|
|
 |
LEGALISM
1
Preface
This
discussion paper was prepared in response to a request from Cultwatch
who expressed concern at the legalistic practices and traditions of
some churches. This paper
is available from their website at www.cultwatch.com.
The
author is a retired secondary school teacher who has no formal theological
training. I do not pretend
to be infallible and I welcome criticisms, corrections and additions
to this paper. I prefer
the hard question to the easy answer.
The bibliography at the end of the paper reflects not only my
research but also my indebtedness to others. It
is assumed that the reader accepts the final authority of Scripture
in spiritual matters. It
is my hope and prayer that many Christians will find this paper useful.
Not every reader is expected to agree with the conclusions reached.
However, it was interesting and profitable for me to write this
paper and I pray that others may also find it useful.
The
legalist experiences practical and doctrinal difficulties understanding
grace, justification by faith, sanctification by the Holy Spirit, and
the relationship of faith to works. Hopefully the Appendices on these subjects clarify some of
these difficulties. For a more detailed discussion of these important topics
the reader is referred to standard Bible dictionaries. May
the Lord give you spiritual insight and understanding as you read this
paper. Only God’s Spirit
can enlighten you to find hope in the Cross of Christ alone.
If a study of this paper simply educates the mind or enlarges
one’s knowledge of the Bible, rather than bringing a God-given change
of heart, it will have been as useful as a talisman or a good-luck charm. Unless
otherwise identified, Scripture quotations are from the New International
Version of the Bible. Jim
Peacock MA (Hons), Diploma of Teaching. “The
truth is cruel, but it can be loved, and it makes free those who have
loved it.”[1] “You
will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” [2] “May
I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through
which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.” [3] “It
is for freedom that Christ has set us free.
Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again
by a yoke of slavery.” [4]
2
Contents.
1
Preface
3
Overview.
Considerable
ink has been spilt in recent years on the opposing beliefs of legalism
and grace as God’s people have come to grips with the first century
AD heresy of legalism. Much
of what the author has to say was initially hewn at the coalface of
daily Christian experience within the context of a church that grew
increasingly legalistic over a period of nearly forty years.
After many years of blessing mixed with frustration, disappointment,
and partial victory, the author finally found personal freedom in living
by grace. Personal freedom
in Christ is a gift from God, to be used in the service of others. It
is a characteristic of human nature that, in different ways, we try
to add to the “finished work” of the cross.
Legalism is an inherent part of our sinful human nature for we
find salvation by faith in Christ alone, hurtful to our spiritual pride.
Church and individual have frequently repeated the foolishness
of the Galatians. In all
our Christian activities, it is easy for us to miss what matters most
to God, love for God and love for our neighbour (Matthew 22: 37-40).
Evangelicals
often pride themselves on their superior knowledge of the Bible, and
pentecostals\charismatics usually claim a superior spiritual experience,
while older denominations sometimes pride themselves on centuries of
tradition. Yet it is easy
for all churches of all persuasions within the community of the Christian
faith, to be blind and deaf to uncomfortable biblical truths. In
every culture, the gospel will be clothed with some cultural traditions.
Whether we like it or not, we all depend to some extent on Christian
tradition. The problem
seems to be that we do not realize this reliance.
Consequently, there is the ever-present danger that what some
call “principles”, or “essentials of the faith”, or “dogma”, become
legalistic rules and the basis of a performance-based false Christianity.
Jesus emphasized that human tradition
can never have the same authority as the Word of God.
He forced people to look beyond the cultural and the traditional
to find the essential core of God’s Word.
The apostle Paul said to the Galatians that fellowship with God
is a trust in Christ that works through love: “The
only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.” (5:6) For the Christian, obedience is to the indwelling Holy Spirit, not to
the letter of the law, or religious rules.
As Paul has it, “Not of
the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives
life.” (2 Corinthians 3:6) The
Pharisees of the New Testament were dedicated legalists and traditionalists
with a loveless, impersonal, and mechanical religion based on man-made
rules that Jesus emphatically rejected.
