Legalism (part 1)
Introduction. Paul told Timothy to “preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.” He also told him to “commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” (2Tim. 2:2; 2Tim. 4:2). With this mandate Christians all over the world and throughout all time apply “the word” to current moral and doctrinal controversies to “reprove and rebuke” everyone who will listen to “hold fast that which is good” and “abstain from every form of evil.” (1Th. 5:21-22).
This is how Christians “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 1:3). While some will reject and persecute this preaching, and others will repent and become obedient, there is third group who “will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears,” “turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.” This group will scoff and undermine the truth because they are “holding a form of godliness, but having denied its power.” (2Tim. 3:5).
Each generation develops its own “fables” to scratch the ears of those who place their own ideas and desires above the authority of Scripture. One of these fables that has taken deep root in the hearts of many today goes by the name “legalism.” Whenever a scripture condemns their conduct, they cry “legalism” and proclaim the verse has been taken too far. Those who teach instrumental music is wrong based on Paul’s command to sing (Eph. 5:19) are dismissed as legalists and the subject is closed. Those who teach as Peter did that baptism is essential for the remission of sins, or as Jesus that baptism is necessary to be saved, are rejected simply by calling them legalists.
There is a grave danger in the elasticity of the term “legalism”. It can be stretched to cover anything justified by one person but condemned by another. Since we must never go beyond what is written, and keeping Jesus commands must be precisely done, rejecting an interpretation we feel is too harsh is fraught with peril. The Bereans did not dismiss Paul as a legalist, but “searched the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.”
There is a fine line between caution, legalism, and lawlessness, and we must make every effort to discern it. In this article we will explore the Scriptural aspects of legalism along with some of the dangers.
There are two clear examples of legalism in the life of Christ and both involved the Pharisees. As a matter of fact, for many, “legalism” and “Phariseeism” are synonymous. Their legalism took two different directions and every devout Christian must become aware of them lest we fall into the same trap.
The first thing they did was take an existing law and interpreted it so strictly that they “condemned the guiltless.” (Mt. 12:1-7). As His disciples walked through the standing grain, they were plucking some of the heads, and after rubbing them with their hands to remove the chaff, eating them. It was lawful to do this on any other day (Deut. 23:24-25), but they charged Jesus with: “Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!"
This is a classic example of legalism. They took the general law: “Do no work on the Sabbath,” and falsely condemned Jesus by taking that law too far and making it more strict than God. Yet we must be aware of the extreme and the danger it presents. While they were wrong to carry it too far, this did not mean all laws regarding the Sabbath would be legalism. Moses was told to stone a man for “gathering sticks on the Sabbath.” (Num. 15:32-36). So if the disciples had been picking up sticks on the Sabbath they would have broken the Sabbath. Jesus proclamation that He was Lord of the Sabbath did not mean He could set it aside, but only that He knew exactly what the limits were and His disciples had not passed them.
The second form of legalism Jesus condemned was in creating “traditions of the elders” and giving them equal weight to the “law of Moses.” When they charged: “Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread,” they revealed their legalism. They had written an entire additional code of conduct based on God’s law. Jesus completely rejected and condemned their code when He responded: “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men.” (Mk. 7:6-8). Any disciple who adds his own ideas to God’s law and then seeks to bind them on others is a legalist. The difficulty is the fine line between adding and applying.
God’s law is sufficient. When anyone adds another book or creed to the gospel of Christ, thus making their own traditions as binding as the will of God, they are following the example of the Pharisees, and are guilty of becoming legalists. God’s law is sufficient to keep God’s people submissive to Christ. All man-made doctrine that is added will merit the condemnation of Jesus. So many of the traditions of the Catholic church along with the creed books of many denominations reveal legalistic laws that are simply additions to God’s.
The admonitions given in Romans 14 concerning foods, drink and days were a warning not to bind our own personal convictions on others. Each must be assured in his own mind regarding them. Paul warned those in the church to be careful not be heed such traditions: “why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations — 21 ‘Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,’ 22 which all concern things which perish with the using — according to the commandments and doctrines of men?” (Col. 2:20-23).
Conclusion. The concern about those who add their own ideas to the Scriptures and bind them on others is legitimate. Whether we call it legalism, Phariseeism, or human tradition, it is dangerous and must be rejected. Yet those who are too quick to call out legalism fall into an equally dangerous extreme. When we set aside a law of God, by calling it “legalism”, we fall into another condemnation that Jesus warned “many” would fall into: “then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'” (Mt. 7:21-23)
Legalism and lawlessness are the among the extremes Jesus warned against: “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Mt. 7:13-14). Many who cry “legalism” the loudest are only walking in the darkness of lawlessness. “When your eye is good, your whole body also is full of light. But when your eye is bad, your body also is full of darkness. Therefore take heed that the light which is in you is not darkness.” “If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is that darkness!” (Lk. 11:34-35; Mt. 6:23). (More Next Week)
This is how Christians “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 1:3). While some will reject and persecute this preaching, and others will repent and become obedient, there is third group who “will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears,” “turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.” This group will scoff and undermine the truth because they are “holding a form of godliness, but having denied its power.” (2Tim. 3:5).
