Jesus challenged many of the religious practices of his day. He criticized religious parties and the religious institutions. This includes the scribes and the Pharisees. He opposed the controversial practices of the money-changers operating from the Temple. The money changers were taking advantage of the ordinary people and causing impoverishment whilst operating under the authority of the then church.
Jesus battled legalism. Legalism may be described as the practice of following the law very closely, especially by paying more attention to rules and details than to the intentions behind them. Some might say that somebody is focusing on the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law. If a policeperson stops you on a police motorcycle for not wearing a seatbelt, then it is not entirely about safety! The Lord Jesus had more conflicts with the legalists of His day than any other group.
The Gospels provide accounts of Jesus confronting the Pharisees, who demonstrated legalistic attitudes. In Matthew 23:23-24 , Jesus criticizes their focus on minor legalistic details while neglecting the more important matters of the law: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You pay tithes of mint, dill, and cumin, but you have disregarded the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.”
The tithe appears to be one tenth as a tax of the minor crops grown in their garden. He complains that they pay these minor taxes but ignore the greater requirements of justice, mercy, and faithfulness when dealing with others. We have this problem today. People make a contract, then they go to court to argue over items in the small print. Couples make a contract for marriage, then find an excuse to break the marriage contract. Some even lie to break the marriage.
If you study the life of Christ, it can be noticed how He deliberately did things to provoke the legalists. He could have healed people on any day of the week. He often did it on the Sabbath rather than wait until another day. He could have been more discrete in his actions, but he chose to do it openly. He was thus breaking a law that he considered was being applied inappropriately. We might not be happy that an ambulance driver was fined for jumping a red light. We would be upset if a fireman refused to knock down a front door for fear of legal action. We get upset when veteran soldiers damaged by war sleep on the street.
When a Pharisee invited Jesus to dinner, He could have gone along with their elaborate hand-washing custom, but He deliberately ignored it. When they questioned Him about it, He could have been more polite, but He blasted them for their hypocrisy. When a lawyer pointed out that Jesus had offended them as well, He didn’t say, “I’m sorry! I didn’t mean to offend you good folks.” He said, “Woe to you lawyers as well!” Jesus confronted legalism as sin.
From bible.org: “Many Christian churches today are struggling with legalism, but the pastors are too ‘nice’ to stand up to the legalists and say, “You’re not going to do that in this church!” The evangelical church today is plagued by “niceness.” Somehow we have the idea that to be like Jesus means always being nice, never offending anyone, never confronting anyone. But clearly, if we want to be like Jesus, we must confront sin. We must confront wrong. And, legalism is sin!”
There is a problem with the Christian concept of legalism. Some will bring up the topic of circumcision. Some might claim we must eat meat on Friday. Some might claim we must attend Church. Some might claim that we should not swear, even though Jesus has a varied range of curse words. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. (Matthew 23:27, ESV). Many humans use his name as a curse word. When something bad happens, even the gentile will rattle “Jesus” or a stronger: “Jesus Christ”. I do not condemn these people for doing so, nor do I condemn Jesus for calling the pharisees a “den of snakes”. Should the quiet old woman be driven out of the congregation when somebody makes a loud noise next to her?
In Philippians 3:2, the Apostle Paul warns the Philippian church to “look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh.” This warning is directed towards those who promote a false gospel, specifically those who emphasize circumcision and adherence to the Law as necessary for salvation. This should be contrasted with following the Philosophy of Jesus Christ. In this context, ‘dogs’ is not a literal reference to canines. It is a derogatory term used to insult those who promote a false gospel. It was a term used by the Judaizers, who were Jewish Christians insisting on circumcision and adherence to the Law for Gentile converts. ‘Mutilation of the flesh’ is a clear reference to circumcision. Paul uses it in a negative manner, highlighting the Judaizers’ obsession with external rituals and their failure to grasp the spiritual meaning of circumcision. There had to be adjustment concerning circumcision. Early Christians were called “Christians” because they followed the ways of Jesus. There was no need to inspect a penis for a person to be called a “Christian”. Why then is it necessary that some early Jewish converts demanded circumcision?
There is another issue with legalism. Some Christian sects believe that you go to heaven on belief in Jesus alone. Many ordinary persons who act in a Christian manner tell me that one goes to heaven by being good. They simplify it down to being good. These people often only attend Church for weddings and funerals. I would never deny them the authority to claim they were Christians because the clearly live their lives following the philosophy of Jesus. Dogmatic Christians might call ‘being good’ it ‘works’ as in ‘good works’ or ‘actions’.