In short, legalism is
substituting law for grace, achievement for faith. Yet many believers
have unthinkingly adopted a checklist of acceptable and unacceptable
behaviour that requires such things as church attendance, a particular
style of worship or ceremony, compulsory tithing, a dress code, or undue
deference to church leaders, or denominational traditions, to the neglect
of “more important matters – justice,
mercy and faithfulness” (Matthew 23:23). The
Pharisees provide a solemn warning about the danger of self-righteous
hypocrisy. They began as
sincere people who valued God’s truth but over time they developed their
own understanding of the Old Testament to the point where Jesus said
their own traditions, human rules and regulations, contradicted God’s
revelation. It is easy
to condemn this legalism, yet be guilty of it ourselves in our relationships
with others. Salvation
by works may be dressed in the most evangelical or charismatic of clothes
and imposed on an unthinking congregation. Why were the Galatians and why are we so often lured
back into legalism?
There is always the temptation to live by a code of behaviour
that gives us a sense of belonging and security but which sets us apart
from other believers. Legalism
is the Bible plus something or grace plus something.
Reader, it is a challenging exercise to attempt the detachment
of any spiritual baggage to the gospel of the NT by making a clear distinction
between the gospel itself and the religious culture of our own church
or denomination. God would
have us trust and obey him in a personal, daily, living relationship
that is nourished by his Spirit and dependent on his grace in Christ
alone. Given
that human nature is basically the same in every generation, all
Christians should beware of replacing inner spiritual reality with outward
religious ritual. Those
who place human traditions above the Bible, eventually lose the power
of God’s Word in their own lives.
How tragic that those who profess to be Christians should so
practice their faith that they become worse for doing so. The danger with all religious rituals and institutions
is that they often acquire a life of their own.
Whereas once they blessed people, later they oppress people.
What for one generation may be a test of truth and a means of
blessing may become an idol and a hindrance to another generation.
For example, in the OT God
commanded Moses to make a bronze figure of a snake and set it on a pole,
so that anyone bitten by a snake need only look at the bronze serpent
and he would live (Numbers 21:4-9; 1 Corinthians 10:9, 11).
Centuries later King Hezekiah of Judah destroyed the bronze serpent
because the people had made it an idol and gave it superstitious respect
(2 Kings 18:4). William
Barclay explains: “A
church is in danger of death when it begins to worship its own past,
when it lives on its memories instead of finding a challenge in its
hopes, when it is more taken up with its traditions than its ideals.
There are churches which are more concerned with correct ritual
than they are with living vitality.
A church is in danger of death when it loves systems more than
it loves Jesus Christ. The
danger that any church runs is that it should become a ‘club’.
Every church activity is necessary, but only as it serves the
primary activity of bringing men and women face to face with Jesus Christ.”
[5] We
need to honestly ask ourselves these questions: Is my personal faith
and my church based on the Bible?
How much is there of worthwhile tradition based on the
Bible (statements of faith, forms of worship, observance of the sacraments,
good works)? How much is
there of harmless tradition (practices and beliefs agreeable
with the Bible)? How much
is there of false tradition (practices and beliefs opposed to
the Bible)? How can you
break through the barriers of tradition? |
4
What Is Legalism?
The
following definitions and descriptions of legalism offer various insights
into the meaning of a term that is not found as a word in the Bible. (1)
“The attempt to acquire merit
before God through the performance of various rituals and practices.”
[6] (2)
“Legalism is a distortion of
obedience that can never produce truly good works.
Its first fault is that it skews motive and purpose, seeing good
deeds as essentially ways to earn more of God’s favour than one has
at the moment. Its second
fault is arrogance. Belief
that one’s labour earns God’s favour begets contempt for those who do
not labour in the same way. Its
third fault is lovelessness in that its self-advancing purpose squeezes
humble kindness and creative compassion out of the heart. So
far, then, from enriching our relationship with God, as it seeks to
do, legalism in all its forms does the opposite.
It puts that relationship in jeopardy and, by stopping
us focusing on Christ, it starves our souls while feeding our pride.
Legalistic religion in all its forms should be avoided like the
plague.” [7] (3) “Legalism is the attempt to please God by erecting hard and fast rules where the Bible does not give them, and then making them binding on oneself and others. It is not a matter of following those things that are commanded, or that have clear biblical principles associated with them. It is a matter of raising so-called doubtful things to the level of commands.”[8] (4)
“Legalism effectively ousts love as the dynamic of the gospel and the
Christian life (and so banishes joy from religion), by reducing both
to obedience or conformity to
a set of external commands or rules, after the manner of the scribes
and Pharisees in the gospels.” [9] (5)
“The Pharisees mistook religious practices for real devotion.
