on "PHARISAISM" AND "LEGALISM"
|
Question #1: Was Jesus a Pharisee rabbi? WAS JESUS
A PHARISEE? There's a "wind of doctrine" blowing
(Ephesians Some enemies of the God of the Bible are currently using the print
and the internet to declare that Paul invented Christianity and Jesus was just
another Pharisee rabbi like Rabbi Hillel or Rabbi Shammai. 1 In liberal Christendom's ecumenical
zeal and/or because of their "Zionist"
views of a coming special millennial era, this has been seen as an opportunity for
a common ground to extend a hand to their "brothers", the "Pharisaic"
professing Jews in Robert Baird claims that he showed
how Jesus in the "Gospels" speaks and acts as a Pharisee in his book
"Revolution in Someone else comments, "After reading
Falk's book, I agree with him that the criticisms of Judaism attributed to
Jesus in the Gospels reflect Jesus' agreement with the ideology of the If Jesus was a Pharisee and
if Pharisees were legalists (as some liberals also contend), would these
advocates also argue that Jesus was a legalist? Question #2: Who are today's Pharisees? In answering these contentions, the
first question is, who the so-called "Pharisees"? A second question is, were the Pharisees
really "legalists"? And then, was Jesus
either one, a Pharisee or a legalist?
WHO ARE TODAY'S PHARISAIC
JEWS? Modern Jews, who espouse the Talmud
as a system of their beliefs, can be categorized as "Pharisaic Jews". There
were numerous sects and trends within Judaism when Jesus walked in Palestine.6
The first
century Pharisee sects (there were at least seven factions) that conflicted
with Jesus had a common ground of professing oral teachings in addition
to an emphasis on selected parts of the Torah. These oral teachings were not in
written form until about a hundred years after the destruction of the temple. The
Mishnah is
the first of the written recordings of the "Oral" Torah
of the Jewish
people, as championed by the Pharisees, and as debated between 70-200 CE
by a group of rabbinic sages. Rabbinic commentaries on the Mishnah over the three centuries after its composition were
then organized as the Gemara
(Aramaic: "learning by tradition")5
section of the Talmud. Hence, those that
profess to follow the Talmud today are equivalent to the "ancient" Pharisee and
can be properly identified as "Pharaic Jews". 7
So
then, Who were the ancient Pharisees? WHO WERE THESE ANCIENT
PHARISEES? WEBSTER
DEFINES "PHARISEE": "One of the members of a school or party among the
ancient Jews noted for the strict formal observance of the rites and validity
of traditions of the elders." 8 Although this was not a large
sect numerically (of the nearly half a million Jews living in Palestine during
the 1st century, only about 6000 adult males were members of this sect of
Pharisees), they nevertheless exerted a tremendous influence upon society.9
The
Pharisees were also known as chasidim,
which means loyal to God, or loved of God .
Perhaps the Pharisees did mean to obey God, but they became so extremist in very limited parts of The Law of Moses plus
all that they themselves added to it. Originally,
Pharisee scholarship was "oral." Rabbis
expounded and debated the law and discussed sacred teachings supposedly without
the benefit of written works, though some may have made private notes. Whereas
one had to be born into the Sadducee family, it wasn't much easier to become a
Pharisee. Although membership was open
to all, one had to memorize the Torah, then the Oral traditions, and then prove
that one held to a certain school of thought. 10 Were these Pharisees "legalists"? WERE THE PHARISEES "LEGALISTS"? Now,
pray tell, what really is a legalist? The term "legalism"
almost always carries with it a bad connotation. The term legalist is often a
synonym for Pharisee; hence, "legalism and Phariseeism."
11 "Humanists, liberals and
neo-evangelicals gladly join forces and raise their voices in unison to chant
intonations against the awful dangers and various ills of 'legalism.'12 Since "legalism" and "legalist" are
not in the vocabulary of the scriptures, as such, we will have to look to
the English Dictionaries for help. 1. The Free
Dictionary defines "Le'gal`ist"
as "One who practices or advocates
strict conformity to law; in theology, one who holds to the law of
works. "13 Did the Pharisee hold to a law and a law
of works? Yes, in this sense, they would
be "legalists" but so would anyone that believed in doing certain deeds. The "Good Samaritan" who helped the robber
victim would also be a "legalist" by this definition. There would probably be a few that would
extend a negative label to this "do gooder". 2. The liberal Dictionary of Philosophy defines
legalism as "The insistence on a strict literal or overt observance of certain
rules of conduct, or the belief that there are rules which must be so obeyed." The
Pharisees did insist on a strict observance of "certain rules". According to this definition, they were
"legalists." And so would everyone
except an anarchist. Even a liberal who
had any code or principle would be a legalist. 3. One dictionary defines "Legalism": "Strict adherence to
law, especially to the letter rather than the spirit".14 The Pharisees tithed even the
minute of things. Jesus said, "They
should have done this" (Matthew 23)!
