Pharisees extensively on the matter and the apostles did as well, Rome added commands to the law in binding traditions, and various forms of this type of legalism continue down to today.
Now, you might be thinking why I clarify legalism as a sin in the portion called ‘The Bad” of this post? Doesn’t calling legalism a sin invalidate my whole argument? Not quite. A Christian must be on guard against sin wherever it arises and whatever form it takes. The reason I bring it up is that the phrase in question actually conflates two concepts, “religion” and “legalism.” Saying Christianity is not a religion is not just wrong, it is dangerously wrong. The big definition at the top of the page describes religion as, “A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.” The Christian faith checks all of the boxes in this basic definition. Faith in Jesus Christ, the second member of the triune Godhead, as the only means by which we can be saved is a generally agreed-upon belief. For over 2,000 years, Christians have gathered on Sunday, heard the infallible word of God preached, broken bread and drank wine together, and sung songs of praise. It is the basic fundamental belief murder is wrong, as commanded by God, which unites Christians against the heinous practice of abortion. The list goes on, but the point is clear. Christianity has parameters. The term ‘orthodox’ is used to refer to someone who confesses a belief which falls within those parameters. Many Christians who use the phrase “relationship, not religion” are also quick to point out to a Mormon or a Jehovah’s Witness they are not Christians. It is for the very reason Christianity is a very well-defined religion that cultish, heretical groups can be marked and separated from the orthodox Christian faith. God, in giving us these parameters, has built a wall to protect his sheep. Now, to conclude with the meat of this discourse, I want to examine what differentiates the true Christian religion from legalism.
The Ugly
The heading for this section may be a bit misleading. It is not really ugly to untangle the knot this sentiment has tied, but it is not exactly a straightforward, clean-cut resolution either. This is some hard work as we seek to avoid legalism on one side by not veering into the ditch of antinomianism on the other side.
Much of the debate about legalism hinges on the law given to Moses on Mt. Sinai so, as promised, we return there now. The law given to Moses consisted of three main sections, the moral law, the ceremonial law, and the judicial law. The moral law is summed up in the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments). The ceremonial law governed the worship of God. This included what foods were clean and unclean, what to do when strange sores and ulcers popped up, and so on. The third category governed the civil sphere of Israel, it defined crimes, and the just penalties for each crime. The overarching demand of the whole law was “be holy for I am holy” (Lev. 11:44-45, 19:2, 20:7, 20:26, 21:8). God was consecrating for himself a people. Today, in 2020, God still demands holiness from his children. We are called to be different, set apart from the world. Now, in order for us to pursue holiness, we must have a standard by which to gauge holiness. We do not get to make up the standard ourselves. Likewise, the standard we use as a metric must be objective. We do not compare ourselves to others. If we do so, we lead ourselves to a “holier than thou” mindset which allows us to be content with our deficient spiritual condition. The prophets and the apostles cried out how wretched they were for not following God’s word. We tend to act like the Pharisee who thanked God he was not like the tax collector.
There is much debate within the faith of the extent of the relevance of the Old Testament law to us today in the New Covenant. Much of that is a subject for another time and has already filled numerous volumes. For now, I just want to dip a toe in the subject here to clarify. When Paul writes to the Galatians and pleads with them not to be deceived by the Judaizers, at first glance, it appears he is dismissing the law out of hand. Paul does nothing of the sort. He is establishing the law cannot save you. Only the one who can keep the law in both word and heart would be worthy of the kingdom of God. All of us were born in sin and as such have no possibility of fulfilling the law to every jot and tittle. Likewise, when the author of Hebrews warns against going back to the old order of things, he is not saying the old was bad (Rom. 7:7), he is saying the bud has come to flower in the beauty of the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus, the ceremonial law, the sacrifices and feasts, the temple and the Levitical priesthood are no longer needed. When we partake of the Lord’s supper, we celebrate the feast of Passover. When we gather as gentiles on the Lord’s Day, we celebrate the feast of Tabernacles, the ingathering of the nations. This is why we are told “as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Cor. 11:26) and “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together” (Heb. 10:25). When an old order is superseded or dissolved, the change requires two conditions to be binding on the Christian. First, it must be done for sufficient reason. The change of the dispensation of the Law comes with good reason: the death of Jesus is the anti-type to the type set forth in the Old Testament. Second, there must be competent authority to enumerate the change. Any Christian would be hard-pressed to deny Jesus Christ and his apostles were not competent authorities to announce this change.