Have we not known people who kept all the rules, whose habits
were faultless, and yet whose “sanctity” was cold and unattractive?
They lacked a sense of the significant, giving priority to trivialities,
putting procedure before people, and conformity before compassion. Their religion was all
law and no grace.” [10] (6)
“Legalism is an attitude, a mentality based on pride. It is an obsessive conformity to an artificial standard for
the purpose of exalting oneself.
A legalist assumes the place of authority and pushes it to unwarranted
extremes. It
results in illegitimate control, requiring unanimity, not unity.
Pride, which is at the
heart of legalism, works guilt, fear and shame.
It leads to an emphasis on what should not
be, and what one should not
do. It flourishes in a
drab context of negativism.” [11] (7)
“Legalistic obedience, life before
God based on religious achievement, does not bring one into right
relationship with God (Galatians 2:16; 3:3) but to alienation from him
(Galatians 5:4), to rejection of God’s grace (Galatians 2:21), to a
life of legalistic bondage (Galatians 4:9, 21; 5:1), and to the curse
of death. (Galatians 3:10–13)” [12] (8) “Whenever men forget the love and the forgiveness and the service and the mercy that are at the heart of religion and replace them by the performance of rules and regulations religion is in decline. Christianity has at all times consisted far more in doing things than in refraining from doing things. People matter far more than systems. Persons are far more important than rituals. The final arbiter in the use of all things is love and not law.” [1 (9)
“Is it fundamentally a matter of what we do for God or of what He
has done for us? The
truth is we cannot boast in ourselves and in the cross simultaneously.
If we boast in ourselves and in our ability to save ourselves,
we shall never boast in the cross and in the ability of Christ crucified
to save us. We have to
choose. Only if we have humbled ourselves as hell-deserving sinners
shall we give up boasting of ourselves, fly to the cross for salvation
and spend the rest of our days glorying in the cross.” [14] Summary Legalism
attempts to please God with man-made rules that are directly opposite
to God’s saving grace in Christ.
It is contrary to the principle of faith as it attempts to add
to the work of the Cross by Law-like works and thus deny the sufficiency
of Christ’s sacrifice. It
undermines Christian assurance and joy and makes for a self-centred
introspective spirituality. Since
it is spiritual and often respectable, it is subtle, deadly and dangerous.
It is based on human pride in the obedience accomplished and
in the works performed. It
causes a man to adopt false priorities and values while at the same
time he considers that he is growing in grace and holiness.
5 The
Religious Legalism Of The Scribes And The Pharisees.
5.1
The Scribes Or Teachers Of The Law
The
Greek word “grammateus” Strong’s
#1122, occurs 67 times in the NT.
In the KJV it is translated “scribe”
in every occurrence except Acts 19:35, where it is translated as “town-clerk”.
Other versions favour “teachers of the law” (NIV; TEV) or “doctors of the law” (NEB).
Arndt and Gingrich comment, “A term for experts in the law, scholars
versed in the law, scribes mentioned with the high priests and the elders
with whom they formed the Sanhedrin.” [15]
Thayer
says, “In the Bible, a man learned in the Mosaic law and in the sacred
writings, an interpreter, teacher.
The scribes explained the meaning of the sacred oracles; examined
the more difficult and subtle questions of the law; added to the Mosaic
Law decisions of various kinds thought to elucidate its meaning and
scope, and did
this to the detriment of religion.” [16] Thus
the scribes or “lawyers” were scholars and teachers of Scripture,
the custodians of Jewish traditions and experts in the study of the
law of Moses (the Torah). In
Jesus' day, they were usually associated with the Pharisees (Matthew
12:38; Mark 7:5; Luke 6:7) and the Sanhedrin, the highest legal and
administrative body in the Jewish state. They questioned the identity and credentials of Jesus (Mark 2:6; 3:22; 11:27-28) and they disliked his frequent association with the disreputable elements of society (Mark 2:15–17). As the major opponents of Jesus, they were involved in his trial and mocked him on the cross (Mark 15:31). For
the scribes, following the traditions that had grown up around the Law
became the measure of a person’s devotion and spirituality.
The scribes’ official interpretation of the meaning of the Law
eventually became more important than the Law itself.
