Frequent use of contrast
So on the pattern goes. We have not just righteous Abel, but the contrast between righteous Abel and his opposite, unrighteous brother Cain. We find not just Jacob, but Jacob and Esau, the twins with opposite values. The most detailed life of the Old Testament, David, finds sharper relief because of the extensive contrast to his predecessor and nemesis, Saul.

In the natural world, we see the same contrasts at work. For example, satiety without hunger would not feel so grand. We don’t understand freedom as well as those who have endured slavery or oppression. Each new day replaces the night past, and we rejoice in the contrasting light. In all of our experiences of life, when we have contrast, we have full meaning.

The grandest example of contrast in scripture sets The New Covenant, God’s salvation through faith in the blood of Jesus Christ, against the background of the Old Covenant, the Law of Moses. We have that seminal declaration in the prologue of John’s gospel, after he had just used darkness and light to set the stage of contrast: The law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus (John 1:18). We could have just had a record of God’s grace. God could have started the Bible with the gospels. But then we wouldn’t really know all that God wants us to know about faith and grace, would we? So the Bible goes beyond telling us about grace. It also tells us about law; thus, we see grace clearly because of its contrasting opposite, law.

The contrast to Jesus
Likewise, when we look at the life of Jesus our Lord, and the various possibilities God could have used to contrast His son, we notice a remarkable and utterly sobering reality. God put forth Jesus as the image of Himself, the revelation of the fullness of Deity in human form (Heb.1: 1,2). He represented the supreme picture of every virtue of God and every aspect of holiness (Col. 2:9).

And with what or whom did God contrast this magnificent life of perfection?

The "choices" could include pagans, licentious sinners, wicked idolaters, polytheistic Romans, atheistic, agnostic Greeks, and others. Many are the ways to be ungodly. Where do we find the divinely selected contrast that fills out the full measure of the appearance of the Son of God?

Did God use the basest of peoples, the utterly wanton Canaanite gentiles? No, they are scarcely even mentioned in the New Testament, and when they are, they seem to come out on the right end of the matter (e.g. Mt. 15:21).

Did He use the Romans, the vanguard of polytheism in Jesus’ day? No, if it were not for the insistence of the Jews, the Romans would have paid no attention to him at all. The Romans, by and large, hardly knew Jesus existed or cared what he did. They’re not the contrasting party.

How about the great sinners of Jesus’ day, the harlots, drunkards, and materialist pleasure-seekers? We find them also wanting in the role of contrast. In fact, the New Testament records the conversion of many of them. This group often stands as the better example for yet another group of worthless individuals (Mt. 21:31).

We find that all the groups we might think the Bible could use to serve as a contrast to the Lord Jesus find little mention in this regard. Not the pagans, not the Romans, not the sinners, not the atheists. Instead, God sets forth an unlikely choice. They weren’t, at least superficially, all that different from the Lord. They shared his heritage. They were monotheistic and pious. They feared God. They were the custodians of His revelation, and they were utterly devoted to keeping religious rules.

They were the Pharisees, and God despised their worship. They confronted Jesus at every station. They found fault in his teachings, in his religion, even in his miracles. They misrepresented God. They exchanged His glory for their own system of rules and rituals. They received much of Jesus’ attention, yet were the least responsive to his teaching. They were the only group he would call "hypocrites."

We do not find the opposite of faith in atheism, materialism, idolatry, or licentiousness per se, although the Pharisees answered to these descriptions also. We find it in false religion, in manmade holiness. We find it when we see faith turned into rules, love turned into scruples, holiness turned into a masquerade, piety turned into pretense. All this happened when God’s own people took His holiness and turned it into a manmade system of rules and rewards. They turned away from God, and turned away others; they turned a deaf ear to His voice, and turned out to be nothing but history's greatest example of evil in sacred vestments.

Legalism opposite of faith
To put the matter simply, the opposite of faith is not unbelief, nor is the opposite of the Son of God an atheistic sinner. The Bible contrasts faith not so much with unbelief, but with misbelief, misbelief of that particular stripe which corrupts faith by establishing a facade of pseudo-holy laws and rituals in its stead. The Bible sets forth the false belief of legalism, with its charade of holiness, as the opposite to instruct us in learning faith. It is from the base of legalism that the other failings of humanism -- licentiousness, materialism and idolatry -- derive.

