Legalism and Faith (21)
Contrasting the Legal and Faithful Minds
(Bible Study - September 2000)

We have said from the beginning of the series that to see faith better, we need to know its opposite, legalism. In this article we will take a close look at the contrasting mental operations of the legalist and a believer, whom we will call a "faithist." Figuratively peering inside the skull, we want to find out what beliefs make each of them function the way they do. By expanding into many dimensions of legalism and faith and their outgrowths in life, we can both clarify the entire scope of our problem and summarize and review the material we have presented thus far.

Legalism opposite of spirituality
Faithism is unnatural; the Bible calls it "spirituality," the opposite of carnal thinking (I Cor. 2:14, etc.). Recognizing the legalism that so easily creeps into our lives and worship starts our journey to spirituality. The analysis may appear a tad harsh, and if so, it’s only because of our innate and cultural bias to legalism. We have two options to lessen the impact of this article. One, we can replace "Legalist" with "Pharisee" at the top of the left-hand column of the lists below. We can easily see the Pharisee in the left-hand list, and that provides a safe distance between us and the pointed wording. Although many of the scriptural examples of legalistic thinking and practice will come from the Pharisees, it’s not meant for them; they are long gone.

Another option is to read the left-hand column and think of people whom we know who seem to fit the description. That’s also safe; it allows us to apply it to today’s house of God, but not to us personally. Again, some of the examples may lead us to think of certain people. However, if we have pegged anyone for the legalist side, we belong there, too, for "judgmental" certainly belongs to the realm of the legalist. By no means do we intend to inculpate anyone; we can only point out areas where some good introspective thinking might yield the full benefits of the faith.

Not knowing the drivers of anyone’s faith and the outworking of their spiritual journey, we dare not equate any observation of behavior as necessarily legalistic. Use the list only for your own personal assessment – that’s the only arena a faithist has interest in anyway.

Who we are, or who we aren’t
We really aren’t very close at all to the Pharisees if we look at the overall picture of our spiritual house. We might say we’re a million miles away, but a million miles might still be too close. We started with the covenant of grace, and they with the covenant of works. Turning grace into law constitutes a far worse sin than adding to an already dead covenant of works. New Testament legalism corrupts grace, a far more serious matter (Heb. 6:4-6, Gal. 4:9-11). With grace as a starting point, any backsliding into legalistic practice becomes reason for distress. We want to maintain faith, and keep ourselves from apostatizing into a religion of works and ritual.

"Not being a Pharisee" might make a good start, but it won’t do for a goal. The Pharisees defined themselves by who they weren’t more than who they were. Witness the "confession" in Luke 18:9-12:

"Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee, and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee that I am not as other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice in the week, and I give tithes of all that I possess."

But we can sound like this:

"And a Christadelphian went to meeting and prayed thus, ‘Yahweh, I thank thee that I am not as other men, adulterers, Catholics, or even this Pharisee here, because I know the TRUTH. I go to Bible class twice a week, I do the daily readings, and put money in the collection. Therefore, I have earned a place in your kingdom."

Do we define ourselves by who we aren’t? Not a good idea, for legalism has other adherents besides the Pharisees. Not belonging to them doesn’t give us faith.

The list of contrasts
Key beliefs lead to others, and we will attempt to logically link the connections. First, we’ll just list the contrasts as a series of opposing, but not necessarily mutually exclusive, pairs. Some of the legalist problem only accrues as a matter of emphasis or priority. We all need to deal with our behavior, for instance, but the legalist emphasizes behavior to the exclusion of attitude. We all need book learning, but the legalist sees this as an end itself, not as part of the growth process. What can appear as subtle distinctions to men turn out as different as sheep and goats in the eyes of the judge who sees to the depths of our souls.

Locus of Sin (development of 1.)
Legalist thought centers on belief in external uncleanness – that sin does lie outside of oneself. We have covered this point repeatedly in previous articles (e.g., "Clean and Unclean," 6/00). For the legalist, the belief in external uncleanness begets a sequence of theological nonsense (including belief in a corporeal devil) and vain attempts at righteousness. Every entry on the above list flows directly from this fundamental error. We know that our first principle declares that we are unclean by nature (Rom. 3:19, 5:20, etc.). The recognition that sin is an internal matter of the flesh stands at the core of our need for mercy.

How does confession sound coming from a legalist? How can one reach the depths of need when the real problem isn’t you, but only what you contacted? The faithist knows that while the world has many temptations, the real problem is within. His confession says, "be merciful to me, a sinner."

Mistaking the enemy engenders misguided effort. Our own human nature and habituated sin constitutes the enemy. If we look elsewhere, we’ll fight the wrong battle, as if we really did believe in an external devil, whether it be TV or Catholicism. If we conquer flesh, we can deal with any circumstances and distractions of life.