But Jesus pointed out that they neglected other things. In other words, unlike Jesus, they had
omitted things in the Law of Moses: e.g., mercy. This meant that they were NOT legalists
because they did not adhere to everything including the letter that they were
supposed to.
4. Recovering Legalists Ministries
defines legalism, for the purpose of their site and ministry, as 'trying to gain God's love and acceptance by:
1)"obedience"; 2) tithing; 3) prayer time; 4) "law keeping"
or anything other than faith and the personal relationship with
Jesus which will follow.' 15
Although this religious site
has organized the points of its identification, it actually eliminates the
Pharisees who neither "obeyed" nor "kept" the Torah in every respect. Since the Pharisees observed only select parts of
the Law and their Oral commentaries and argued over how and when to obey those,
it would be hard pressed to identify them as being "legalists". They would better be described along with the
"liberals" of today who pick and choose what they believe and do. Did Jesus ever condemn anyone for being "legalists"? DID JESUS EVER CONDEMN "LEGALISTS"? Why are Pharisees associated with
"legalism"? Jesus never called the
Pharisees "legalists" anywhere in the Bible.
This is a fabrication of false teachers today. Jesus rather condemned them as hypocrites,
liars, and adding man's teaching to God's teaching. Jesus did say, "They say and do not"
(i.e., "hypocrites"). When they sat in Moses'
seat (speaking by Moses' authority; hence, the Torah) Jesus commanded his
disciples to do as "they say". Of course
this was before the cross and the Law of the Lord by Moses was still in effect
(Heb. 8, 9). Was Jesus a Pharisee rabbi? WAS JESUS A PHARISEE?
Jesus
grew up in Remember that although Pharisee membership
was open to anyone who memorized the Torah and memorized the Oral teachings,
they had to profess to hold to certain religious beliefs. As for the Talmud all three writers,
J. Dwight Pentecost, J. W. Shepard and Frederick Farrar agree that the teachings
of "Jesus" differed completely from those of the Talmud. There are no moral teachings of value
compared to those of "Jesus".
For example, some have pointed out that the rabbinic teachings on a
"golden rule" were similar. But they are
mistaken. The Pharisaic teaching is like
Confucius' "silver rule". It is a
negative: "Do not unto others ... " Jesus
taught a positive teaching, the golden rule: "Do unto others ... ", which historically
is unique. Jesus was not a Pharisee. Note the following facts: 1.
Jesus classed the Pharisees as a group and always in the second person,
never in the first person which would have included himself as a member. 3. He
characterized them as "children of the devil" and their converts as more so.
4. Just because He supported the Torah did not make Him a member of any one of the Pharisaic schools. 5. He
was readily baptized by John who had challenged the Pharisees to "repent"
before they could be properly baptized. John did not command Jesus to repent. 6. The requirement to prove that one held to a certain school of Pharasaic thought to be a Pharisee disqualified Jesus as one of them. Jesus was not a "Pharisee". Jesus Christ had strong words about the Pharisees,
and what awaited some of them: "He answered them, 'And why do you transgress the Commandment of God for
the sake of your tradition (their oral law-gw)?" (Matthew 15:3-6 RSV). "Then
they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of
bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees."
(Matthew 16:11-12 RSV) "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men; for you
neither enter yourselves, nor allow those who would enter to go in." (Matthew "Woe to you, scribes and
Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin,
and have neglected the weightier matters of the Law, justice and mercy and
faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. You blind
guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!" (Matthew 23:23-24) Was Jesus a "legalist"? WAS JESUS A LEGALIST? Hebrews
4 :15 "For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our
weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin." Jesus was born under the Law and He kept
it perfectly. If sin is "violation of law"(Strong's)
(1 John 3:4), Jesus did not sin; therefore, Jesus kept the Law! In that sense then, Jesus was a "legalist"!! In Matthew Philippians
2:7 states that Jesus "made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant (literally, a slave), and coming
in the likeness of men. 8 And being
found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the
death of the cross." (NKJV) Jesus
was an "obedient" legalist. He was
"obedient" like a "slave". Hebrews
5:8-9 states that "though He was a Son, yet He learned obedience by the things which He
suffered. And having been perfected, He
became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him" (NKJV). 1 Peter 2:21-22 records "For to
this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you
should follow His steps: "Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in
His mouth" (NKJV). Should Christians be "legalists"? LEGALISTS WITH A "HEART" Are followers of Christ to be "legalists"?
