Tags
antinomianism, God, Gospel, law, new calvinism, pharisees, righteousness, works
Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. – Matthew 5:19, 20
Matthew 5:19, 20 is often explained by New Calvinists in the following way:
Verse 19 indicates that we should revere God’s law, but since the pharisees were really, really good at keeping the law [an assumed interpretive criteria], we shouldn’t “try” to keep the law because that’s what they tried to do, and our righteousness must surpass theirs.
But we can see from the text alone that this interpretation is not true. Verses 19 and 20 are connected by a conjunction (“for”) which shows a relationship between the two verses. The subject of verse 19 does not lend such an interpretation to verse 20. Moreover, other biblical texts affirm the idea that verse 19 describes the Pharisees. That’s why Jesus launched into the whole “You have heard that it was said…but I tell you…” starting in the following sentence (verse 21). Those are specific examples of how the Pharisees taught things that contradicted the law. Not only that, Jesus said specifically in Matthew 15:1-9 that His contention with the Pharisees was the fact that they twisted the Scriptures according to their traditions:
Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,” he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: “‘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.’”
The Pharisees were not proficient at keeping God’s law outwardly. In fact, they didn’t do so at all, but rather propagated teaching “as doctrines the commandments of men.”
Therefore, the Pharisees were guilty of neglecting the true law and teaching others to do the same (Matthew 5:19). They were not the poster-children for some campaign to demonstrate the futility of law-keeping, especially in regard to believers. In fact, Christ said their lax attitude towards the law was indicative of those who will not enter the kingdom. For this reason the Pharisees were not the greatest in the kingdom as the masses suppose, but the least – if they were even in the kingdom at all. Therefore, when Christ told the crowd that their righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the Pharisees, He was plainly speaking of righteous behavior demanded of kingdom citizens who claim to be saved. Christ’s true contention against the Pharisees is evident when you consider that some translations interpret Matthew 15:6 this way: “…you have made void the law of God.” It is also interesting that Christ uses the quote from Isaiah to contrast true worship with teaching the rules of men rather than the commandments of God. Playing games with the law of God – flirts with worshipping in vain.
Most historians agree that the Pharisees believed that they were saved by virtue of being children of Abraham and circumcision alone (Luke 3:8; Galatians 6:15). The idea that the Pharisees were the embodiment of works-righteousness is patently false. According to Christ (Matthew 23:23-28), they were not only lawless on the outside; they were also lawless on the inside. Outwardly, they put on a show to appear righteous to others (so they probably didn’t even obey outwardly when in private) but on the inside they were greedy and self-serving. Christ used the illustrations of a cup and a tomb to indict the Pharisees for their lawlessness on the inside. In other words, their minds/thoughts were saturated with things like lust, covetousness and revenge while being concerned with outward appearances to impress others (bad motives).
The actual Greek word used in Matthew 23:28 is anomia. Christ said the Pharisees were also antinomians (lawless) on the inside. One of the primary reasons God judged the earth via the flood was the rampant lawlessness of the mind (Genesis 6:5). The fact that God calls for an inward obedience to Godly thinking is clear. Paul said in 2 Corinthians 10:5 that we are to “take every thought captive to obey Christ.”
The Pharisees were really more like the New Calvinists of today who relax God’s law and teach others to do the same, especially in regard to New Covenant theology.
- Paul Dohse, Sr., The Truth About New Calvinism: It’s History, Doctrine and Character
Quote
Therefore, when Christ told the crowd that their righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the Pharisees, He was plainly speaking of righteous behavior demanded of kingdom citizens who claim to be saved.
I would have to disagree with Dohse’s assesment on this part of his assertion. I believe the only way that our righteousness would ever exceed that of the Pharisees is by way of imputed righteousness. To interpret any other way is venturing into works justification.
Dohse is speaking of sanctification, not justification which is a (completed, not progressive act) declaration from God the Father.
I agree that Dohse is addressing sanctification , and looking at vs 19 of the passage cited , this is a reasonable interpretation of that verse , however , vs 20 , where Jesus says ;
you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
is an unambiguous reference to justification , and not sanctification.I think that the context of this passage is found in vs 17 where Jesus states that He has come to fulfil the law. I believe the question to be asked is did Jesus fulfil the law for our sanctification or our justification.
“I believe the question to be asked is did Jesus fulfil the law for our sanctification or our justification.”
Good question! Ok, I’ll answer that. Sanctification is not ‘justification in action’. Nor is sanctification the completion of justification. Justification is a completed, instantaneous, one-time, never-again-repeated declaration from God regarding our legal status before Him. We can say that Jesus is our sanctification, yet we are also in the process of being sanctified. If you are asking if Jesus obeyed or fulfilled the law for my sanctification so I can abandon God’s law and the imperatives of Scripture, live anyway I want, sinning with abandon so grace may abound, then absolutely not, Jesus did not fulfill the law for our sanctification. We are to pursue holiness of life, and Scripture everywhere speaks of our own exertion in doing so. See Hebrews 12:14.
Joel
I believe we agree on far more than we disagree, and I think that my posts reflect that agreement. I agree 100% that justification is by the finished work of Christ and that being justified does not absolve us from our responsibility towards sanctification. But if I could make one statement on this , and that is that sanctification is by the work of the Spirit in us, in co-operation with ourselves. In as much as we cannot justify ourselves , neither can we sanctify ourselves , the initiative is always from the Holy Spirit.
Key word you said…co-operation. I absolutely agree. We are ‘co-workers with God’ in sanctification, enabled by the Holy Spirit, yes. However, new calvinists say Jesus obeyed for us – for our sanctification – and that’s just not good theology.
Joel, you have been very fair, I see.
Are any examples available which show that Matt. 5:19-20 are “often explained” by New Calvinists the way in which this article states?
Are any examples available of New Calvinists who interpret and apply the Law as the Pharisees did in these passages?
Also, the article states.
And then:
Followed by:
If the first quote is true that the Pharisees did not keep God’s law outwardly, then it seems that the other two quotes do not follow the first since they would be meaningless if they did.
BTW, have you read Paul Helm’s artice “John Calvin’s Stroke of Genius”?
Pingback: 120112–George Hach’s Journal–Thursday | George Hach's Blog
Pingback: Better Counterfeits or Better Believers? « BibleOpia Blog
Pingback: Freedom from what? Pharisees, heresies and the Law | Stand Up for the Truth
Pingback: Resources for Matthew 5:19 - 20