If we want further evidence that the study of faith begins with the study of its opposite, legalism, we will find far more, as our inquiries will reveal. For now, let us just look at the warning implied in what we see on the surface of the gospels.

As a community, we find ourselves in the exact role of those who turned adversary to Jesus. We are God’s people, the custodians of His word, religious in every way. We see ourselves as holy, the New Israel. How does God see us? Have we maintained the faith of the New Covenant or slipped back into the law? We are in a blessed and serious position. We can go either way.

What does legalism mean?
Legalism describes a fundamental approach to life and religion. It is not in itself a creed or religious doctrine; rather, it is a pervasive principle that will color one’s perspective of many doctrines, including God, sin, salvation, righteousness, atonement, forgiveness, worship, and fellowship. Legalism relies on the "three R’s:" Rules, Rituals, and Rewards. Remember these, and you’ll remember what legalism is all about.

We do not use "legalism" pejoratively to denounce anybody or any group, within or without Christadelphia (God has done so with the Pharisees, as in Mt. 23). We do not use it to label or decry or isolate anyone. We use it in recognition of its pervasive nature, sometimes obvious, sometimes subtle. We use it to describe the human proclivity toward substituting the seen for the unseen. Rule-following can be observed, faith cannot.

Legalism wants rules, so it can follow them and earn a reward. If we are legalists, we want to know the rules, follow them, and exclude those who don’t, so we can appear more righteous. We want the tangible instead of the abstract. We want to know that we have done something good. We like the concepts of doing good and avoiding external evils. We like the concreteness of a rule-and ritual-based religion. The ambiguities of developing personal faith scare us. Growth in Christ lacks definition and measurement. We want to know what we should do, but we shy away from knowing whom we should be.

A human problem
Before we leave the Pharisees, we must make a further point that will give us another perspective on the pervasive problems of legalism. We could assume legalism is a problem of time and place long ago and far away. After all, the Pharisees’ legacy is the dictionary definition of "a hypocritically self-righteous person." We might think that the Pharisees invented and perfected legalism. If we do, we think amiss.

Legalism is a human problem, not a Pharisee problem. It is bigger than Orthodox Judaism, bigger than religion. It is as big as all human institutions. It is as much a part of our humanity as our sin-prone nature. In fact, it is basic to that nature. As we will see in the next article, it has its roots in our first encounter with God. It hasn’t gotten any better since. We all want just rules and rituals and rewards instead of the life-transforming experience of New Testament Christianity.

A matter of emphasis
Everyone has his/her favorite Bible passages and teachings. We get unbalanced when we emphasize and overwork what the Scriptures don’t. Scripture emphasizes what’s important. The life of Jesus has great importance to us; God gave us four gospels, or accounts of that life. In each account, the opposite, the contrast, the antagonist is played by a group of highly religious, covenant-sharing, Bible-reading, zealous people. Their approach to religion -- substituting laws for faith -- drew Jesus’ harshest condemnation. God warns us about false religion by placing these people directly opposite His son.

The gospels have dozens of examples of confrontations, parables, teachings, miracles, and warnings, all in the context of Pharisaic teaching and practice versus the "way of life." We cannot dismiss this universal context of gospel teaching without likewise dismissing the relevance of the words of the Master for us also. To observe the Gospel teachings in context, we must look at the legalistic tendencies inherent in each of our hearts.

We can say the same for most of Paul’s writings. What is his predominant context? Law vs. faith and grace. Do we take Paul’s advice as relevant and valuable to us, or is it confined to his day and time? Human nature hasn’t changed. Paul’s teachings and warnings likewise must surely apply to us today as we live out our faith and struggle with the ever-present urge to lapse into rules, rituals, and rewards.

The scope of this series
God willing, we intend to take a long, detailed look at legalism. We will trace its history and its manifestations in the Old Testament. We will look at the underlying assumptions and principles inherent in a legalistic religious system. We will carefully examine those texts in the Gospels and Paul’s letters which reveal to us how Jesus and Paul countered legalism and its nefarious consequences. We will scrutinize the legalistic mind-set, and carefully contrast it with the mind of faith. Always, we aim to expand our faith, not fall into the legalistic trap of setting ourselves up as righteous and looking askance at others. We want to use this study to know what faith isn’t, so that by learning from the scripturally-emphasized device of contrast, we can increase our faith.

Lord God, we pray for your grace and guidance as we grow in Christ. Help us know, we ask in Jesus’ name, to discern faith and incorporate it into in our lives.