Consequently “the results were an exceedingly shallow view of
religious and moral life. Religion
was reduced to legal formalism. All
religious and moral life was dragged down to the level of law.” [17] Christ's teaching forms a striking contrast
to that of the scribes.
The scribes relied on what "was
said long ago" (Matthew 5:21, 33) whereas Jesus “taught as one who had authority and not as their teachers of the law"
(Matthew 7:29). The scribes
taught only their disciples whereas Jesus “had compassion on the crowds" (Matthew 9:36).
The scribes taught only in their own schools while Jesus taught
in "all the towns and villages
and synagogues." (Matthew 9:35).
Although the majority opposed Christ (Matthew 21:15), some believed
(Matthew 8:19). 5.2
The Pharisees Were Nit-Picking Formalists and Religionists.
While
many scribes were Pharisees, the two groups were not identical.
The origin of the Pharisees is obscure but seems to begin in
the second century B.C. Although
the root meaning of the word "Pharisee" is uncertain, it is
probably related to the Hebrew verb “parash”, meaning "separate"
or "divide." [18]
Thus the name "Pharisee" is usually taken to mean "the
separated ones." It
may mean that they separated themselves from the common people or that
they separated themselves to the study and interpretation of the Law.
Also they would have nothing to do with the Gentiles whom they
considered to be “unclean”. In
first century AD Palestine they were one of the power brokers of Jewish
society. In
general, the Pharisees in the
NT are a sad indictment of religious legalism, sectarianism, traditionalism,
isolationism, and formalism. They began as an important spiritual movement that promised
moral renewal, a purging of the nation’s idolatry, and a restoration
of national reverence for God’s Law.
However,
the Pharisees developed their own body of interpretations, expansions,
and applications of the Law that they came to regard as of divine origin.
Mark (7:3) describes these extra-biblical
rules as “the tradition of the
elders” (NIV) or “old established tradition” (NEB) or “the
tradition of their ancestors” (Knox). Such
is human nature that valuable movements and worthwhile institutions
become corrupt over time. The Pharisees had played an important part in Jewish history
by preserving faith at a critical time.
God at first used them,
but ultimately abandoned them, when hypocrisy and self-righteous
pride predominated. Regrettably,
some aspects of Church history bear testimony to this truth.
Eventually the Pharisees allied with the rationalistic Sadducees
and implicated themselves in the murder of Jesus Christ. Some
of Christ’s fiercest critics throughout the four gospels were the Pharisees,
or “Separatists” of the day, whose religion
was basically negative. All
that mattered to them was that they should not be contaminated by the
evil of sinners in general and tax collectors in particular.
The God they served seemed more concerned with outward holiness
than with compassion and grace toward needy people.
They forgot the spirit of the Law and they tried to earn God’s
favour through spiritual perfectionism
i.e. keeping man-made rules and regulations.
They
were always on the lookout for violations of their non-biblical traditions.
They preferred petty and oppressive rituals that dictated their
lifestyle, such as fasting for fasting sake, elaborate hand washing,
tithing garden herbs leaf by leaf, and endless rules that governed the
Sabbath. This misguided zeal led to a fiercely judgmental attitude toward those who disagreed with them.
However, not all the Pharisees experienced the wrath of Jesus.
Nicodemus (John 3:1 ff; 19:39) and Gamaliel (Acts 5:34 ff) were
two notable exceptions, and Jesus had friendly relations with some Pharisees
(Luke 7:36; 13:1 ff; Mark 12:34). In
Jesus’ day the Pharisees controlled the synagogues and exercised great
control over the general population.
They calculated that the Law had 613 commandments,
248 positive, and 365 negative. [19] They attempted
to keep them all, at least outwardly.
Like Saul (Paul) the Pharisee they were “as
for legalistic righteousness, faultless.” (Philippians 3:6). But they were preoccupied with the petty rules of their elaborate
religious code and neglectful of the higher realities of justice, mercy
and love. Jesus warned,
“Unless your righteousness surpasses
that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly
not enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:20).
This righteousness that Jesus recommended finds its expression
in love for God and love for others (Matthew 22: 37-40). The Pharisees thought they could reach God's standards
by keeping all the outward rules.
Luke says they "trusted
in themselves that they were righteous." (18:9).
This can easily happen when religious people think God's will
is the same as their list of what they can and cannot do.
