An Astonishing Illustration Of The Arrogance Of Legalism

“AN ASTONISHING ILLUSTRATION OF THE ARROGANCE OF LEGALISM”

John 18.28

Early in the morning in a faraway city, at a faraway time, a group of scrupulously religious old men is culminating the fulfillment of a conspiracy set in motion months before.[1] The men are mostly priests who have spent their lives studying the Hebrew Scriptures and administering the observance of the Law of Moses by their people, the Jews.

We know the city to be Jerusalem, the most important of cities to Jewry, designated the nation’s capital a thousand years before by King David, atop the mount that nearly a thousand years before that was where father Abraham had almost offered up his son, Isaac, as a sacrifice to the one true and living God.[2] At the moment of our concern, Jerusalem was an occupied city for centuries. First, by the Babylonians. Then by the Greeks. Now by the Romans. Worship according to the dictates of God’s Law and their consciences was permitted by the Romans, but not without some interference, inconvenience, and irritation.

The old men, these religious leaders, formed what was termed the Sanhedrin and was led by the high priest, a man named Caiaphas. They had gathered in the middle of the night hours before at Caiaphas’ home to deal with the man they had identified as a threat to their well-being, a disturbance to the established order, and potentially a dangerous provocation to the Romans, who they feared more than they feared God.

That particular day was the holiest of days for the people, the annual commemoration of God’s deliverance of their nation from four centuries of Egyptian bondage. It was one of their high holy days. However, before they could attend to the affairs of that special day, they had to dispose of the troublemaker, Jesus of Nazareth.

They had orchestrated His arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane. They arranged for Him first to be taken to the home of Annas, the former high priest, and then to Caiaphas, the serving high priest. Subjecting Him to false accusations, physical abuse, and violations of the Law of Moses they had spent their lives administering. They had finally convened the meeting of the Sanhedrin at sunrise to formally convict the acknowledged miracle worker and demand His execution by the Romans.

It is at this point we turn to our text in God’s Word, John 18.28, where we find a stunning illustration of what I have chosen to label the arrogance of legalism:

“Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.”

This is one of the numerous passages in God’s Word that one would expect readers to pause and gasp or shake their heads as they read the jarring words. But those kinds of reactions do not often occur. Why so? There are two possible reasons if I understand correctly.

On the one hand, some readers do not grasp the meaning and significance of legalism, how utterly ridiculous it is, how futile it is, and how counterproductive it is. They fail to recognize it. On the other hand, there are readers who are so legalistic that they also possess no recognition of the crime they are guilty of. As the thief justifies taking what is not his, and as the liar rationalizes distorting the truth to achieve her goals, the legalist gives themself a pass on their legalism.

If you imagine legalism is a topic that much is written about, I am afraid you will be disappointed. For the most part, systematic theologies do not take a deep dive into legalism. And most commentators who mention legalism do so in passing. That said, most Christians have opinions about what legalism is.

This message is designed to be a first cut of the topic of legalism, developing the concept and using our text to ponder one illustration of legalism. The sermon will be pretty basic, and you are invited to further study the issue to broaden your understanding of legalism.

My observations will be grouped under six major headings:

First, WHAT LEGALISM MEANS

Speaking very broadly, legalism is the concept of securing or improving salvation by adherence to good works.[3] The notion of salvation by adherence to good works is termed legalism because some form of law (be that law written or generally understood) serves as the basis for defining those good works.

Understood in this way, every religious or secular belief system other than Biblical Christianity is legalistic. Identify any belief system, be it Roman Catholicism, Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism, Islam, Communism, Feminism, or Maoism. To be a good Catholic,[4] Buddhist, Hindu, Communist, Feminist, or whatever, you must subscribe to that belief system’s rules to be that good whatever.

Christianity, on the other hand, the Christian faith, as it is revealed in the Bible, stands alone among all known belief systems as non-legalistic.[5] One’s standing as a Christian is entirely predicated on faith in Christ as opposed to works of any kind, with a host of passages in the Bible illustrating the impossibility of becoming a Christian by doing good works.[6]

Let me expand on that last remark. Some identify as Christians who imagine that one becomes a Christian legally, such as by christening as an infant, baptism as an adult, church membership, keeping the Ten Commandments, or whatever. Much of what the world observes to be Christendom embraces that unscriptural error.

