Set Free from the Law

When President Lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation, it stated that as of January 1st 1863, all of the slaves were free. The people who had been formerly held as slaves were free and no longer legally bound to serve their former master. Unfortunately, not all of the slaves knew right away that they were emancipated. Their masters did everything they could to keep the slaves from finding out that they were actually free. For many, it was quite a while later that they actually found out that they didn't have to serve their masters anymore. When Jesus died on the cross, he emancipated us from the law. We are no longer legally bound to follow it. Unfortunately, not all of us know that. Satan is doing everything he can to keep people from finding out that they are free. He wants to keep us thinking that we are enslaved to the law, trying desperately to fulfill something that God already fulfilled through Christ. Even though our freedom was purchased on the cross 2,000 years ago, many of us don't realize until later the freedom that we have in Christ..

For many years I was very confused about the Old Testament Law. I wrestled with it and wrestled with it, but still I couldn't come to a clear understanding. It made complete sense in the context of the Old Testament, but what was its place now that Jesus had come?

The main reason I struggled so much was because of what I was taught at home all of my growing up years. I was taught that anything that wasn't contradicted in the Old Testament still stood. I was taught that there were still parts of the law that we as Christians were required to follow. But which parts? How did we know what we should follow and what we didn't have to? My parents told me that only the sacrificial system and the laws about what you could and couldn't eat had been done away with. All the rest of the law still stood. This didn't make sense to me. There were so many of laws that we didn't follow, like not wearing clothes with more than one kind of thread, or not trimming the corners of your beard. Why didn't we follow those laws? My parents didn't like it when I asked these kind of questions.

I was confused. I didn't really understand my parent's beliefs. They didn't make sense. They weren't consistent. They didn't really seem to line up with the rest of Scripture. But they were my parents! Somehow it seemed wrong not to believe what they taught me. I was only in my early teens when I began struggling with these issues. I thought that maybe when I was older and more spiritually mature, I would understand what they were talking about. But in the meantime I was torn. What did I believe? I didn't feel like I could really support something I wasn't totally convinced was true. But to believe something else in contradiction to my parents instruction? I didn't feel I could do that either.

Over the years, the issue was pushed to the back of my mind. Once in a while it would come up again and I would wrestle with it some more, but nothing really seemed to change. I tried to forget about it as much as possible. It wasn't until I was twenty-two years old that it really surfaced again full force. This time, I knew that it was God bringing it to my attention and I knew I had to deal with it.

It all started when my fiance and I began studying the book of Galatians together. I have the read the book of Galatians many times, but somehow I never understood it before like I understood it this time. The whole book is Paul addressing the church at Galatia who had been told that they still needed to be circumcised. Paul is writing to tell them that they are no longer under the law and if they try to keep it in any point, they have fallen from grace and the death of Jesus means nothing to them. "It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery. Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love." (Galatians 5:1-6)

The book of Galatians explains that the reason for the law was to show us that we are sinners, to show us that we need a Savior.  But now that they Savior has come and we have received Him, we no longer need the law. "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:24-26)

As for the belief that everything in the Old Testament that is not contradicted in the New Testament still stands, it is not my goal to discuss whether or not that is true at this time. But for right now, let's just suppose that it is true. I don't understand the purpose of going through the entire law, point by point, to see whether or not each one is contradicted in the New Testament when God spent an ENTIRE BOOK explaining how we aren't under the law! At all. Any of it. Some would say that I'm just making that up or trying to make the Bible say what I want it to. That is not the case. "But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law." (Galatians 5:18) I had to read that verse about 12 times for it to really sink in. I desperately searched for the "but", the "and" the "except" trying to find which part of the law I still WAS under. It wasn't there. There is no exception. It says that if you are led by the Spirit, you ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW. Period. End of sentence.

Paul does not use soft words when he describes the seriousness of trying to follow the law. I already mentioned what he says in chapter 5 verses 1-6. When he talks about the consequences of still holding to the law, he says that "Christ will be of no benefit to you", he says that you will be "under obligation to keep the whole law" (which is impossible, by the way). He talks about being "severed from Christ" and having "fallen from grace" This is serious business, guys! In fact, Paul is not nice in his wish of what will happen to those who are teaching circumcision under the law. In Galatians 5:12 he says, "I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves."  If you read that verse in other translations, you will see that what Paul is saying is, "I wish that those who are telling you that you need to be circumcised would just emasculate themselves while they're at it!" That's not a nice thing to say! I get the feeling that Paul felt rather strongly on this subject.

As I studied the book of Galatians, God has shown me with crystal clarity the answers to my questions. When I set aside the things I had always been taught and simply looked at what the Bible actually said, all my confusion melted away. It is not longer a mystery to me what part of the law I am under. None of it! The law served its purpose and now it is done! Hallelujah! Oh the joy of finally realizing that I am free in Christ!

"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery." (Galatians 5:1)


*All scripture taken from the New American Standard Bible

Asking the Hard Questions: Don't Skirt the Issue

I know that some people will roll their eyes when they read this and say, "It's about time!" and others will raise cries of "rebel!" and "heretic!".

Here is the question: Is it wrong for a woman to wear pants instead of a skirt?

Trust me, I've dealt with this issue for a long time and I've been on both sides of the fence! When I was about 15, I decided that I should wear skirts. And I held to this decision quite religiously. You see, I thought that since some godly people wore skirts. It must be the only option if I wanted to be godly. But the more I think about the rational behind the skirts-only doctrine, the less it makes sense to me.

I want to address a few of the arguments that I have used to support skirts-only as well as some others that I have heard.