Here I must belabor the point that the Christian faith is not a new religion. It started in Genesis 3:15 in the promise of the Serpent-Crusher, of which Adam and Eve believed God and were covered by the sacrifice of blood for their sin (Gen. 3:20-21). It was renewed to Abraham in the promise to bless all nations through his seed, Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness (Rom 4:17). The promise was renewed in the law of Moses as the Altar, the Tabernacle, and the Ark of the Covenant were erected. It was renewed to David when, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool” (Ps110:1) and David believed the coming King, though he would be his descendant, the King would be greater than he (Matt. 22:41-45). It continued through the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hoesa, and Daniel, that a Messiah would come and save his people bringing an end to iniquity and bringing everlasting righteousness (Is 9:6-7, Dan. 9:24). Finally, John the baptizer comes out of the wilderness proclaiming the Kingdom is at hand. The coming of Christ is not the founding of a new religion, nor is it a parenthesis in history. It is history’s bud coming into bloom. This earth is under new management and the King desires holiness, uprightness, and justice in his kingdom. None of these can be defined apart from him and his character.
We are co-heirs with Christ in this kingdom (Rom. 8:17, Eph. 2:6). And, as stated before, every house has house rules and any good kingdom has laws and a constitution. Though we reign with Christ, we are not above having to keep his law. While we may differ on the extent to which the law should be applied, which is where the debate of legalism comes in, we should all agree that we are not free to do whatever we want. Sin shall no longer have a rule over us because we are no longer under the law; that is to say, we have been given grace to keep the law as we could not have done before. Legalism is introduced as a secondary means of salvation. We believe faith in Christ plus nothing is what the scriptures teach. But we also know that faith without works is dead (Jas. 2:17) and that we would not know how to define what is wrong if not for the law of God (Rom. 7:7). While we are given extensive warnings not to submit ourselves to unnecessary laws of the old dispensation, we are also told the law is a strict schoolmaster (Gal. 3:24) and we find the entire basis for our morality in the law of God (Jas. 2:8-13). The trap of legalism is a deadly snare, but righteous law-keeping is not. It is no mistake that the longest chapter of the Bible is a song singing the praises of God’s law and how joyous it is to obey them. In the reconciling of the tension between religion and legalism, you can see a stark contrast between the Pharisee’s view of the precepts of God and David’s view of them in Psalm 119.
Lastly, I want to quickly examine Peter’s first epistle in a brief survey as a capstone to this discussion. Now, this may seem an odd place to come in for a landing. Would not Hebrews or Romans or Galatians be a more appropriate place to establish the differentiation of religion and legalism? Probably. But there are a few important points Peter drives home in his epistle I believe wraps this subject up in an orderly, hope-filled way rather than it feeling like a logic beatdown. Peter opens his letter by addressing the “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 1:2). At the very outset, he is demonstrating the relational election of God the Father, the personal sanctifying work of the Spirit, and the intercessory and substitutionary work of Christ. He goes on to reference our lively hope in Christ’s resurrection and our inheritance held for us incorruptible and fades not away (1 Pet. 1:3-5). This is all part of the amazing relational aspect of our dealings with God. But do not miss a key word in the second verse, “obedience.” The sanctifying work of the Spirit in our life leads us to obedience. Obedience to what? Continue on in the book and see what else Peter has to say about it. He gives extensive commendation to the reader in the hope of Christ and the glory of the gospel of grace. He says even angels have desired to look into these things, but it was not revealed unto them, it was revealed to God’s people, his image-bearers, his elect. Again, relational; an intimate relationship. But what is the application of the knowledge of such a relationship? Obedience. “Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy” (1 Pet. 1:13-16). The relationship of God to man is unconditionally on the part of God to initiate. But the quality of the relationship is directly related to the quality of obedience to the Father by the leading of the Holy Spirit. Christ was able to be our substitutionary death because he was perfect. Jesus did not live a life free from sin so we didn’t have to, he died so we could. The first chapter of the epistle closes with the reminder that the word of the Lord stands forever as opposed to man who is like the fading grass and wilting flowers, yet another reminder of the significance of the precepts of God.