In addition, let me be careful to note that legalism is a trap that even genuinely born-again Christians can fall into. While those who imagine one can become a Christian by doing good works and their dependence on their good works show they do not depend on the merits of Christ for their salvation (and are not true Christians), there is a legalism problem in the Christian community.

Some folks who have come to faith in Christ and possess eternal life have fallen from grace by embracing the notion that a Christian who is saved by grace through faith in Christ can somehow grow as a Christian can be sanctified by some legal means.[7] They are mistaken, and it is a severe problem addressed at length by the Apostle Paul.

In Galatians 3.1-5, Paul challenged the Galatian Christians by pointing out that faith in Christ is not only how a sinner comes into the Christian life, but faith is also the means by which the ongoing Christian life following conversion is to be lived. In short, legalism is the belief that you do something to secure God’s blessings wherever you find it, to become a Christian or to grow as a Christian.

Next, WHAT LEGALISM IGNORES/FORGETS

From this point, let me confine my remarks about legalism to those who are, or imagine themselves to be, Christians. I will no longer refer to Roman Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Feminists, or those who embrace Judaism, Communism, Maoism, Jainism, Sikhism, or Secular Humanism.

Concerning the Christian faith, the legalist ignores or forgets two profoundly important realities, with both the non-Christian who seeks to become a Christian and the believer who has already become a Christian being capable of both ignorance and/or a bad memory on these two points.

The sinner (reality number one) is spiritually dead. As a dead person, the sinner cannot say or do anything that merits God’s favor or commends him or her to God. Why so? That unsaved individual has nothing God wants or can use. All his rigtheousnesses are as filthy rags to God, Isaiah 64.6, and the chasm between God’s holiness and the sinner’s defilement cannot be spanned by anything the unsaved person can say or do. The only means for reaching across the great chasm is God-given faith in the enthroned Savior,[8] Who reaches across that impassible gulf to lay hold of one who trusts Him. And that faith by which the sinner reaches and lays hold of Christ is authored by the Spirit of God[1] and imparted to the sinner by the Gospel’s proclamation.[9] The sinner who trusts the risen from the dead and glorified Savior to do for him what he cannot do for himself, which is please God and cleanse his sins, is said to be justified by his faith in Christ, Romans 5.1. To draw an inadequate word picture, the sinner comes to faith in Christ with empty hands because he has nothing and needs everything, while Christ needs nothing and has everything.

Reality number two has to do with after conversion to Christ. There is a fascinating word used by the Apostle Paul in his letter to the Romans, dealing with one aspect of his inspired understanding of a believer’s salvation. The forms of the word are ἀsthέneia and its adjective ἀsthenήs, with the range of meanings including debilitating illness, incapacity, inadequacy, and impotence.[10] This word describes the individual who can do nothing! Paul used the term in Romans 5.6 to declare the unsaved person’s impotence to do commendable spiritual things as a lost individual and Romans 6.19 to declare the believer’s remaining impotence to do commendable spiritual things even as a saved individual. Listen as I read those two verses:

5.6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

6.19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh.

Thus, Christians are as spiritually incapable after conversion to Christ as we were before conversion to Christ. Whatever we can do as Christians is entirely the result of divine enablement. Being a Christian does not make you capable of doing anything. It is the Spirit of God, not you, who accomplishes what the believer in Christ accomplished. Legalists either never knew these things or have forgotten these things.

Third, WHAT LEGALISM FOSTERS

Legalism fosters pride because legalism presumes the ability to perform, the capacity to do, be it the knowledge of what to do to please God or the ability to do to please God. However, the pride fostered by legalism further worsens the problem related to what has been ignored or forgotten.

How so? Legalism’s attitude is, I can do this! I am capable! God will be pleased with my accomplishment! Or, in the case of the person who has obliterated any God-consciousness, I am pleased with my accomplishment! But can such vain imaginations be true?

In the first place, let us reckon on God’s declared response to a person’s pride, found in James 4.6 and First Peter 5.5:

4.6 But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.

5.5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

Both verses are condensations of Proverbs 3.21-35, showing that God has always been opposed to the absence of humility, so much so that He declares Himself to be your opponent if you are proud.