Their desire to keep all of God's laws was commendable, but they
put the emphasis on the wrong places so that minor details became a
major concern, and they forgot the more important things.
The Pharisees despised "sinners" especially people
like tax collectors and prostitutes.
Christians need to remember
that they themselves are sinners in God's eyes, and that Christ died
for everyone. Jesus denounced the Pharisees as hypocrites who "did not practice what they preach" (Matthew 23:3), who did not live up to their own high standards of righteousness, and who put burdensome rules upon others which they themselves did not keep (Matthew 23:4). They used clever but false reasoning to evade the spirit of the law while carrying out its letter (Mark 7:9-13). Their religion was a cloak to hide dishonesty. They gloried in their own righteousness and did good works only to be seen by men (Luke 18:9-14). John
the Baptist had called them a "brood
of vipers" that rested complacently in their relationship to
Abraham (Matthew 3:7). Jesus
seconded this verdict (Matthew 23:33).
He said that the heart must be right with God, and not merely
the external actions. He regretted that he had to speak as he did about those who
should have been trustworthy guides, but in fact were leading their
followers to spiritual disaster.
Jesus’ hard words recorded in Matthew chapter 23 were spoken
in love. The
Pharisees believed that the oral “traditions
of the elders”, (Mark 7:3,5) though not part of the written law
of Moses, had been given to Moses by God at Mount Sinai.
Therefore to the Pharisees, the oral tradition was of equal authority
with the Torah or Mosaic Law.
During the second century BC, the oral traditions were recorded
as the Mishnah. Later the
Mishnah was supplemented by the Gemara, which was a commentary on the
Mishnah. Finally the two
commentaries, the Mishnah and the Gemara, together became known as the
Talmud. The Hebrew word
“Talmud” means "study" or "learning. At
some points during Jewish history, the Talmud has been considered equal
to or better than the Scripture itself.
The rabbis later said, “The Scriptures are water; the Mishnah,
wine; but the Gemara, spiced wine.” [20]
Jesus encountered this attitude among the Pharisees even before
the existence of the Talmud (Matthew 15:3).
Christians
must be careful not to make the same mistake with their own traditions. As
E. M. Blaiklock comments: “It is always and everywhere true that any system of religion, or any interpretation of Scripture, which makes religion difficult to follow, irrelevant to common life, hard to understand, and impossible for ordinary men and women, is wrong. The ‘common people heard him [Jesus] gladly’ because He brought God near, made Heaven real, and faith relevant to life. Those who, then and now, deny men this gladness, merit the words of His rebuke.” [21]
6
Jesus Likened The Teaching Of The Pharisees To “Yeast”: Matthew
16: 6, 11-12.
"Be
careful," Jesus said to them. "Be
on your guard against the yeast
of the Pharisees and Sadducees." “How
is it you don't understand that I was not talking to you about bread?
But be on your guard
against the yeast of the
Pharisees and Sadducees."
Then they understood that he was not telling them to guard
against the yeast used in
bread, but against the teaching
of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” As
the yeast fungus multiplies, and infiltrates, throughout a piece of
dough, it symbolically illustrates a spiritual truth.
As Paul said, “A little yeast works through a whole batch
of dough.” (1 Corinthians 5:6; Galatians 5:9).
The transforming effect of yeast or leaven can be either positive
or negative. While
Jesus had earlier used yeast as a symbol for the extensive growth of
God’s kingdom (Matthew 13:33), it was also an
image for the corrupting power of evil to extend its influence.
Jesus twice warned his disciples against the “yeast”,
that is, the inner
corruption of the teaching of the two groups of religious leaders.
“Be on your guard” or
“Beware” (KJV)
or “Keep a sharp eye out for” (The Message) translates the Greek
“prosecho”, Strong’s #4337. It
means “to hold the mind towards, i.e. pay attention to, be cautious
about.” [22] Vine defines
it as "to turn one's mind or attention to a thing by being on one's
guard against it; it suggests devotion of thought and effort to a thing.”
[23]
Thayer says it means, “to give heed to oneself, to guard oneself.”
[24] Typically the Pharisees added to God’s Word while the
Sadducees subtracted from it.
False teaching is like yeast
in its ability to totally infect a person or a church. People may be unconsciously won over to it.
At first the disciples were focused on real bread and did not
understand the symbolism. The
Pharisees were legalists and traditionalists who made issues out of
trivial matters and meaningless rules.
