A Theology Against Legalism

They weren’t allowed to listen to music or watch television. Movies were strictly forbidden and school dances were out of the question. I often wondered how this family had come to such conclusions. Why were such things as music, dancing, movies, and the like evil things? Why were they banned? My initial analysis was simply that they were legalistic. They had set down rules and made regulations for things that the Bible never speaks about. They were living by some other standard, I thought. In recent years, however, I have come to see more clearly that this is not entirely fair, nor is it a true understanding of what legalism is. Legalism is a serious issue and one that each Christian encounters, both externally and internally. Therefore, we must know, understand, and counteract the doctrines of legalism.

What is Legalism?
C.J. Mahaney has helpfully clarified what legalism is in the following definition: Legalism is seeking to achieve forgiveness from God and acceptance by God through obedience to God.[1] It is basing our relationship with God on our own performance. This is such a crucial point to get because it turns legalism into something that is not merely “out there”, but quite probably “in here”. In other words this definition points out that legalism is something that all Christians struggle with. Let me show you how.

Legalism in Me
Do you ever feel God is more accessible because you read your Bible? Do you ever feel like you can’t go to God because you have sin in your life, you haven’t done a daily devotional, you haven’t prayed, or you yelled at your spouse? Do you ever feel like God looks on you more happily because you attended church, sang with a worshipful spirit, or wept over sin? This is essentially legalism. We are basing our relationship with God on something we ourselves have done. We are all prone to do these sorts of things, to believe these things. Suddenly the legalist is not merely that person who scorns wearing makeup, but it’s me. It’s no longer external, it’s internal. It’s no longer an issue for old churches or young believers, but a struggle for me. Suddenly I have to examine my own life to touch on spots where I am failing in my theology. John MacArthur is dead on when he writes that legalism is a threat today. He says:

Even in Evangelical churches there are many people whose assurance of salvation is based on their religious activities rather than faith alone in the all-sufficient Savior. They assume they are Christians because they read the Bible, pray, go to church, or perform other religious functions. They judge spirituality on the basis of external performance rather than internal love for Christ, hatred for sin, and a heart devoted to obedience.[2]

It’s easy to do and most of us are prone to it. Perhaps we don’t all associate our salvation so blatantly with our works, but rather we judge God’s accessibility based on these works. We say, or simply think, “God won’t hear me,” or “God won’t bless me if I don’t do ____,” and you can fill in the blank. The fundamental error involved here is a confusion of two important works of God: justification and sanctification.

When the Related Become Synonymous
Because the church often employs its own language to talk about certain ideas and doctrines it is easy for people to be confused about what these terms mean without a simple investigation. That is, I believe, what has happened with the terms “justification” and “sanctification”. In many ways the church has taken the term “salvation” and made it synonymous with both of these terms. When we mean to say that someone is “saved” we may say he is “justified.” But in reality “Justification” and “Sanctification” are sub-sets of the whole work of “Salvation”. All three of these terms are related but they are not synonymous. To be saved one must be “justified” and one must begin the process of “sanctification.” If you are “justified” then you will be growing in “sanctification”. It’s important to see the differences between justification and sanctification, for that is where the fundamental error leading to legalism begins. Mahaney gives a good list of these differences.

· Justification is being declared righteous. Sanctification is being made righteous- being conformed to the image of Christ.
· Justification is our position before God. Sanctification is our practice. You don’t practice justification! It happens once for all, upon conversion.
· Justification is objective- Christ’s work for us. Sanctification is subjective- Christ’s work within us.
· Justification is immediate and complete upon conversion. You will never be more justified than you are the first moment you trust in the Person and finished work of Christ. Sanctification is a process. You will be more sanctified as you continue in grace-motivated obedience.[3]

Understanding the distinction between these two works of the Spirit of God is
crucial to avoiding the error of legalism. Mahaney wisely writes, “Nearly every man and woman I’ve met who has struggled with legalism has had a faulty understanding of how justification and sanctification are related to each other, and how they’re distinct. We must distinguish between justifying grace and sanctifying grace, but never separate them.”[4] Do you adequately understand these two theological terms? A quick summary of them individually may be helpful here.

Changing Positions
The term “justification” is too important to leave open to various interpretations. It is, as Thomas Watson said, “the very hinge and pillar of Christianity.”[5] We must make sure that we fully understand what justification is as taught from scripture.

The Bible indicates that the term “justification” is a legal term. The common meaning of the Greek word, which we translate as “justification,” is “to declare righteous.”[6] Some verses make this abundantly clear by the way that they contrast “justification” with “condemnation”. So note Romans 8:33-34, “Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies; who is to condemn?” The contrast is between two types of declarations: (1) The Declaration of Guilty, and (2) The Declaration of NOT Guilty. This is the essence of justification. Wayne Grudem gives us a wonderful working definition: Justification is an instantaneous legal act of God in which He (1) thinks of our sins as forgiven and Christ’s righteousness as belonging to us, and (2) declares us to be righteous in His sight.[7]

Justification is a legal declaration made by God, and this is important to remember. For we are all guilty of one great sin: disobedience to God’s law. We are lawbreakers and God has every right, as the just judge of the universe, to condemn us for this crime. Yet, because of Christ’s death on the cross, all those who repent of this sin and confess Christ as Lord and Savior, can be declared not guilty. The only Son of God has bore the punishment that they deserved, and God now “justifies” them. It is a changing of positions on the grandest scale. Listen to how Paul describes this transition in Colossians 1:21-22.