I once watched a television program where individuals were tested for the length of time they could hold their hand in a bucket of ice. Those that swore heavily manage to hold their hands in the ice for longer times. When it comes to it, ‘fuck’ is something that everybody does but nobody talks about. In the animal kingdom, they just get on with it like and everyday activity. If you consider males in the animal kingdom, they only have one task in life and that is to chase females. Yet again, I avoided using the ‘f’ word. In polite circles, they call it f-bomb. President Trump was noted for using the ‘f-bomb’. The president used the word but the commentators fudged the report with the expression ‘f-bomb’. Now I will be controversial and state that we are all the result of an orgasm, even though we don’t like to mention it.
Paul clarifies the purpose of the law in Romans 3:20 : “Therefore no one will be justified in His sight by works of the law. For the law merely brings awareness of sin.” St. Paul actually uses a profanity that is still a profanity in the modern world in Philippians 3:8: “What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ.” The word translated as “garbage” here is in Greek σκύβαλα (shit, hardened feces, dung).
Some erroneously confuse legalism with an emphasis on obedience. They mean obedience to every rule in the bible.
Others say that legalism is when we set up any manmade rules. But there are many areas not specifically addressed in the Bible where we need some rules in order to function as a family or church. Jesus never gave us rules to run a family. He never gave us rules to run a nation. He never gave us rules to run a congregation. Parents are not being legalistic when they set a curfew for their kids. Churches are not being legalistic when they follow certain procedures or practices. Many modern procedures have to be infered from following the spirit of the new testament. That was what was remarkable about Jesus. He gave us a way of deciding right from wrong without using a rule book. The New Testament is like a book of riddles. One has to interpret it. Once one get the gist of the stories therein, one can make sensible decisions on right and wrong. Mothers do the same backed by fathers. Watch a mother in the marketplace with her young son. She gives a constant: “Good boy”, “Bad boy”, upbringing to the extent that when he goes out on his own when older, he is well versed in right and wrong, without being legalistic.
We operate under two sets of rules. We have the laws of the ‘nation state’. These are all negative: “Don’t do this. We will lock you up.” “Don’t do that. We will lock you up with other bad people.” This system is all negative. There is no rule saying you must be good. The result is that if people think that they can get away with something they will do it. If they disagree with the law, they might disregard it. There are constant speeding tickets handed out to people that might consider themselves to be good citizens. There is a second set of rules that comes from religion. Many of these rules are not codified. They come under an umbrella rule of ‘common decency’ or however you like to explain it. I sometimes give the example of a car park where another driver wizzes into a parking spot that you have been waiting for. There also no rule for queuing at a supermarket counter. How do we deal with the person that pushes in? Mostly we just grumble to ourselves. It can cause great angst between different ethnic groups. One quote about the persons of another country I was told was: “Work is a punishment for those that are not bright enough to steal.” You cannot cooperate in a society where others think it is acceptable to push in front in a queue. I was stunned when taking a minibus tour in New Orleans after the floods. Some had paid online and others had registered by giving a mobile number. Someone on the bus had not paid. The tour guide started ringing the numbers until he found the person who had not paid. The person then paid without even apologizing. What I am finding is that as we destroy our Christianity, people start being unpleasant to each other.
At the root of legalism is the sin of pride. The legalist thinks that he is able to commend himself to God by his good deeds. Invariably, he is only looking at externals, not at his heart. This legalist’s pride motivates him to exalt himself in the sight of others by his outward behavior. He fails to to see the corruption of his own heart. Both Jesus and Paul clashed with the legalists.
But there is still a clash in Christianity. Some believe in preachers such as Martin Luther that faith alone is required. These people can be difficult to reason with. The Catholic Church require indulgences. It is the method they used to get the money to build the magnificent cathedrals. In strong Catholic times, if one had been naughty, one could give a sack of money to the Church and the matter was absolved supposedly giving you right of passage to heaven. I am still a little doubtful about the confession boxes.
I though Christianity has a brilliant system. If I am bad, I cannot hide it from myself. I then already know whether I am going to heaven or eternal hell. This is clearly a magic and simple way of creating a cooperative society. The Church does not need to incarcerate people to create a cooperative pleasant society. This is not to say that the Church does not go off the rails from time to time. It is our task as thinking individuals that wish to live in a cooperative society to ensure the Church and government stays ‘on the rails’. Thus it is incumbent upon you to go to Church not just for your benefit but to make sure the church is operating appropriately which then indirectly benefits you.
James 2:17 states, “So too, faith by itself, if it does not result in action, is dead.” This verse underscores the balance between faith and works. I like to think that genuine faith in Jesus and his philosophy then leads to ‘good works’. Some use the expression: “Do the ‘right’ thing”, yet there is not a definition of ‘right thing’! We know what the request means and it is actually following the philosophy of Jesus. I here reason that ‘faith in Jesus’ means following his example. This then means that one stands firmly and emphatically against wrong doing even if it makes you unpopular. It also means following His examples of decency and compassion, and empathy. Although not directly stated, Jesus was pushing ‘the compassions’.