1. The Bible instructs us to be modest

I couldn't agree more! 1 Timothy 2:9 says "Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly..." But where in the Bible does it say that a skirt is the definition of modesty? It is true that many skirts are more modest than many pairs of pants. But I've also seen many pairs of pants that are more modest than many skirts. I have asked guys about this and they say that they don't have a problem with girls in pants as long as they aren't super tight (but the same holds true of skirts). Some even said they preferred for girls to wear pants as there was less chance of showing something if you sit or move wrong.

2. Historically it was considered immodest for a woman to wear pants

Historically it was also considered immodest to show your feet or ankles. I don't see anybody arguing for women's feet and ankles to be covered at all times.

3. The Bible says that a woman should not wear men's clothing

It is absolutely true that Deuteronomy 22 says "A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God." Please note that this is part of the law of Moses. Are we as believers required to follow the law of Moses? No. We are no longer under the law.

Now let me clarify, I believe it is most glorifying to God when women dress and act like women and when men dress and act like men. But let me point something out. At the time that the Bible was written, men and women BOTH wore robes. So wouldn't it be acceptable for men to wear men's pants and women to wear women's pants?

4. Pants for women is just Satan's way of trying to make sin look acceptable

I've been told that the devil tries to deceive us into thinking that is is ok for a woman to wear men's clothes by making a women's version of them.

Let me reiterate; when the Bible was written, men and women BOTH wore robes. So I asked a skirt-only believer, "If men and women both wore robes in the Bible, how did women make sure they weren't wearing men's clothes?" Here is the answer I got, "Well, I'm sure there was a certain style of robe that was for men and a different one for women." Right...........kind of like one style of pants for men and one for women, eh? How is different styles of the same thing ok as long as it's robes, but it's a ploy of the devil if it's pants?

I also have another question. I've never heard anybody raise cain over men and women both wearing t-shirts. Maybe there are those that do, but I personally have never heard any. Why is it acceptable for men and women to both wear t-shirts (as long as the women wear them with a skirt, of course), but it's not ok for men and women to both wear pants? Why are pants "men's clothing" but t-shirts aren't?

5. Historically, pants were men's clothing

Historically voting was a man's role, but we don't say that it is wrong for women to vote. Since when did historic customs dictate moral law? Sure, it was historically unacceptable to kill people, but we don't refrain from killing people because of history, we hold to it because the Bible says that we shouldn't kill people. So if the Bible doesn't say that it's wrong for women to wear pants, why should history make it wrong?

6. Even Mormons and Muslims wear skirts (or robes, or whatever they call them)

Remind me again why I should base my lifestyle choices on the practices of cults and false religions? I've been told that Muslims would be offended if I wore pants, so I shouldn't do it. If I was ministering to Muslims, I might choose to dress like them in order to be able to build relationships more easily, but seeing as how I don't even know any Muslims, I don't know why I need to dress like them. I mean, a Hindu would be offended by the fact that I eat meat (might be great uncle Bob reincarnated, you know.), but I've never had anyone tell me that I should become a vegetarian based on that fact.

7. Skirts are distinctly feminine

I agree! And I absolutely love wearing skirts for just that reason! If someone chooses to wear skirts because they are very feminine, I have no problem with that! More power to them! But this sounds like a personal preference not a Biblical mandate. The color pink is distinctly feminine too, but that doesn't mean that we should all only wear pink.

8. You never see a man in a skirt

Have you ever seen a kilt? Seriously. Look it up.

Perhaps there is something that I'm missing. Maybe there are valid reasons that I have never heard and I am terribly mislead. But based on what I have heard and read, it seems to me that whether a woman wears pants or skirts is a personal decision. I don't see how one way is more right than the other.

If you have a different point of view, or opinion that you would like me to consider, please share! Really, I mean it. I don't promise to alter my opinion, but I do promise to be interested in hearing what you have to say.

To Ask Hard Questions

There are a number of reasons why I decided to start my own personal blog. One of the biggest reasons is because of the place I'm at in my spiritual walk and the things God is teaching me right now. It's sometimes easier to write about my thoughts to nobody in particular, than it is to figure out how to talk about it in real life. I talk about these things with my fiance, but sometimes I still feel the urge to write about it, to somehow declare to the world, "This is where I stand. This is what I think. This is how I feel. This is who I am." And there is always a small thought in the back of my mind that says, "Maybe there's someone else out there who feels the same way, who is going through the same thing, who would be encouraged by what I have to say." And so I decided to blog.

The place I am at in spiritual walk that I alluded to earlier perhaps could be described as a time of questioning. I don't mean questioning my faith, questioning my salvation, questioning the deity of Christ or the authority of the Bible. I mean questioning things I have been taught, things I have always believed, standards that I have held or been required to hold. I am the kind of person who has an irrepressible urge to ask "Why?" Why do we live this way? Why do we do this? Why do we believe this? As I have grown older, the urge to know why has grown stronger. Somehow the answers that used to satisfy me don't anymore. As I have grown in knowledge, wisdom and maturity, I realize that many of the answers I have been given, don't really answer the question.

Unfortunately, this questioning is steadily becoming less and less acceptable in my family. My parent's always taught me to think for myself. They taught me not to simply accept what people told me, but to search out the truth for myself. Especially biblical truth. Perhaps it did not occur to them that I would begin to apply the same principle to the things that they themselves told me. Maybe they did not realize that in thinking for myself, I might disagree with them or come to different conclusions.

My questions often seem to be seen as a threat. Whether consciously or subconsciously, the impression is given that to question is to rebel. To disagree with what my dad says, is to disagree with God Himself. Perhaps this communication is unintentional, but it is there all the same. I have learned to keep most of my questions to myself or to ask them elsewhere.

So that is, in part, the purpose of this blog. To ask the hard questions, to root out lies I have believed, to understand what God's word says and choose to believe it for myself, and to encourage others who are asking their own questions.