And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, He has now reconciled in His body of flesh by His death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before Him.

Listen again to Paul’s words from his letter to the Ephesians:

And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience- among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ- by grace you have been saved- and raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages He might show the immeasurable riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not of your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

These two verses emphasize well the change of positions that occurs in the sinner when he is justified. The ground of this justification is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ on the cross in the place of sinners. The key to this justification is faith, and this is crucial to our discussion of legalism.

Justification by Faith Alone?
The great debate of the Protestant Reformation was over the issue of justification by faith alone. It was perversions of this doctrine that Luther most ardently opposed. The Catholic church, at that time, taught that one might attain justification via the sacraments. Justification is poured into the soul at an infant’s baptism, but the receiver must co-operate and assent to this. The individual is, then, justified if they keep themselves from mortal sin. If one commits a mortal sin that individual may be restored through penance. The works of satisfaction give the penitent sinner a merit that God acknowledges as worthy to grant the sinner restoration. What Luther was running into was a theology, which confessed that faith was necessary for justification, but not sufficient. It was the difference between faith and faith alone.[8]

Today we have similar problems, not only with Catholic theology but with Protestants as well. While many plainly profess justification by faith alone they do not live that way. Our actions and thoughts often reflect a belief that we are justified by something other than faith, and we often judge others by an external standard. But note what scripture clearly teaches about our justification.

And to one who does not work but trusts Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness. (Rom. 4:5)

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the law and the Prophets bear witness to it- the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. (Rom. 3:21-22a)

For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. (Rom. 3:28)

He will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. (Rom. 3:30b)

Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. (Rom. 5:1)

Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. (Gal. 2:16)

We must all come to grasp fully the truth that we are only justified by faith! Works have no place in the Biblical doctrine of justification. We are neither initially justified nor remain justified by our works, it is all by grace through faith. This is the most crucial step to grasp if we are to fight off the urge to be legalists, yet it is not the only step.

Growth is a Process
As I have already noted, most of us do not have the problem of defining our salvation by our works. For any good Protestant this is an obvious heresy. Yet in the area of our sanctification we often stumble into legalism. Dave Swavely notes the distinction:

The word [legalism] is used by Christians in connection with both justification and sanctification, two very different topics. When used in connection with justification, “legalism” usually means adding works to faith, or human merit to grace, as a condition for salvation. But when used in connection with sanctification (the Christian life after coming to salvation), the term usually has something to do with man-made traditions added to the Bible.[9]

It is often in this second area that Christians fall into the error of legalism: by adding man-made traditions to the Word of God. This creates a standard for spirituality which the Bible never mandates and which often leads to pride, sin, and disappointment. Let’s begin this part of the discussion, however, by nailing down exactly what “sanctification” is.
We’ve already seen what the differences are between “justification” and “sanctification” but let’s get some more detailed information. Wayne Grudem gives us a working definition for “sanctification.” He writes: Sanctification is a progressive work of God and man that makes us more and more free from sin and like Christ in our actual lives.[10]
It’s important to realize that our conversion is a full and complete change of heart. We once hated God and now we desire Him and love Him. This truth, however, does not negate the fact that we still live in a world of temptation and have sinful desires in us. To change this takes time, hard work, and the continuing outpouring of God’s grace. This is why we read Paul saying to the Roman Christians, who had “died to sin” (Rom. 6:2), that they should “let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions” (v. 12). And likewise, the apostle writes of the Corinthian Christians that while they are “beholding the glory of the Lord,” they are also “being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another” (2 Cor. 3:18).
These verses, and many others, teach that God’s work to conform us to the image of His dear Son is a process, it does not happen overnight and requires both our hard discipline and, ultimately, His triumphing grace to overcome sin. This is important for us to remember as we seek to avoid the error of legalism. There are two main pitfalls into that sin in the area of sanctification, so let’s look at them each individually.