Yeast symbolized
their preoccupation with human traditions, their hypocritical ritual,
their obsession with an outward show of religious devotion, and their
control of others. The
Sadducees were rationalists and skeptics who did not believe in resurrection. Yeast figuratively described their worldly skepticism with
its love of status, wealth, and power. As
Alfred Barnes, the nineteenth century American Presbyterian minister
comments: “Leaven
passes secretly, silently, but certainly.
None can see its progress.
So it was with the doctrines of the Pharisees.
They were insinuating, artful, and plausible.
They concealed the
real tendency of their doctrines, they instilled them secretly into
the mind, and they pervaded all the faculties, like leaven.” [25] Paul’s
figurative use of yeast, in 1 Corinthians 5:8 (“the
yeast of malice and wickedness”) and in Galatians 5:9, confirms
its negative use as a symbol of what is corrupt and what corrupts.
Paul used the idea of yeast’s ability to permeate flour to warn
the Corinthians about the destructive effect of tolerated sin within
their church.
Even a small amount of
yeast, or corruption, can influence a large number of people to believe
false doctrine.
7
An Argument Over The Sabbath: Mark 2:23-28 (Matthew 12:1-8)
“One
Sabbath Jesus was going through the grain fields, and as his disciples
walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain.
The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what
is unlawful on the Sabbath?" He
answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were
hungry and in need? In
the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and
ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."
Then
he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.
So the
Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath." 7.1
Legalism Comes From Mankind, Not God.
This
incident describes an area of conflict between Jesus and his disciples
and the religious authorities.
The word “Sabbath”
means “to cease” or “to desist”. Jesus was not
breaking any OT law concerning the Sabbath, but the Pharisees’ interpretation
and misunderstanding of it. The
generosity of the Law allowed hungry people to eat the ripe ears of
grain while walking through the fields (Deuteronomy 23:25).
The
Pharisees made the Sabbath their special preserve. Plucking the ears of
grain was technically regarded by them as a form of reaping, and rubbing them to extract the kernel as a form of
grinding. Both reaping
and grinding were two kinds of work that were forbidden on the Sabbath
(Exodus 34:21). They made
a burdensome bondage of the Sabbath with 39 types of petty actions forbidden
on that day. They
made the observance of the Sabbath more demanding than God had commanded.
Their narrow interpretation of the fourth commandment (Exodus
20:8) was typical of their nit-picking beliefs, and their small mindedness
put them on a collision course with Jesus.
They saw him and his followers as law-breakers. 7.2
The Principle Of Human Need Supersedes All Ritual And Ceremony.
The
irony of Jesus saying, “Have you never read?” to religious experts who prided themselves
on their understanding of scripture, is apparent. Jesus countered their misinterpretation of scripture by quoting
a scriptural example that did not fit their narrow legalistic views.
To him, OT scripture was a higher level of authority than the
tradition of the Pharisees. He
reminded the Pharisees that David and his men, when they were hungry,
broke the ceremonial law (1 Samuel chapter 21; Leviticus 24:9), yet
God did not condemn them. In
effect, Jesus said that if you condemn my disciples, then you also condemn
David and his men who were guilty of a greater sin.
The Pharisees could not deny this example from scripture that
showed that where a human need existed, God allowed ritual regulations
to be disregarded.
7.3
The Principle That The Sabbath Was Made For Mankind.
But
Jesus went on to appeal to an earlier and higher precedent.
“Made” (27) means “made
by God”, while “for man” means
“for his benefit.” While
the Sabbath was to be observed as a day holy to the Lord, Jesus pointed
out that the goal of Sabbath observance was to benefit and bless people
both physically and spiritually.
In the order of events in Genesis, Adam is created on the sixth
day, followed by a seventh day of rest and freedom.
In other words, mankind was made first,
and then the Sabbath was made for his welfare (Genesis 2:1-3). God
commanded people to rest one day in seven for their own good, rather
than as an end in itself, which was how the Pharisees thought of it.
The Sabbath was not made first, and then mankind made with regard
to it. As the Sabbath was
meant for man's good, the law concerning it should be interpreted so
as to further his well-being in general.
This special day was also intended for actions of compassion
and mercy, as Jesus makes plain in Matthew’s account (12:12). 7.4
Jesus Rejected Man-Made Religious Rules.