In the second place, added to the folly of thinking that spiritually you can do, there is the folly of imagining you spiritually know what to do. But Proverbs 14.12 and 16.25 establish that life is counter-intuitive:

“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

Combining these two principles, the legalist imagines two patently false things guaranteed to be faulty by God’s commitment to oppose those who are proud, which includes every legalist. The legalist imagines he can do something to please God, and she reckons she knows what to do to please God. On both counts, the legalist is mistaken.

Fourth, THIS ILLUSTRATION OF LEGALISM

We now return to our text, John 18.28:

The context and first-century practice demand that the entire Jewish Sanhedrin, including the chief priest, be described four times in this verse as “they” and once as “themselves.”

These men were the epitome of legalism, imagining that their good works, as defined by the Law of Moses, stood them in good stead with God. Yet, in their legalistic pride of thinking they both could do works to please God and that they knew what works to do to please God are here seen presenting the Son of God to the Roman governor for His execution by crucifixion!

What is so additionally jarring is their determination to remain ceremonially pure so they might eat the Passover while concluding their efforts to frame an innocent man and devise His execution! Willing to see an innocent man’s life end, the innocent man being the Son of God, they are scrupulous about stepping over a threshold! They are planning and executing a murder while acting out their concern to avoid ceremonial defilement!

Fifth, CONTEMPORARY EXAMPLES OF LEGALISM

Lest you delude yourself into imagining legalism is confined to the Bible record, let me relate some contemporary examples of legalism in its various forms from everyday life. I cite these examples for one reason only, to show you that accuse others of legalism (perhaps you use the term hypocrisy) that you are more than likely just as guilty of legalism yourself.

Let me begin with Mr. Sanchez. At my first pastorate, a lovely young divorcee began attending our Church with her child. After a few weeks, her high school gym coach ex-husband, the son of a Pentecostal preacher and a notorious womanizer around town, who preferred dating girls he used to coach in high school, also began to attend our Church. However, after two or three services, he informed me that he would not attend our Church anymore and would do what he could to prevent his ex-wife and their child from ever attending again. What was the reason for this notorious womanizer’s unwillingness to attend our Church? Horror of horrors! Our women wore earrings. Here was a guy who routinely engaged in illicit sexual activity with young women just out of high school that he might have groomed when they were his students. Yet he overlooked his fornication to be disturbed by our ladies’ earrings!

Let me continue with feminists who attend Churches—expressing my opinion based upon remarks made by the internationally famous Dr. Jordan Peterson, the clinical psychologist and now retired university professor. He has observed that men and women are different, and studies show they sin against others differently. Women characteristically engage in reputation destruction using gossip, innuendo, and other forms of verbal bullying, while men are more likely to resort to threats of violence.[11] What do these people seem to do concerning Churches?

My nonscientific observations lead me to believe they exercise their brands of legalism as follows. Women resort to accusing our people of being unfriendly, measuring them by some undeclared standard or rule. Their accusations are typically leveled at those not in a position to know about or address the issue raised, so people cannot defend themselves against the accusations, or broad and sweeping generalizations are made that fly in the face of how people in our Church typically behave. But that is the point, isn’t it? The point of the accusations? To justify leaving the Church. To rationalize being unresponsive to the Gospel. To dislodge someone else from continuing to attend for fear, he might develop into a spiritual leader. I have seen the pattern repeated over the decades. Guys are different. Guys leave without comment, with soy boys modeling the women who lead them. Ours is not a Church that soy boys or the women who prefer soy boys feel comfortable attending.

Legalism? How about observations of the practices of legalism proximate to some preachers? Are you up for some of those? Would you conclude that an evangelist with strict dietary requirements imposed on congregations hosting him for special meetings was being legalistic for talking down to those who did not maintain his dietary practices? And what about when he was observed eating a half dozen Snickers candy bars? With a touch of hypocrisy? Then there are pastors whose entire philosophy of ministry encourages Church members to employ a legalism that measures spirituality according to how pleased the pastor is with you rather than your walk with God. That is a common form of legalism in our day. The clue to discovering it is when Church members are positively afraid of displeasing the pastor rather than being disappointed by their unfaithfulness to God. Here is a final observation of pastoral practice legalism. How can a longtime Christian and student of the Bible not arrive at opinions and convictions about Bible translations? That said, how is it possible for a pastor who embraces the soul liberty and priesthood of the believer so cherished by Baptists to force, coerce, bully, and intimidate anyone’s selection of a Bible translation without engaging in legalism? So, erecting unbiblical requirements to impose on others is legalism, and it is related to hypocrisy because no one can be a consistent legalist.