Remember the Cross
The first pitfall we have already mentioned, it is the confusion of “sanctification” with “justification.” I won’t belabor discussion of this beyond what is necessary; I have already highlighted (thanks to C.J. Mahaney) what the differences are between the two doctrines. But let me add a few more comments to this discussion.
The chief fault of this association is that it makes necessary for salvation what God never required. Mahaney, again, gives a good summary of what needs to be said. He writes:
Now…here’s the mistake the legalist makes. He confuses his own ongoing participation in the process of sanctification with God’s finished work in justification. In other words, he thinks that godly practices and good works somehow contribute to his justification.[11]
We seem to struggle with the notion of having nothing to contribute to our salvation. We tend to want to “help God out,” or, less blasphemous, “to pull our own weight.” During the 3rd Century a heresy developed in Christendom known as Pelagianism, which embraced this innate tendency. The teachings of Pelagius, a British monk, argued for a meritorious salvation. Man was not corrupted with sin, but could, through hard work, save himself. Historian and theologian Timothy George summarizes well the distinctiveness of Pelagius’ teachings when he writes, “The law was the perfect rulebook and Jesus was the perfect rule keeper- nothing more. Salvation, like sin, is by imitation too.”[12] Under this type of teaching legalism would creep into a doctrine of justification. After Pelagianism itself was refuted and declared heretical, a new brand of the old teaching developed: Semi-Pelagianism. In many ways this same teaching is still in existence today and may be even more disastrous. 19th Century Princeton theologian Charles Hodge once jokingly said that he did not fear the ghost of Pelagius, but the ghost of Semi-Pelagius.
Semi-Pelagianism, while acknowledging the faults of the old Pelagianism, still maintained a meritorious aspect to salvation. In Pelagianism we did 99% of the work towards our salvation and God, in sending the Son, did 1%. In Semi-Pelagianism, however, it is God who does the 99% and we who do the 1%. Martin Luther, writing of Semi-Pelagianism, asserted that this teaching was even more dangerous than the former heresy:

This hypocrisy of theirs [Semi-Pelagians] results in their valuing and seeking to purchase the grace of God at a much cheaper rate than the Pelagians. The latter assert that it is not by a feeble something in us that we obtain grace, but by efforts and works that are complete, entire, perfect, many and mighty; but our friends here tell us that it is by something very small, almost nothing, that we merit grace.[13]

The outcome of this teaching is the same as that of the heretical Pelagius: man works for his salvation. Many Christians believe and live as though their salvation is based on how good of a Christian they are. This can be most evidently seen in the theology of those who deny the doctrine of Eternal Security.[14] There is a shift in the central focus of the believer, going on here. Instead of focusing on the cross and Christ’s death as the satisfaction of God’s wrath against man’s sin, he focuses on his works as the means to maintaining God’s good favor. But the Bible is clear that no one will be saved (or kept saved) by the works of the law. No good deed is good enough to satisfy God’s anger against your sin, only Christ’s subistutionary death, paying the penalty we deserved, is sufficient. This is important because of what “working for God’s favor” says about the cross.
When we work to earn God’s favor, when we attempt to add our character or deeds to the cross, we are saying with our lives, if not with our hearts, that Jesus’ death was not sufficient. That in fact his death may very well be in vain if I do not do something to help him out. We suddenly turn God into a puny deity who needs us to work, or worse still we rob Him of all the glory He deservers for our salvation. Jesus paid it all! We have nothing to add. In the words of William Cowper, “Nothing in my hands I bring, simply to Thy cross I cling.” Grasping this is crucial for warding off legalism.

Remember Progression
The second pitfall into legalism deals with the issue of sanctification as a process. While the former failed to distinguish sanctification from justification, this error fails to realize the progressive nature of sanctification. This problem is all the more difficult to resist because of the battle going on currently over “Lordship Salvation.”[15] It is true that Scripture does indeed teach that the true Christian will live a life representative of his changed heart, reflecting his conversion. But our obedience as evidence of our salvation can easily be perverted into something it was not meant to be. Let’s carefully deal with this issue in more detail.
The mistake of legalists in this area is to confuse sanctification with glorification. We are not perfect in this life and while we are to follow Christ in obedience, failure to do so flawlessly does not admit false conversion, or lost salvation. A theology that teaches otherwise may properly be identified as Perfectionism. Theologians and Christians who adhere to this system of teaching do so based on misinterpretations of various Scriptural passages, such as: Matthew 5:48 “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect;” 2 Corinthians 7:1 “Let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, and make holiness perfect in the fear of God;” 1 Thess. 5:23 “May the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly;” and John 3:6 “No one who abides in Him sins;” and there are many other verses. Do these verses, however, teach that in this life our perfection may be realized? After a closer inspection of the context and the whole of Scripture it is simply not possible to conclude what the Perfectionists profess. Wayne Grudem has done a masterful job of arguing against their interpretations of these verses in his systematic theology[16]; I will not here repeat them. What we must understand, however, is that each part of the Bible is to be interpreted in light of the whole. So we should consider here and ask the question, “what does the whole Bible teach about sanctification?”
A great verse to consider here is Romans 6:19. Here Paul writes, “Just as you once yielded your members to impurity and to greater and greater iniquity, so now yield your members to righteousness for sanctification.” We must pay attention to the words at the beginning of this verse. The “Just as” is crucial. For “just as” the Roman Christians had previously yielded themselves up to more and more sin, in a like manner they are now to yield themselves up to more and more “righteousness for sanctification.” So Wayne Grudem correctly writes:
Paul says that throughout the Christian life “we all…are being changed into His likeness from one degree of glory to another” (2 Cor. 3:18). We are progressively becoming more and more like Christ as we go on in the Christian life. Therefore he says, “Forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 3:13-14)- this is in the context of saying that he is not already perfect but he presses on to achieve all of the purposes for which Christ has saved him (vv. 9-12).[17]

The Bible teaches that sanctification is a process, not a one-time event that produces perfection in this life.[18] Legalism appears in this manner when individuals suppose that any sin is a sign of “backsliding” or of a lack of salvation all together. This simply is not always the case. The apostle James clearly said, “We all make many mistakes” (James 3:2). When we understand that sanctification is a process we are less prone to judge others, and ourselves, by our works.
The “sticky” part of this particular aspect of the discussion comes up when we inquire of the role of works. What place does self-discipline have in the Christian life? What about the spiritual disciplines? How do we wrestle with those commands in the Bible that tell us to “work?” These are important questions and they must be addressed in a balanced manner. It is important to remember that while we are called to “work” we are never called to any form of legalism, and the difficulty is in finding the proper balance.

