Listen to this Audio Message...

[Guest]

The Lord has been convicting me lately about my mental attitude toward other believers. While I'd be the first to admit that legalism is a poison in the church, I must confess that I've been guilty of this crime myself, up to this present day. It sometimes takes on a subtle form and creeps up on us until one day we wake up and say, "Man... I sound no different than those Pharisees whom the Lord condemned!" This hit me like a ton of bricks recently when evaluating the actions of another believer. My judgement of his actions may have been scripturally correct, but my thoughts and actions toward this person broke a number of (more important) commands of our Lord.

I just listened to Greg Boyd's latest sermon and this was his topic. I'll admit that I often listen to Greg simply because he's entertaining. The guy makes me laugh... a lot. But this particular message REALLY struck a cord with me and opened my eyes to something I needed to be reminded of. Namely, it's not the rule that matters... but the principle behind the rule. When we focus on the rule (don't covet) instead of the principle (love your neighbor) we get caught up in legalism and become the purveyer of doctrinal purity. Sound familiar? This squares so perfectly with every word Jesus uttered.

The sermon is short, but impactful. Go to

http://www.whchurch.org/content/page_781.htm

and scroll to the bottom. Click on the 3/25/07 audio link titled "Principles and Rules." Be blessed.

[Guest]

Hi JC,

What a coincidence! I had this downloaded onto my ipod to listen to this morning. It was a great message. I, like Greg, tend to be a rebellious rule breaker, usually just to see what I can get away with. In my case, I need to be careful to avoid jettisoning the principles just for the thrill of breaking the rules. Without the principles, things fall apart pretty quickly I've noticed.

Michelle






edited to fix spelling. I am on vacation, but that's no excuse.

[_kaufmannphillips]

Hello, JC,

I appreciate the importance of being attentive to principles; they help us understand how to fulfill rules.

But to say that "it's not the rule that matters..." is dangerously polarized; one overemphasis should not be replaced with another.

We must appreciate the importance of being attentive to rules; they help us understand how to fulfill principles.

It is not either/or, but both/and. Each matters.

Shlamaa,
Emmet

[edited once for formatting]

[Guest]

JC,

Thank you for sharing this website...I listened this evening to two messages and I have been very encouraged..

[Guest]

Thanks for posting this, it's was a very helpful message.

[Guest]

Hello, JC,

interrupting again...

I appreciate the importance of being attentive to principles; they help us understand how to fulfill rules.

I believe it's the other way around; the principles help us to understand why the rules exist. The rules help us to carry out the principles.

But to say that "it's not the rule that matters..." is dangerously polarized; one overemphasis should not be replaced with another.

We must appreciate the importance of being attentive to rules; they help us understand how to fulfill principles.
It is not either/or, but both/and. Each matters.

Each matters, but they aren't of equal importance, I believe. Rules without principles are meaningless, and those who follow them are pitiable, especially when they get all bent out of shape by those who reject their codes. Principles without rules can stand alone, but rules can be helpful in fulfilling them. (Just my limited opinion.)

Michelle

[_kaufmannphillips]

Hello, Michelle,

Thank you for your response.

interrupting again...

kaufmannphillips: I appreciate the importance of being attentive to principles; they help us understand how to fulfill rules.

MichelleM: I believe it's the other way around; the principles help us to understand why the rules exist. The rules help us to carry out the principles.

Our statements here on principles and rules are not necessarily exclusive.

I value thinking holistically, so I favor seeing principles and rules as being interrelated and interdependent on a practical level. Each may be improperly engaged if the other is not granted proper attention.

Beyond this, sometimes we are given principles, and we deduce rules; othertimes, we are given rules, and we deduce principles. Depending upon the flow of deduction (and the relative authority of the giver), the greater importance may lie with one or the other.

Each matters, but they aren't of equal importance, I believe.

Here my perfectionism joins with my holistic sensibilities. I have some difficulty with prioritization when the entirety has dignity and needs to be fulfilled.

Once one part of the whole is elevated over the other, we have tacitly determined which part to throw from the bus first. But instead of lightening the load, our task is to keep the bus in adequate condition to carry all of its payload.