The New Covenant, established through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, offers believers a relationship with God based on grace rather than legalistic adherence to the law. Hebrews 8:10 describes this covenant: “This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord. I will put My laws in their minds and inscribe them on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they will be My people.” This internalization of God’s law signifies a transformation that legalism cannot achieve.
I remember a sports mistress addressing her team of school children. She talked of the need of sticking to the rules and to the ‘spirit of the rules’. I was impressed by these words. Similar applies in our everyday life and and to any rules that we have been pushed on us from the local pulpit. A policeman once reasoned with me. I didn’t completely agree with him but I took his comment on-board as a valid thought process. He said that the laws of the nation-state were designed to uphold the religious law. I infer that he meant that the laws of the land supported what we see as the ‘philosophy of Jesus’, even if we don’t use that term. I could also infer that he meant that the laws of the land supported what we perceive to be the contrast between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ at we are taught as youngsters by our mothers. In other words, it is tied to our culture, that being the culture of Christendom, or what some would call the Christian West, or some would simply call: “The West”.
It is why we clash with other religions. We like Muslims when they act like Christians. We like Jews when they act like Christians. We don’t like them when they use the un-Christian like excesses of their doctrine. There are many items in their documents that are wholly unacceptable to the Christian. We clash less with Buddhists as it appears that Jesus may have learned about Buddhism before his ministries started. Similar for Hinduism, although modern Hinduism has altered from its early form as the Hindus suffer extreme abuse under their Mughal (Muslim) overlords.
Here is another example of this rebel stance against legalism: (Matthew 5 vss. 27-28) “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery . . . but I say unto you, That whosever looketh on a woman to lust hath already committed adultery . . .” The modern wording is ‘don’t even think about it’. He is saying that you should not have wicked thoughts about sleeping with your neighbor’s wife or your wife’s sister. He is saying you should not mentally undress her. As men, we are awful in this manner as our subconscious does this analysis automatically. I checked what my brain does by monitoring it’s action. When we see an ‘interesting’ female, it is very much like the television program: ‘Snog Marry Avoid?’ The mind determines ‘would I or would I not’ which implies ‘sleep with’. If the answer is affirmative, and other question is raised: “Would I run afterwards or stay permanently?” Apologies for the hard truth of the male mind. But you might as well know what is happening so that you can understand situations. Jesus said very cleverly: “Don’t even think about it.” Don’t have adulterous thoughts! Jesus was a rebel because he contested all the established norms and thinking procedures.
Although he clashed violently with the money manipulators, he said little or nothing about monetary practices. He did not directly condemn usury, although there are some references to the ‘Feast of Tents’. This now appears in searches as the Feast of Tabernacles. Some call it a celebration of harvest, but very significant is the release of debt. Moses made a rule to limit the effect of usury. Berean Standard Bible
“Then Moses commanded them, “At the end of every seven years, at the appointed time in the year of remission of debt, during the Feast of Tabernacles, …” New American Standard Bible “Then Moses commanded them, saying, “At the end of every seven years, at the time of the year of the release of debts, at the Feast of Booths, …”
Jesus certainly attended the Feast of Tabernacles at some stage but was at times fairly low key because the Jewish authorities wanted to kill him. I am thinking censorship under threat of death. A key component of the Feast of Tabernacles, Feast of Tents, was the annulment of debt. The usurers could not create permanent impoverishment with extended loans or burdensome loans that were unpayable. A key characteristic of usury is that it creates unpayable loans, a situation that is now world wide. My calculations are that there is twice as much debt in the world as there is money. None of this debt can be repaid as the money that exists is needed for circulation to enable the economy. We cannot live without a circulating medium. Jesus did not give us a set of rules to cover usury. We still operate on the old testament particularly Moses with his genocidal apartheid commands:
Moses (Deuteronomy 23:19-20) instructs Israelites not to charge interest to fellow Israelites on loans. However, they are permitted to charge interest to foreigners. The reason given for this distinction is that God will bless the Israelites in their endeavors if they show compassion and refrain from exploiting their own people through interest. However, usury for foreigners will bring the foreigners under the will of the usurers. This is the main issue that we have to day. The current crop of usurers have nations, companies, families, students and individuals under control though lending practices. The money they lend is either paper notes with pictures of dead kings or it is numbers in computer registers created by a few computer key-strokes. It was one of the methods used to genocide the Canaanites. It is the method by which the evil persons controlling international banks put every nation on earth in debt to their ‘international banks’ which are above national law or control.
The verses in more detail:
- Deuteronomy 23:19:“You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest.” ESV Bible. This verse prohibits charging interest on loans to fellow Israelites.
- Deuteronomy 23:20:“You may charge a foreigner interest, but you may not charge your brother interest, that the Lord your God may bless you in all that you undertake in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.” ESV Bible. This verse clarifies that charging interest to foreigners is permissible, but not to fellow Israelites.