The Role of Works in the Christian Life
Titus 2:14 is one particular passage that helps us to understand the place of discipline and work in the Christian life. There the apostle Paul, writing to his son in the faith, says that Christ “gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify form himself a people for His own possession who are zealous for good works.” Within in this short and simple verse we have a basic theology of works. Let’s lay it out.
The context of this verse indicates that Paul is speaking about the very issue we are here considering: working in the Christian life. Beginning in verse 11 he states that it is the grace of God through Jesus Christ that has brought salvation to us, and that this salvation is “training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age.” So sanctification is a post conversion work of God. After salvation, God, through His Holy Spirit works in us to train us to renounce ungodliness, to be conformed to the image of Christ. The verse we are mainly focusing on in this section of scripture, v. 14, teaches the same thing. Christ redeems a people from all “lawlessness and to purify” them. No matter how good our works were before Christ they were not good enough, for all men and women need to be redeemed from lawlessness and be purified.
The second part of the verse indicates why Christ redeemed and purifies: to make a “people for His own possession who are zealous for good works.” To be zealous for truly good works we must first be redeemed and purified. So in no way are our works meant to save us! They cannot! Only after our salvation do works have a proper place in our life, as a means to honor God and exalt Christ. Where we fall short of this we are to confess our sins and ask for forgiveness, and, according to the apostle John, “if we confess our sins, [God] is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us of all unrighteousness.”[19] Christians sin; John says as much when he writes in chapter two of 1 John, “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” There is no place in Christian theology for a Perfectionist teaching, and no place for a legalism that deems only the perfectly sinless are truly converted.

Turning Our Theology On Others
The brunt of our focus on legalism thus far has been the self. I have been concerned with encouraging those of us who bare the scars of legalism and find ourselves hopeless and depressed and indeed doubting our salvation. I hope that if you are one of those people you see how clearly the Bible teaches only Christ can save and His work is sufficient for your full and eternal salvation. Rest in that truth and never move beyond it. But now let me take the time to focus on those who use legalism as a means of judging others, something, I am sure, none of us are innocent of.
While none of us likes to be judged by the legalist’s standards it is sadly true that we often do the same to others. I hope that making the proper distinctions between justification, sanctification, and glorification will keep you from doing this, but there is another principal that may also help us to avoid judging others un-biblically. The apostle Paul lays it out for us:
I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another. (1 Cor. 4: 6)
The context of this passage is Paul’s criticism of the Corinthians who were judging others based on what leader they followed, and judging Paul, himself. In verse 5 we read, “Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.” In this verse Paul is instructing the Corinthians not to judge matters for which we do not have all the information (things hidden in darkness) and not to judge the motives of others’ hearts. And he follows this up with a strict command “not to go beyond what is written,” meaning beyond what God has laid out in His Holy Word. This is the number one fault leading to legalism and as such deserves a full explication; this will help us make a proper distinction between judging Biblically and un-Biblically.

Beyond What is Written
God has given us clear commands in scripture on a number of issues in the Christian life. We know from the Bible that we are not to commit adultery, we are not to steal, we are not to get drunk, we know that we are not to forsake the church, or to oppress the poor. But what are we to do when the Bible does not give an explicit command on a certain issue? There are a number of issues which Scripture does not address that are considered somewhat controversial in Christian circles. For example: Should Christians go to the movies, play video games, smoke, drink, watch football games on Sunday afternoon, dance? These and many other issues are a main source of division in the church. How are we to deal with such subjects when God’s word does not deal with them? In that one phrase “do not go beyond what is written” Paul gives us a principal of guidance.
Where God’s word remains silent, by either direct statement or implication, then we are free to make our own choice in good conscience. This one verse assuredly condemns making a moral universal standard out of something that is nowhere recorded in Scripture. You cannot make a universal law about something that the Bible is silent. Again, in Romans 14 Paul lays this principal out for us.
As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
The passage continues with an astounding and forthright declaration on the freedom of the Christian to make decisions where the Bible is silent, and on the prohibition of judging where there is no definitive Biblical rule.
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself and none of us dies to himself. If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the Judgment seat of God; for it is written, ‘As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me and every tongue shall confess to God.’ So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.
The whole chapter is rich with this topic and in a straightforward fashion declares judging where the Bible is silent is an un-Biblical form of judging. Instead it promotes the freedom that Christians have in Christ, and one phrase in particular stands out as key: Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. In this one sentence we have a mandate for free thinking and conscience guided decision-making. After all a Biblically informed conscience can be an excellent guide in the Christian life, though it is not the only one or the ultimate one. Dave Swavely calls this the “Principal of Conscience” and it is an important principal to grasp to help aid us in the fight against legalism.