Of course, in our culture, we have observed different varieties of legalism. First, the Covid Pandemic lockdown practices were foisted on people by those who did not heed those requirements themselves. Can anyone say, “Governor Newsome and the French Laundry?”[12] Or how about Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass’ longtime opposition to the Second Amendment, who recently reported her residence was burglarized and two firearms were stolen?[13] I seek to make a point not to wag a finger at the governor or the mayor. The larger point is that legalism is utterly untenable. Rules for me and not for thee will always backfire. That is why legalism is no way to deal with God, try to live a Christian life, or accomplish anything else worthwhile. Not to say you should throw out all rules at your house, in your company, or concerning law and order in our community or nation at large. The fact that we are sinful creatures demands that we impose order of some kind. Only an anarchist would argue otherwise.

Let me wrap up this point by commenting on instances of Church kids’ legalism. I am not trying to be mean, but aren’t many Church kids susceptible to legalism? Consider two things about being a child growing up in a Gospel preaching Church and see if you don’t agree with me. On the one hand, every unsaved person, no matter what they think they believe, in the deep recesses of their mind and heart, embraces the notion that you have to be good enough to go to heaven. Kids think that as much as grownups believe that. What do you imagine the Devil whispers in a child’s ear, thinking that you have to be good to go to heaven and then seeing Daddy do bad things or experiencing Mommy being very disappointing? It creates a conflict. Of course, it does. Who do you think the conflicted child will side with, Mom and Dad or God and Jesus? And as the youngster gets older and the more they are around other Church members, the more likely they will observe inconsistencies, personal flaws, and defects in the congregation. Each lost child can choose to focus on various Church members’ flaws, inconsistencies, and misconduct or can direct their attention to the Savior. Is that not true? I will wager that every kid who grew up in Church and reached adulthood without Christ is someone whose attention was more fixed on parental misconduct, Church members’ flaws, or such issues as that, and not the truthfulness of the Gospel, the reliability of the Bible, or the excellence of the Savior. And they will do that while paying no attention to their sins.

Finally, THE ANTIDOTE TO LEGALISM; LOVE, HUMILITY, AND GRACE

Perhaps you are a Christian dad or mom. You may very well not be a legalist. But your unsaved youngster most certainly is a legalist. And you or I may unconsciously slip into legalistic behavior and conduct from time to time without realizing it. It is not difficult to do that.

What do you do to address the legalistic tendencies of your unsaved children, your unsaved spouse, your unsaved parents, your unsaved colleagues, your unsaved neighbors, and others who (despite their protests) have deeply rooted notions that you get right with God and prepare for heaven by doing good?

Can you tell them again and again and again? Yes, but will they likely listen to or hear what you say with comprehension? That is not likely at all. People rarely listen. But they do watch. They do scan. They do sneak a peek. Amen?

Because people do scan, watch, sneak a peek, and are on the lookout for your flaws and shortcomings, especially your kids, here is how you disabuse them of the notion that legalism will get them anything. Are you ready? Two characteristics must be a part of your everyday life:

First, you must remove any indication that your relationship with them and their relationship with you is performance-based. Legalism is predicated on your ability to perform and do good works to earn blessings, including salvation. So your relationship with your child and others must be relationships that do not run hot and cold depending on performance. I am not suggesting you not correct your child. Remember, chastening is an act of love, according to Hebrews 12.5-10. The mother or father who is very soft and undemanding of their children does not read the Bible with understanding. Your children must honor you. You cannot settle for less. That said, you need to learn to love the child you are displeased with rather than withhold love from the child you are displeased with. There is too much conditional love in modern parenting, and it is no surprise to me when children lose all hope and stop trying to please their parents. And if you don’t know the difference, we need to talk.