In the same sense that Jesus was a legalist in obeying the Law (letter and
spirit), so Christians (followers of Christ) are to be legalists. He
became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him. Jesus was obedient. Are we to be "disobedient"? We
are to "follow His example". We are to
have the same "mind", attitude", of Jesus in humility and obedience (Philippians
2:5). This does not eliminate the heart's
role, for obedience must be sincere and from the heart (Romans Although
we are not under the Law of Moses (and certainly not the Talmud), we are now
under the "Law of the Spirit" (Romans 8:1,2): Christ's
Law. This Law must be kept today. It is called the "Perfect Law" (1 John 1);
i.e., the "Complete Law". A
few brethren, for example, have argued that Jesus authorized only alcoholic wine for
the Lord's Supper. Why? Because the Mishnah requires such for observing the Passover feast. But the "Mishnah"
was nonexistent in 1 John 3: 7-8 records "Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth
righteousness is righteous, even as He (God) is
righteous. He that commits sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son
of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." Isn't this plain? John says that it is what you DO that
counts. If you continue to do the
"works" of the devil, you will be with the devil eventually and not with God
who is righteous. 1
Peter 4 : 11 " If
anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of
God [that's the Bible]. ... that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus
Christ, to whom belong the glory and the dominion
forever and ever. Amen."(NKJV) Christians will glorify God by
being legalists for the will of God. Ephesians 5:17 (BBE), "For this reason, then, do not be foolish,
but be conscious of the Lord's pleasure." Did Paul actually orchestrate an expansion of His "Jewish sect" to include the Gentiles? POSTSCRIPT Some sincere people might be misled by some of the arguments of "Paul inventing Christianity". Namely, that Jesus did not preach to the Gentiles while on Earth. The record does state that Jesus did come and preached to the Jews and not the Gentile population generally. John 1 plainly states that Jesus came to His own (nation) but they received Him not. Jesus told the woman at Jacob's Well (who was not Jewish but Samaritan) that salvation was of the Jews. Jesus did send the seventy (70) (Matthew 10) to the Jews only. It is usually referred for distinction as "the limited commission." But the record also states that Jesus said that "other sheep have I that are not of this fold" (John 10:16); and after His resurrection He commanded those chosen disciples (apostles) to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mark 16--this is sometimes referred to as His "Great Commission"). Peter and not Paul converted the first Gentiles (Acts 10 and 11). Peter's testimony was very compelling if not decisive in the meeting in Jerusalem (Acts 15) that Gentiles were to be converted. SOURCES [references] 1The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of
Christianity (Paperback) by
Hyam
MacCoby
http://debate.org.uk/topics/theo/jes-paul.htm 2The Pharisaic Jesus and His Gospel Parables by
Philip Culbertson, This article
appeared in The Christian Century, *"The new Christology proceeding out
of the Christian-Jewish dialogue, expressed by such theologians as Catholic
John Pawlikowski and Anglican Paul van Buren,
challenges traditional Christian assumptions in a manner that can seem
threatening, yet captures an important strain of our faith too long suppressed." http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1912 3http://ezinearticles.com/?Jesus-the-Pharisee&id=43359 4(Jesus the Pharisee: A New Look at the Jewishness of Jesus (Paperback)by Harvey
Falk) 5 A good read with some caveats..., 6 Michael Stone, Scriptures, Sects, and
Visions. Fortress Press, 7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah 8
Webster's New International Dictionary of the English
Language, 2nd Edition, 1950. 9The History of the
Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, Emil Schurer. T and T Clark, 10THE SILENT CENTURIES:Religious Groups of the "Intertestamental"
Period by Al Maxey http://www.zianet.com/maxey/Inter7.htm 11http://www.bibletruths.net/Archives/BTAR214.htm 12James R. Hines www.baptistpillar.com/bd0367.htm 13
www.thefreedictionary.com/ 15http://www.recoveringlegalists.org/templates/System/details.asp?id=39848&PID=480062 READER RESPONSE #1 It is true that Jesus obeyed (perfectly) the laws He lived under while in the flesh among His creation. But that didn't make Him a legalist. If we truly follow Him, we won't be legalists either. But didn't Jesus give us commandments to obey? And didn't He tell us to teach others to obey His commands? Yes. That is true. But, is it legalism to encourage people to obey Jesus' commandments? No. Here's why... True faith will seek to please Christ, but it is not legalism. There is a vast difference between law-keeping and law-depending. Those who understand God's grace will want to do God's will, but they will never trust in their own performance for their salvation. They will glory only in the cross of Christ. It is one thing to seek God's will because we love Him and want to please Him. It is another thing altogether to approach a matter with the idea that our salvation depends on our own good performance. That is legalism, and it will always lead to pride (insofar as we are successful), or to despair and hopelessness (insofar as we fail). READER RESPONSE #2 Matthew 23 records seven woes directed by Jesus toward teachers of the law and Pharisees. For example: "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to." (Matthew 23:13) "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are." (Matthew 23:15) One of the definitions for "hypocrite" according to the dictionary is "sanctimonious person" which would fit the Pharisees. It would also fit [some] religious leaders today. |
|