The second chapter spends the first half drawing a contrast from the fading flowers and grass of chapter one with believers likened unto stones, which are immovable. These stones are also likened in kind to the Lord Jesus as the chief stone (1 Pet. 2:6-7). He is an offense to the disobedient (1 Pet. 2:8). Again, hearkening back to a requirement for order. This symbolism of stones is vital to our understanding of the Christian life. In Exodus, when God gave instructions for constructing the tabernacle, his dwelling place, he was very meticulous about every detail from dimensions to materials. Likewise, when Solomon built the temple, he was given specific instructions for how it was to be done (1 Chr. 28). And when the veil was torn and that old order done away with, it was no longer a temple made of stone that God would dwell in (1 Cor. 3:16). He would now dwell in a temple of men fashioned after the likeness of his Son. If God was as detailed about the construction of the physical temple, then there is no reason to believe he would not be equally as zealous about the living temple of his people. In the same vein we, his people, are called a royal priesthood. The old priesthood had to follow a specific order when offering sacrifices in God’s temple. Our priesthood looks different than that priesthood, but there are still expectations for that priestly work.
In the remainder of chapter two and into the third, are laid out several areas of specific commands for this temple and priesthood to follow: citizens’ submission to their ruling magistrates (1 Pet. 2:12-17), servants’ submission to their masters (1 Pet. 2:19-25), wives’ submission to husbands (1 Pet. 3:1-6), husbands’ requirement to dwell in understanding with their wives (1 Pet. 3:7), and an overall attitude of respect and charitable reciprocity among the congregation (1 Pet. 3:8-14). All of this so that Christ may be regarded as Lord in our hearts and that no evil brought against his people may stand. This is demanding a high degree of religious observance and command-following. He concludes his argument here by asserting the need to put off the filth of the world by baptism, a watery sign for those set apart unto God.
As pointed out in paragraphs above, the root of Peter’s commands for this outward righteousness is rooted in the kingly authority of King Jesus “who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him” (1 Pet. 3:22). Therefore, because Jesus is King, we are to cease from sin, arm ourselves, and carry out our marching orders. It is by proclaiming the gospel to the world, and the testimony of an upright and holy life that those dead in their sins would be made alive to God (1Pe 4:6). We do this confidently as heralds, priests, and co-heirs of the kingdom, “that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever” (1 Pet:4:11). We know not everyone will like this good news. Some do not like the commands of the new King. Many think the coming of a new regime means they are free to set their own rules. Some view the changing of the guard as an opportunity for mischief (1 Pet. 4:12-19). And the old ruler, though he is de-fanged, does like to cause a commotion (1 Pet. 5:8).
Christian, the charge is there for you in chapter five verse eight, be sober, be vigilant. You are a soldier at your post, pay attention, watch for the enemy, follow the orders of your Commanding Officer. Though he is a gracious, merciful General, he does expect his commands to be carried out to the letter. He rewards the good soldier who follows orders and punishes the one who does not (Heb. 12:6). He is not just your commander, he is your King, your High Priest, your Big Brother, and your God. Worship him and serve him with gladness and peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen (1 Pet. 5:14).