Second, you need to be eager, and I mean eager, to seize upon your shortcomings and personal failures as opportunities to minister grace to your children and other unsaved people. How does your youngster think she has to be good to go to heaven when Daddy has just admitted to her that he was wrong and needs her forgiveness? How does your unsaved friend or loved one cling to the notion that only good people go to heaven (and thinking you might be a hypocrite for being so sure you are going to heaven) if you readily admit to the sin he confronted you with and humbly ask forgiveness and offer restitution?

The constancy of your love, the humility with which you seek forgiveness without hesitation when you sin, and the grace of God in your life. What is grace? It is divine enablement. It is God’s favor. God’s provision to you by various means enables you to live as you do and be what you are (assuming how you live and what you are reflects God’s blessings). But how will your son or daughter know it is God’s grace? They may think you are just superb. They may think you are special. They may imagine you to be most excellent. But you are not! God is superb. God is special. God is most excellent. Therefore, you must be careful to admit your faults and seek forgiveness while bragging on God and the means of grace for the commendable parts of your life.

“Daddy, you are wonderful!” “Thank you, honey, but God is the wonderful One. And He blessed Daddy to give him such a wonderful girl as you.”

“Hey, neighbor. I appreciate how you seem to really have it together with those sons of yours.” “I appreciate the compliment, but my boys are answers to many prayers to God, the good wife God has given me, and what little wisdom I have from the Bible.”

Legalism is a dumb concept with regard to God, despite being the underlying principle of every belief system known to man other than the Christian faith. We will never be good enough, smart enough, or anything to establish, much less maintain, a relationship with God.

Those members of the Sanhedrin standing there to conclude their conspiracy to commit murder but refusing to step over a threshold so they could eat the Passover. How dumb could they have been? But it was the result of pride to imagine they could please God by doing such a thing. And this applies to every area of life. We will always fall short. We will always disappoint. Failure is inevitable, especially with little eyes always watching.

The Biblical remedy to legalism and every other sin? Does this not conform to First John 1.8, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us?” Concerning God, Psalm 32.5, “I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin.”

Concerning others, including your children? James 5.16, “Confess your faults one to another,” especially to your children and unsaved loved ones. Show them your dependence upon Christ and the grace of God for your soul’s salvation rather than your ability to do good.

__________

[1] John 11.1-53

[2] Genesis 22

[3] Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, (New York: Barnes & Noble Books, 1996), page 1034.

[4] This link to a Facebook video features an accurate condensation of Roman Catholicism’s view of salvation presented by a committed practicing Roman Catholic, https://www.facebook.com/reel/1557223528120682?mibextid=9drbnH&s=yWDuG2&fs=e

[5] This article by Kimi Harris is a good treatment of legalism. https://www.christianity.com/wiki/christian-terms/what-is-legalism-definition-and-examples.html

[6] Genesis 15.6; John 1.12-13; 3.16; 14.6; Romans 4.1-8; 5.1-2; 11.6; Galatians 2.16; 3.6; Ephesians 2.8-10; Titus 3.5

[7] Galatians 5.4

[8] Psalm 16.11; 110.1; Matthew 26.64; Mark 12.36; 14.62; 16.19; Luke 20.42; 22.69; John 3.13; 13.1; 14.2-4; Acts 1.9-11; 2.33, 34-35; 7.56; Romans 8.34; Ephesians 1.20; 6.9; Colossians 3.1; Second Thessalonians 1.7; Hebrews 1.3, 13; 8.1; 9.24; 10.12-13; 12.2; 1 Peter 3.22; Revelation 19.11

[9] Romans 10.17

[10] Bauer, Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2000), pages 142-143, and Gerhard Kittel, Editor, Theological Dictionary Of The New Testament, Vol I, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), pages 490-493.

[11] https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/KtbxLrjNcFbNsMtVQtZrHBwSRSwbGQwTdB?projector=1

[12] https://californiaglobe.com/articles/following-french-laundry-debacle-gov-newsom-blames-chp-detail-for-family-exposure-to-covid/

[13] https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/10/politics/karen-bass-burglary-los-angeles/index.html

Question? Comment?

Would you like to contact Dr. Waldrip about this sermon? Fill out the form below to send him an email. Thank you.

Calvary Road Baptist Church

Question? Comment?