Each generation develops its own “fables” to scratch the ears of those who place their own ideas and desires above the authority of Scripture. One of these fables that has taken deep root in the hearts of many today goes by the name “legalism.” Whenever a scripture condemns their conduct, they cry “legalism” and proclaim the verse has been taken too far. Those who teach instrumental music is wrong based on Paul’s command to sing (Eph. 5:19) are dismissed as legalists and the subject is closed. Those who teach as Peter did that baptism is essential for the remission of sins, or as Jesus that baptism is necessary to be saved, are rejected simply by calling them legalists.
There is a grave danger in the elasticity of the term “legalism”. It can be stretched to cover anything justified by one person but condemned by another. Since we must never go beyond what is written, and keeping Jesus commands must be precisely done, rejecting an interpretation we feel is too harsh is fraught with peril. The Bereans did not dismiss Paul as a legalist, but “searched the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.”
There is a fine line between caution, legalism, and lawlessness, and we must make every effort to discern it. In this article we will explore the Scriptural aspects of legalism along with some of the dangers.
There are two clear examples of legalism in the life of Christ and both involved the Pharisees. As a matter of fact, for many, “legalism” and “Phariseeism” are synonymous. Their legalism took two different directions and every devout Christian must become aware of them lest we fall into the same trap.
The first thing they did was take an existing law and interpreted it so strictly that they “condemned the guiltless.” (Mt. 12:1-7). As His disciples walked through the standing grain, they were plucking some of the heads, and after rubbing them with their hands to remove the chaff, eating them. It was lawful to do this on any other day (Deut. 23:24-25), but they charged Jesus with: “Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!"
This is a classic example of legalism. They took the general law: “Do no work on the Sabbath,” and falsely condemned Jesus by taking that law too far and making it more strict than God. Yet we must be aware of the extreme and the danger it presents. While they were wrong to carry it too far, this did not mean all laws regarding the Sabbath would be legalism. Moses was told to stone a man for “gathering sticks on the Sabbath.” (Num. 15:32-36). So if the disciples had been picking up sticks on the Sabbath they would have broken the Sabbath. Jesus proclamation that He was Lord of the Sabbath did not mean He could set it aside, but only that He knew exactly what the limits were and His disciples had not passed them.
The second form of legalism Jesus condemned was in creating “traditions of the elders” and giving them equal weight to the “law of Moses.” When they charged: “Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread,” they revealed their legalism. They had written an entire additional code of conduct based on God’s law. Jesus completely rejected and condemned their code when He responded: “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men.” (Mk. 7:6-8). Any disciple who adds his own ideas to God’s law and then seeks to bind them on others is a legalist. The difficulty is the fine line between adding and applying.
God’s law is sufficient. When anyone adds another book or creed to the gospel of Christ, thus making their own traditions as binding as the will of God, they are following the example of the Pharisees, and are guilty of becoming legalists. God’s law is sufficient to keep God’s people submissive to Christ. All man-made doctrine that is added will merit the condemnation of Jesus. So many of the traditions of the Catholic church along with the creed books of many denominations reveal legalistic laws that are simply additions to God’s.
The admonitions given in Romans 14 concerning foods, drink and days were a warning not to bind our own personal convictions on others. Each must be assured in his own mind regarding them. Paul warned those in the church to be careful not be heed such traditions: “why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations — 21 ‘Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,’ 22 which all concern things which perish with the using — according to the commandments and doctrines of men?” (Col. 2:20-23).
Conclusion. The concern about those who add their own ideas to the Scriptures and bind them on others is legitimate. Whether we call it legalism, Phariseeism, or human tradition, it is dangerous and must be rejected. Yet those who are too quick to call out legalism fall into an equally dangerous extreme. When we set aside a law of God, by calling it “legalism”, we fall into another condemnation that Jesus warned “many” would fall into: “then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'” (Mt. 7:21-23)
Legalism and lawlessness are the among the extremes Jesus warned against: “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Mt. 7:13-14). Many who cry “legalism” the loudest are only walking in the darkness of lawlessness. “When your eye is good, your whole body also is full of light. But when your eye is bad, your body also is full of darkness. Therefore take heed that the light which is in you is not darkness.” “If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is that darkness!” (Lk. 11:34-35; Mt. 6:23). (More Next Week)