Jesus
emphatically rejected the Halakah, the complicated series of rules made
by the scribes, which was considered by them to have almost an equal
authority with the OT. Jesus
emphasized the intent or spirit of the Law while the Pharisees rigidly
required the letter of the Law as well as their own ridiculous interpretations
of it. In
Matthew’s account of this incident, Jesus quotes one of his favourite
OT verses, Hosea 6:6, “I
desire mercy, not sacrifice.”
Thus Jesus shifted the issue from strict obedience to the detailed
laws of the OT to one’s heart attitude towards God.
To him, this was all-important, not the observance of ritual,
custom and tradition. God requires “mercy”
(KJV) or “steadfast love”
(RSV) or “loyalty” (NASB)
or “faithfulness” (NET) or “kindness” (TEV) expressed in a personal
relationship. 7.5
There Are None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See.
The
Pharisees on this occasion, as on other occasions, deliberately closed
their eyes to the truth of Christ’s teaching and his claims.
This is a negative aspect to a
law of spiritual response.
As we accept truth so we understand more of it; conversely, the
more we refuse truth or ignore it, the less we understand of it until
eventually self-righteousness condemns us to blindness (John 9:39-41).
Some of the parables of Jesus, such as the parable of the sower,
reinforce this basic truth (Mark 4:23-25 In
brief, “They knew the Bible story, but did not understand its essential
meaning. Bigotry made the
safeguarding of their traditions more important than the recognition
of new truth; indeed, the one precluded any possibility of the other.
We must read God’s word with open minds and open hearts, seeking
the insight of love, not the confirmation of our own ideas.” [26] 7.6
The Lordship Of Christ In Our Lives Gives Us Freedom.
The
Pharisees misrepresented God with their petty, negative and tyrannical
rules that distorted the Sabbath.
Jesus insisted that his Father established the Sabbath for people’s
good as an opportunity to cease from the repetitive everyday routine
of work and be refreshed and strengthened in faith.
Often he deliberately performed gracious acts of mercy such as
healing on the Sabbath to make the point that as the Lord of the Sabbath,
he had come to bring life in all its fullness (John 10:10).
As “Lord of the Sabbath” he asserted his authority to interpret the Sabbath
law and implies that Jesus has an
authority as great as that of the Mosaic Law. As the Sabbath was God’s day, this claim was also equivalent
to a claim to deity. Jesus
knew that his answer was a challenge to the religious “establishment”
and put his life in danger. 7.7
Beware Of Becoming Restricted By Traditions And Structures.
This
incident has relevance to our lives today.
Reader, is Christ Lord of your Sabbath?
Do you spend Sunday, the Lord’s Day, so as to bring the maximum
benefit to yourself and to others?
Perhaps our Christian Sunday might be more attractive to our
secular society if it saw Christians use it in a wholesome way, that
enriches family life, rather than in a boring restrictive way that prohibits
harmless activities. Sunday
is a day for worship and rest from regular secular work, but it is also
a time of fun and for enjoying God’s glorious creation. Let us not make “religious duty” an excuse for not doing good. The
Sabbath was a defining feature of Judaism.
It may be said to represent all those religious traditions that
have blessed God’s people throughout history.
The same could be said of our denominational doctrines and interpretations
of the Bible, and our heritage of church traditions, customs and rituals.
The danger with all religious
rituals and institutions is that they often acquire a life of their
own. Whereas once they
blessed people; later they oppress people.
The religious scruples of the Pharisees hindered Christ’s mission.
What for one generation may be a test of truth and a means of
blessing, may become an idol and a hindrance to another generation. Christians need to submit all their rituals and traditions
to the lordship of Christ.
God is always doing new things.
The Pharisees represented the old ways and old attitudes that
needed to change and respond to God’s new ways.
The new wine of Jesus broke the old wineskin of Judaism (Mark
2:21-22). The new is not
easily attached to the old. The
“new wine” represents the inner working of the Holy Spirit. We should be open to Christ challenging our traditional assumptions,
attitudes and activities. The
failure to change the structures and traditions of your church to accommodate
the new work of the Holy Spirit may have disastrous results.
Jesus will not patch up an old rigid legalistic system of religion.
8
Breaking God’s Word To Keep Human Tradition: Mark 7:1-13.
“The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were "unclean," that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitche |