http://archive.org/stream/hereistandalifeo017222mbp#page/n335/mode/2up/search/straw

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2007/08/free-book-here-i-stand-life-of-martin.html

Legalists tend to (over) emphasize the Law and that we are sinners. Legalists commonly are traditional conservative Christians who incline toward being Pharisee-like. Their expression of genuine warmth and God’s love is weak, because of their critical mindedness.

Liberals, on the other hand, tend to (over) emphasize God’s unconditional love and acceptance of all sinners. Their favorite word might be tolerance. In contrast to legalists, they have a low view of sin and the Law.

Because we Christians are sinners, we incline either toward legalism or liberalism, or we flip flop between the two, depending on our sentiment, our situation, or the people we are dealing with. For instance, I can easily become legalistic towards those who are legalistic, and at the same time liberal and loose toward those who I do not want to offend.

Only the gospel of God’s grace takes the Law/sin and God’s love most seriously simultaneously. God took Law/sin so seriously that he had to destroy His Son. God took love most deeply that he would love sinners at the greatest cost to Himself by the sacrifice of His Son.

Personally, I think the list (which comes from Rick Warren’s study guide) is helpful, but doesn’t do justice to the full measure of what each wrote about. Warren does not intend the list to minimalize the grand truth of Paul or James; only to create a starting point for understanding that their writings are complimentary. In this sense, the list is very helpful to me.

I see God’s wisdom in this too. I see that God knew the big problem of Christians would be legalism (hence Paul’s prolific writings). Antinomianism is a problem too, but only on a much smaller scale.

The problem is that I find the legalists feel they have to fend off grace, thinking they are fighting antinomianism when they are not. Grace is between the two extremes, and grace is a solid footing!

If I may modify the 1st, it would be: Paul exhorts against legalism; James exhorts against antinomianism.

“Liberal” churches need to listen to James. “Legalistic” churches need to listen to Paul.

Helping the poor and needy in some way is not an “optional add-on” for a Christian ministry. It is the main point.

James 3:1 comes to mind for me… “Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.”

“My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism.”

“But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, *impartial* and sincere.”

I think the word “submissive” is not a good translation here. It does not mean that people are submissive to autocratic leaders, but it rather addresses the leaders, that they should listen to what people say. Better English Bible translations have here: “reasonable”, “willing to yield”, “willing to yield to reason”, “easy to be intreated”. Luther translates as “lässt sich etwas sagen” = “willing to listen”. This is exactly the opposite of what I experienced from the UBF leadership.

One statement from James 1 should be also remarkable for UBFers: “Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.” If you ask UBF leaders what pure religion is, then they will start talking about preaching, evangelizing, making Bible study, writing testimonies, sharing testimonies, recruiting members, raising shepherds, training disciples etc. But practical help like visiting orphans and widows? Never heard of in UBF.