The Principal of Conscience
Dave Swavely writes, “The apostle Paul ends his discussion in Romans 14 by explaining more about Christian liberty and its relation to that mysterious faculty of the human soul that we call conscience.”[20] God has instilled in His created man a conscience with the intent that, under the influence of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God, man would be led in the way he should go. Of course with the fall into sin all of man has been contaminated, and even our conscience can sometimes lead us astray. But when informed by God’s moral law and requirements the conscience can be a great tool. In verses 22 and 23 Paul gives encouragement for us to enjoy the freedoms that we have in Christ. So he writes:

The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

On issues where the Bible has given no clear direct or implied moral command we are free to make our own decision. But, as Paul tells us here, that decision must be Biblically informed and you must be convinced in your conscience that you are in no way sinning against God. Speaking of those who would eat food sacrificed to idols when it is against their conscience to do so Paul says that they are “condemned,” meaning guilty. To eat without faith, Paul says, is sin. It is not the eating that is the sin, it is the person’s heart that is causing him to sin. Dave Swavely uses an interesting example to explain this point.
A helpful illustration would be a woman who was taught while growing up, by her parents and her church, that wearing pants is wrong. Men wear pants, the argument goes, so women should not wear pants. This is a legalistic view that is read into Scripture…, but does not proceed from a sound interpretation of Scripture and is not consistent with common sense…So she has been convinced that it is wrong for her to wear pants. Now suppose she is getting ready to go out for the evening with some female friends, who are all wearing jeans and begin to encourage her to do the same. They even poke fun at her hesitancy, and practically browbeat her into breaking her tradition. If she decides to put the jeans on while she still thinks it might be wrong, she will be sinning, because at that moment something is more important to her than pleasing God. It will not be her faith in Him that motivates her to put those jeans on, but her fear of what her friends think, and perhaps her own comfort. [21]
Here is a clear case of how the “Principal of Conscience” should be applied. It is not a sin to wear jeans; nowhere in Scripture do we find even the slightest implication of such a rule. Yet if one believes it is a sin to wear jeans, yet you do it anyways, than you say with your heart, “I would rather wear jeans than honor God.” As is often the case with sin, the action is not necessarily the sin; it is the motivation and inclination of the heart. In the case of Swavely’s fictional woman, her heart is more inclined towards pleasing her friends than pleasing God. Where Scripture does not give us boundaries we are free to make our own choice, but that choice must never be to do what we think might even possibly be a sin.

The Dangers of Unbiblical Judging
While the Bible does declare that we have much freedom in Christ there are many who don’t acknowledge this and they make their own opinions about certain issues to be universal laws. So they judge others by a standard which God has not set, a man-made tradition. This was the great fault of the Pharisees in Jesus’ own day. The Pharisees had a number of problems, a majority of which stemmed from their legalism. I want to turn our attention to three major problems, or dangers, that stem from legalism: (1) Hypocrisy, (2) Pride, (3) Self-Condemnation.

The Sin of Hypocrisy
Hypocrisy is a word used to describe those who give the pretense of being something which they are not. It is saying one thing, and doing the opposite. This is often a result of legalism because of the tendency that this teaching has to focus on the external actions while ignoring the internal heart. On Several occasions Jesus identifies this as the problem that the Pharisees had. In Mark 7:5-7 we read:

And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, "Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?" And he said to them, "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; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'

Here we have a real life example, from the New Testament, of legalism. The Pharisees were teaching “as doctrine,” meaning they made a universal law, the “commandments of men.” The “law” to wash your hands before eating was not set by God, but was a man-made rule that the Pharisees were making universal. It was the “tradition of the elders,” not the tradition of God. Yet in making this rule the Pharisees forgot that it is not merely the external actions that matter, but the state of one’s heart. So Jesus condemns them for their formalism: honoring God with their lips but not worshiping Him in their hearts.
Again in Luke 11:37-44 Jesus identifies the Pharisees as hypocrites.

While Jesus was speaking, a Pharisee asked him to dine with him, so he went in and reclined at table. The Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not first wash before dinner. And the Lord said to him, "Now you Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. You fools! Did not he who made the outside make the inside also? But give as alms those things that are within, and behold, everything is clean for you. But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seat in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it."

The Pharisees here are said to cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, a metaphor for their own selves, yet the inside is still dirty. It’s a very practical and convincing image. Would you want to drink from a cup that was clean and shiny on the outside but on the inside had week old coffee stains or milk? It’s a rather gross image in that way, and Jesus is here comparing the Pharisees to externally clean dishes that have maintained their filth on the inside. They look good to others, yet to God, who judges the heart, they are stained with sin. In short: they give the pretense of holiness, while being full of sin; it is hypocrisy.
Of course this serves as a warning to us. One of the great faults of legalism is to suppose that external deeds are evidence of internal holiness. But we know it to be true that often we can do the right things and still be sinners. Before we were Christians even, we often did good deeds, but this does not make anyone holy (as has been shown above). Washing the outside of our cups but leaving the inside dirty is hypocrisy and not genuine righteousness. We may honor God with our lives but if our hearts do not worship Him than we worship God in vain. Hypocrisy hardens our hearts to true purity. We will gradually become more convinced that if we are doing the right deeds, we will not need to seek true repentance and internal devotion to God. It is this hypocrisy that Jesus condemned and it will bear dead spiritual fruit in our lives.

The Sin of Pride
Pride is the second major sin of the practice of legalism. This result being as equally disastrous to our spiritual lives and fellowship with the saints and the Lord as the former sin is. Often the keeping of these external rules can become a source of pride in the legalist. Listen to the words of the Pharisee in the parable that Jesus tells.
[Jesus] also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: "Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee standing by himself, prayed thus: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.'[22]
What audacity this Pharisee had. He came before God bragging of his good deeds as though he had accomplished much for God without God. His heart was full of arrogance and self-righteousness. And Jesus’ has told this parable with the expressed intent of showing the self-righteous how foolish they are, for it continues:

But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner!' I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted."

It was not the self-professed righteous Pharisee who leaves the temple justified, but rather the poor and humble tax collector. Legalism tends towards making arrogant fools out of men, a point that the Apostle Paul saw all to clearly.
Why is the Apostle Paul so concerned, in 1 Corinthians 4, that Christians should never go “beyond what is written” in their judgments about moral issues? …The Answer lies in all the problems that result from it…The last part [of 1 Corinthians 4:6] is a purpose clause (beginning with the Greek conjunction “hina”) explaining why Paul wants the Corinthians to keep themselves from going beyond what is written…Paul says we should avoid legalism “so that no one of you will become arrogant.”[23]
Pride is simple sin to fall into and yet God’s word has very harsh words for the proud man. Note these verses from Proverbs:

When pride comes, then comes dishonor, but with the humble is wisdom (11:2).
Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord; assuredly , He will not be unpunished (16:5).
Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before stumbling. It is better to be humble in spirit with the lowly than to divide the spoil with the proud (16:18-19).
Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him (26:12).
An arrogant man stirs up strife, but he who trusts in the Lord will prosper (28:25).
A man’s pride will bring him low, but a humble spirit will obtain honor (29:23).[24]

God’s word makes no excuses for the sin of pride. It is an “abomination” to the Lord. It is an outrage to Him, for many reasons but chief among them being that it robs God of His glory. Paul plainly asked the Corinthian Christians “What do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if you did not?” God gets the glory for every “good and perfect gift” and our pride is an attempt to claim for ourselves some of what belongs solely to Him, for “in Him we live and move and have our being.” So how does pride come from legalism? Dave Swavely gives a solid and Biblical answer:

…Remember that to whatever extent you go beyond what is written, it will short-circuit your spiritual growth to the same degree. Why does this happen? One way of explaining it is that when we are learning and obeying the commandments and teachings of Scripture, the Holy Spirit is present and working within us as we do …But when we are learning and obeying the “commandments and teachings of men,” He is not. If we grow in our godliness by the power of the Holy Spirit, He makes sure that we progress in humility as well. But when we are living in legalism by our own strength, we can only grow arrogant as we surpass other Christians in our “spiritual success.”[25]

Legalism leads to pride because it accomplishes “spiritual growth” (which is really false spiritual growth) in one’s own strength, and bypasses the power of the Holy Spirit. And, as we read above, pride leads to destruction and is an abomination to the Lord. Spiritual pride wreaks havoc on our relationship with God and with other believers.

The Sin of Self-Condemnation
Perhaps it seems odd to you to call “self-condemnation” a sin. Many think this has more to do with a lack of self-esteem than with sinfulness, but sin is usually involved in this psychological problem. C.J. Mahaney helps us better understand condemnation, he writes, “Condmenation is something we all deal with at one time or another…We can become condemned over any sin, past or present, great or small. The common element is a sustained sense of guilt or shame over sins for which you have repented to God and to any appropriate individuals.”[26] How is this a sin? That’s an excellent question and I am glad you asked.
Self-Condemnation is a sin because it reflects an unspoken attitude that says, “Jesus’ sacrifice couldn’t possibly be enough to win the Father’s favor completely, unreservedly, and forever.”[27] It is an attempt to justify oneself by works, which we have already seen is the epitome of arrogance and impossible. Legalism almost always leads to self-condemnation, both for those who allow themselves to be judged and often for those who do the judging. Let’s see an example.
A legalist has recently joined your church. Of course he does not identify himself as a legalist, and to the members and the staff of the congregation he seems to be a very godly man who lives a very godly life. You welcome him with open arms, and suspect nothing (which you should if you do not know him to be a legalist or have reason to suppose he is). As you spend more time together he convinces you that it is a sin to watch movies, to listen to public radio, and to eat a snack after dinner. He then convinces you that only home schooling is a Biblical way to train your kids, and that if you are not leading a Bible study at work then you are sinning. After further time together he wants you to read a book together with him, and join the bus ministry; After all “every good Christians serves in as many capacities as he can at the church,” he tells you. Well for several weeks you are doing well but then you had some ice cream after supper one night, and you watched a movie with your cousin who came in town. Suddenly you begin feeling extremely guilty, and for things that are not even sins. As time goes on you fail to read the weekly chapters for the book you’re reading with him, and you listened to a song on the radio on the way to work, you begin to wonder how displeased God is with you? You’re now feeling worse than before, you begin to avoid prayer and Bible study, and you can no longer look you friend the eye. Why does this happen? Where did this condemnation come from? From the legalism you have been sucked into.
There are many good things to do in the Christian life, some are even essentials, yet none of them ever changes our accessibility to God or His favor on us. Even something as crucial as Bible reading and church attendance will never make us more acceptable to God. But the more we think they do, and the more we fail to do them, the more we will build up a problem of self-condemnation. Mahaney gives some sound advice, however, when he writes:

The Christian who desires to live a cross centered life will regularly face his or her own depravity and the seriousness of personal sin, squarely and unflinchingly. It’s a reality. But the reality of the death and resurrection of Jesus for the forgiveness of sin is even greater…Here’s how to beat condemnation. Confess your sin to God. Then believe in Him.[28]

Fighting Our Great Foe
We have, at length, discussed the issue of judging and legalism. Much more could be said, and, thankfully, has been said by better authors than myself. It is important, however, that before we conclude our discussion we ask the question: How can I fight against legalism in me? That is the final focus of this chapter: Steps to Kill Legalism.
Step 1: Sola Scriptura. We read above on the strict command of Paul “not to go beyond what is written.” The chief way to avoid legalism is to filter every though through the word of God. Paul said to the Romans, “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind…” We become more like Christ as our thoughts become more like His thoughts. Keep a close guard on your theology and let the word of God be your source. Speaking of the phrase “do not go beyond what is written,” Dave Swavely comments:

This would be a good slogan for Christians today to repeat regularly, similar to Sola Scriptura, the one made famous during the Reformation in Europe. It represents and reminds us of the important doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture- both positively and negatively. Positively it reminds us that in God’s Word we have all we need to know and serve Him- in other words, “everything pertaining to life and godliness” (2 Peter 1:3). And negatively the slogan reminds us that the Bible is the only trustworthy chart by which we can navigate the murky waters of human morality.[29]

God gave His Bible as the means by which we would learn how to serve Him and live in this world for His glory, to that end it should be sufficient to instruct us. Adding to it is only a suggestion that God’s infallible Bible is not enough.
Step 2: Cross-Examination. One of the elements to the Puritan Spiritual life we would do well to recover is the element of self-examination. Among them there was often a suspicion about the self, they did not always trust themselves and therefore the were constantly holding up to their faces the mirror of Scripture. In a like manner we need to cross-examine our judgments. It is important to realize that if we will compare our judgments with what the Scriptures say it will be much easier to put off un-biblical ones and to hold tightly to those that are Biblical. So Dave Swavely lists several questions to help us examine our judgments.
First, Is this opinion based firmly on Scripture, or on my ideas and preferences? We might use the example of music here. Nowhere in the Bible are we told what style of music to sing in our worship services, we are told to honor God and in some ways certain genres and certain songs will affect this, but nonetheless we cannot make a case for singing only hymns, or singing only new worship songs. We each certainly have our preferences but we cannot make a universal rule about music styles without basing them on our own ideas and preferences alone.
Second, Does the formation of this opinion include any judgments about the person’s thoughts or motives? We have read above how Paul strictly forbids the judging of people’s motives, things which we cannot see or know for definite. We need to be conscious that we are not making judgments based on what we think others may be thinking. Dave Swavely wisely notes the tendency of some Reformed folks to do this with non-reformed brothers. He writes:

As a Reformed Christian I find it easy to assume certain things about the hearts of those who are not Reformed in their doctrine. I tend to think that they are not willing to study enough to get to the truth, that they are afraid of the unpopularity that true doctrine brings, or even that they want to believe that they have contributed to their salvation, and are really trusting in their works rather than in Christ. But although some of those things might be true of some non-Reformed people, it simply does not follow for all of them.[30]