Shlamaa,
Emmet

[Guest]

Hello Emmet,

kaufmannphillips: I appreciate the importance of being attentive to principles; they help us understand how to fulfill rules.

MichelleM: I believe it's the other way around; the principles help us to understand why the rules exist. The rules help us to carry out the principles.

Our statements here on principles and rules are not necessarily exclusive.

I value thinking holistically, so I favor seeing principles and rules as being interrelated and interdependent on a practical level. Each may be improperly engaged if the other is not granted proper attention.

Perhaps you are right. I'll think about that statement; right now I still think that principles can stand alone, but rules collapse under their own weight without principles to buoy them.

Beyond this, sometimes we are given principles, and we deduce rules; othertimes, we are given rules, and we deduce principles. Depending upon the flow of deduction (and the relative authority of the giver), the greater importance may lie with one or the other.

Some rules, in some instances, can be contradictory. That's why I think principles are more important.

Each matters, but they aren't of equal importance, I believe.

Here my perfectionism joins with my holistic sensibilities. I have some difficulty with prioritization when the entirety has dignity and needs to be fulfilled.

See? It pays to be a dimwitted, rebellious, non-perfectionist; I have no difficulty seeing principles as having priority over rules.

Once one part of the whole is elevated over the other, we have tacitly determined which part to throw from the bus first. But instead of lightening the load, our task is to keep the bus in adequate condition to carry all of its payload.

It is definitely against the rules to throw things from buses!

But to extend your analogy, why isn't it advantageous to lighten the load a little? I ask this fully realizing that I have a character weakness that I confessed to a couple of times in this thread; I like to break rules. The fewer rules there are, the fewer I wanna break.


Yours,
Michelle

[Guest]

Emmet, I appreciate you giving us your take on the issue, but did you listen to the audio link I provided? I only ask because the points you've raised don't entirely fit the message I'm promoting here. The prominent example Greg Boyd gave is when Jesus was criticized for breaking the Sabbath by doing his normal work, which just happened to be healing people. With respect to the law, they were correct. Jesus didn't cease from doing his normal work on the Sabbath and this was the cause of several disputes.

Jesus didn't respond to their criticism by stating that he, in fact, had not broken the Sabbath. Instead, he pointed to the example of David eating the showbread. David indeed broke the law... which is a religious rule to be followed. Jesus underscored the virtues of mercy and thus defended his actions. He chose to heal a man in defiance of the law. This is a clear example of a principal (mercy) trumping a rule (Sabbath-keeping). Believe me, I'd be the last one to trample on the rules given to us by God. I'm merely addressing our area of focus. When we focus on the rules we become very cynical and I know this from personal experience. I've also observed it in countless others. Cynicism is not a fruit of the spirit.

[_kaufmannphillips]

Hello, Michelle,

Thank you for your response.

...right now I still think that principles can stand alone, but rules collapse under their own weight without principles to buoy them.

I think there is a mutual need, as each one may be misunderstood without attention to the other.

Principles, when they stand alone, may be so abstract as to allow conflicting interpretation and/or application; this is why rules are necessary. For example, the principle of loving one's neighbor is useful, but somewhat vague. How is one supposed to love one's neighbor?

Some might find impermissable forms of sexual expression to be validated under this principle. We might object that those forms are not truly "love." But how do we know this to be the case? From rules of conduct that (we believe) do not contravene God's principles, but rather uphold them.

Then again, some implications of love we might never realize without rules to bring them to our attention.

Some rules, in some instances, can be contradictory. That's why I think principles are more important.

Some principles also appear to come into conflict with each other, no?

But I will hazard the proposition that neither divine principles nor divine rules contradict one another.

It is definitely against the rules to throw things from buses!

But to extend your analogy, why isn't it advantageous to lighten the load a little? I ask this fully realizing that I have a character weakness that I confessed to a couple of times in this thread; I like to break rules. The fewer rules there are, the fewer I wanna break.

I would not advocate for all rules, any more than I would advocate for all principles. But the rules that should be broken are not worth retaining, and the ones that are worth retaining should not be broken.


Shlamaa,
Emmet