Avoidance (2.)
Believing that some things out there really are inherently sinful, avoidance strategies rank high for the legalist, and these require vigilant cataloging and labeling. "This is good, this is bad." Things, objects, people, activities become subject to ritual rejection. The Pharisees’ avoidance agenda listed certain foods, people, clothes, work, houses, and so on. Our lists tend more to entertainment and educational choices, career goals, and only occasionally do we trivialize down to dress styles and facial hair and holiday observances. Nonetheless, it’s usually not too hard to find someone who’s glad to tell us what evil to avoid, but it’s all a vain attempt at creating holiness in the heart (Col. 2:20-23).

The faithist knows problems come from within, not from the environment (Mk. 7:20, 21). This fundamental first principle applies to daily life. No amount of avoiding can make him clean or give him a reward; he knows that he doesn’t avoid anything for the sake of staying undefiled, but carefully nourishes his spiritual growth through wise choices. The faithist also knows not to avoid something because it is evil, which it isn’t, but only to involve himself in practices and activities that promote spiritual growth -- we call this overcoming, not avoiding (Rom. 13:10). You outgrow TV, for instance, rather than preach its evils, which might actually get people interested in watching (Rom. 7:8,9, same principle at work).

Restrictions (3., 5.)
With so many potential external defilements, the legalist lives in a narrow, self-restricted world. The faithist, not ruled by fear of defilement, lives in a free and open world (Rom. 14:2) and that gives him many more options for growth and service. We offer again the Samaritan story to illustrate different opportunities for service and helping. The Pharisee’s narrow* world didn’t include bloodied persons, sinners, Gentiles, and many other people and things. They achieved monasticism through the law, without the inconvenience of the Essenes’ troglodytic lifestyle.

The faithist has a broad* view of the world because he sees in it opportunities for learning, growth, and service. The legalist, who has no structure or strategy for growth, but only follows rules, sees no need for this. He doesn’t want to overcome, he wants to avoid. Moreover, because he lives in a much wider world, the faithist can help far more people than the legalist, who is quite busy enough making sure his napkin stays clean.

* This might sound opposed to the oft-cited "straight and narrow" directive; however, that phrase doesn’t occur in Scripture. People wrest it from Matthew 7:14, which refers to a narrow gate and a strait (difficult), not straight way. The gate (faith in Christ) is narrow, as it’s the only way to the Kingdom. The way is difficult (not narrow) through trials of faith (see meaning of the Gr. word for "strait"). The teaching refers to the way of life that few would find, but has no reference to legalistic constrictions of our behavior. (See RSV or Greek text for details.)

Rules (4., 6., 7.)
We have spared no print in earlier articles detailing the excesses of the Pharisees’ rule-making. Rules, rituals, and rewards form the three pillars of legalism. Rules typically fall into the category of dos and do nots. Do nots address the need for avoidance of the unclean, and dos address the need for ritualistic justification. Neither of these have much usefulness, as does preaching, teaching, and looking after another’s welfare. Legalists don’t really help anyone.

Do not rules create an ersatz faith (Col. 2:20-23) and inhibit spiritual growth. Christadelphian do rules tend toward the legislation of worthwhile activities: do the readings, attend class, go to meeting, serve the ecclesias, etc. Necessary activities all, but thinking that they are commands to be ticked off so that one pleases God reduces them to works of the flesh.

The faithist has few rules, mostly dos, which he uses as expedients to develop good spiritual habits. Moreover, he keeps his rules strictly for his own personal improvement. He knows that he gains no credits toward the kingdom, nor does he expect anyone else to abide by his rules.

The faithist lives by principles, not rules. These in turn motivate the necessary behaviors of spiritual life. He knows that attending meeting has spiritual benefits -- learning, worship, fellowship and service – he’s there because he wants to be there, not because he’s supposed to be there. While the legalist thinks that works provide – or even guarantee -- favor with God, a faithist principle such as "I owe my existence to the Creator" surpasses countless rules in effecting godly behavior. Thanksgiving (Psa. 50:14, 23) motivates the works of the faithist. With spiritual development and service as highly-placed values, the necessary behaviors fall accordingly into place. A legalist does ritual and avoidance works in order to obtain salvation; a faithist does useful works because God has already provided salvation through faith in Christ.

Change (8., 9.)
The legalist lexicon lacks this word. Things that people avoid don’t change--if something is unclean, it’s unclean. So the need for personal change evaporates. Synonymous with change, the legalist does not have the word growth in his dictionary either. Just identify and avoid. So the legalist looks upon any kind of change as suspect, unhealthy, regressive, and unnecessary. After decades in the Truth, a legalist still functions at the same level as when newly baptized.

By contrast, the faithist loves the concept of change because he continually changes. As he grows to higher levels of spirituality, his modes of worship, prayer, study, and service will also take new forms. Ideas once thought unworkable become incorporated into his life. This doesn’t mean all changes are good. However good change is necessary.

The "no change" mind set of the legalist is a ripe breeding ground for thoughtless adherence to tradition. When a practice or belief goes untested and maintains its life only because "that’s what we’ve always done (or believed)," then that’s a potentially unhealthy tradition. Such esteem for tradition (Mk. 7:8) blinded the Pharisees to the real word of God. Let this serve as a lesson and warning to us. Any belief or practice requires evaluation for truth and spiritual utility before we hold it fast (I Thess. 5:21).

David Levin

Return to Top