We must examine our judgments to see if we are in anyway judging things that we cannot know for certain. Judging the hearts and motives of others is beyond our ability and only God can judge the heart.
Third, Am I missing any facts that are necessary for an accurate evaluation? In some cases we can get ahead of ourselves in making judgments. We rush in and look like fools (as the song says), we need to be sure we have all the facts straight before we draw our conclusions about issues. How many relationships have been broken because one person didn’t get all the facts about another person’s response. Think about surprise parties. It seems as though everyone has forgotten your birthday and this, of course, would make you very upset. So you begin to formulate judgments about certain individuals. “They never liked me anyways,” or “So-and-So is just too busy for her own good,” or “I remembered his birthday and this is the thanks I get.” But at the end of the week you come to find out that they have all been secretly planning your surprise party. Imagine how foolish you would have looked if you would have expressed your judgments to these people before you found out about the party. It’s embarrassing to even think about.
Fourth, How would I want this person to think of me if the roles were reversed? This important question puts us in the shoes of those we would judge. Perhaps we are judging the hearts and motives of another person, and if that is the case would we want someone to judge our hearts that they cannot know? Would we want someone to make opinions about us or our actions without getting all the details? We want people to “hear our side” before they draw conclusions so shouldn’t we give them the same respect?
Finally, How can I show the grace of the cross to this person? We must never forget in our judgments that God has all along known our hearts and motives and seen all our wicked deeds yet has been merciful to us. We truly deserve condemnation and wrath, yet receive grace because of the Cross of Christ. How can we demonstrate Christ and point others to the grace of God? Both believers and un-believers need to be reminded of the cross and the way that we judge can be a pointer to it. This is not to say that we should never make judgments. Paul clearly makes it known that in certain cases judging and expelling from the church is the most loving thing to do with a sinning brother who will not repent (1 Cor. 5:5). But in all cases our goal is not to condemn a brother, but to love them and to show grace to them just as God through Christ has shown grace to us. In these five ways, and I am sure many others, we can guard our hearts and lives from legalism.
Step Three: Cross Centeredness. All things tend back to what was discussed in chapter one. The Bible is of no use to us if it does not speak of the Cross. Worship cannot happen if Christ has not reconciled us to God. The meaning of life is fulfilled only after Christ has redeemed us from the Kingdom of darkness. And legalism can only be thwarted by the Christ on the Cross and continues to be denied a place in our Christian lives through our sanctification. A life centered on the cross, living in its shadow, and turning to it repeatedly is a life that will avoid the error of legalism. When we know that we are justified only by Christ’s death, and we are sanctified through a process of becoming conformed to His perfect image, we will see no place for un-biblical standards and rules. We will be less prone to confuse justification, sanctification, and glorification, and we will be more prone to humble, gracious, Christ honored living. Legalism is the great killer in the church. It divides and conquers whole congregations. But at the cross Christ died for every sin, even the sin of legalism. Through His death He made atonement for our sins, justified the repentant believer, and now makes intercession on our behalf at the right hand of God almighty. When we are tempted towards legalism we can think of the cross, when we commit legalism we can repent and be forgiven because of the cross, and when others judge us we can hope in the cross. “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1)!


[1] C.J. Mahaney, The Cross Centered Life. (Sisters: Multnomah, 2002). 24.
[2] John MacArthur, Our Sufficiency in Christ. (Wheaton: Crossway, 1991). 179.
[3] Mahaney, Cross Centered Life. 32-33.
[4] Ibid. 32.
[5] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity. (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2003). 226.
[6] diakou is the Greek word. Cf. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994). 723.
[7] Grudem, Systematic Theology. 723.
[8] This summary of Catholic teaching is owing to a lecture by R.C. Sproul at Together for the Gospel, 2006. Louisville, KY.
[9] Dave Swavely, Who Are You To Judge?. (Philipsburg: P&R, 2005). 51.
[10] Grudem, Systematic Theology. 746.
[11] Mahaney, The Cross Centered Life. 33.
[12] Timothy George, Amazing Grace. (Nashville: LifeWay, 2000). 50.
[13] As quoted by J.I. Packer in the introduction to The Bondage of the Will. Trans. J.I. Packer and O.R. Johnston. (Grand Rapids: Revell, 1957). 50.
[14] Eternal Security asserts that Christ’s death on the cross secured salvation for all those who repent and believe. Based on verses such as John 10:27-30 and others this doctrine denies that any true Christian can ever lose their salvation. For further reading see Tom Schreiner, The Race Set Before Us: A Biblical Theology of Perseverance and Assurance. (Leicester: IVP, 2001).
[15] Lordship Salvation teaches that where there is not fruit of repentance there is not genuine conversion. That is to say a true Christian will show forth his salvation in good works; not that we are saved by good works, but that we are saved for good works. See Titus 2:14, Romans 6:1-4, etc. For further reading see John MacArthur, The Gospel According to the Apostles. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2005); The Gospel According to Jesus. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994); Ernest C. Reisinger, Lord & Christ: The Implications of Lordship for Faith and Life. (Philipsburg: P&R, 1994).
[16] pp. 746- 759.
[17] Grudem, Systematic Theology. 748-9.
[18] Some verses in scripture do speak about sanctification as a past tense event but interpreting these passages requires careful consideration of the context. Some may refer to the definite beginning stage of our sanctification, some may be speaking in a future context of glorification looking back on our life of sanctification. Always, always, always pay attention to the context. For further reading see G.C. Berkouwer, Faith and Sanctification. Trans. by John Vriend. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952); Anthony Hoekema, Saved By Grace. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989); and John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955). For a thorough dealing with Perfectionism see B.B. Warfield Perfectionism. Volumes VII and VIII of The Works of B.B. Warfield. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1932 reprinted 2003).
[19] 1 John 1:9. Some have said that this verse speaks of conversion but John is not writing to non-believers. He refers to them as “My little children,” in chapter 2 verse 1.
[20] Swavely, Who Are You To Judge?. 126.
[21] Ibid. 127.
[22] Luke 18: 9-12.
[23] Swavely, Who Are You To Judge?. 65-66.
[24] These verses were compiled by Dave Swavely in his book Who Are You To Judge?. 77.
[25] Swavely, 70.
[26] Mahaney, 38.
[27] Mahaney, 42.
[28] Ibid. 42-43.
[29] Swavely, 55.
[30] Ibid. 39.