"My family has a great standing in the community.” "We don't want that loser to be part of the church social committee!” "Those folks right there are all right; they're good people."

I can't recall all the times I have heard these sorts of comments from Christians. Sometimes, I can tell people's words are harsher than they intended them to be, and I don't want to be uncharitable when interpreting others' off-the-cuff remarks.

But at other times, I fear there is an underlying meritocracy that exists in people's hearts and minds; a subtle but profound legalism that is far too close to the Pharisee's anti-grace prayer "God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are" (Luke 18:11).

People who have experienced grace seek, by grace, to be gracious. I fear that the harsh, arrogant words I have sometimes heard are evidence of hearts devoid of grace, hearts that are existing in the broken Covenant of Works. Am I mistaking things? Am I being too sensitive? Do I see the phantom of legalism where it does not, in fact, exist?

William Strong on Legalism

William Strong has some things to say about how prevalent legalism is. He says that it is part of the Adamic nature to desire a works-based system and to promote one's own righteousness. People, by nature, want a meritocracy when approaching God.

Strong asserts that people desire to be "under the law" for salvation. They want acceptance with God to be based on their personal merit and worth. Strong delves into Pauline theology to demonstrate this point. In Galatians 4:21, Paul describes people who "desire to be under the law." Desiring to be under the law is desiring to be in a works-based system or to be in the Covenant of Works.

Earlier in Galatians, Paul describes people who "are of the works of the law" (Gal. 3:10). The two sayings are synonymous. Both refer to people who desire to be under the law as a covenant, or who desire to be justified by works. Elsewhere, Paul describes them as people who go "about to establish their own righteousness" (Rom. 10:3).

In selecting these three verses from Paul, Strong has honed in on an important biblical concept that has striking implications about the psychological state of mankind. People are committed to promoting a high estimation of their own virtue. If this were simply a tendency to promote oneself among other people, it would merely be obnoxiously egotistical.

But people bring this meritocracy even into their hope for acceptance with the most holy God. Such people would abhor any approach to spirituality that demands casting away one's own righteousness and admitting that one has nothing except spiritual poverty. The striking thing is that Strong asserts all people are this way—the works-oriented Jews are a "pattern for all mankind, and in whom the dispositions of all men may be read."[1]

Legalism exists in all ages and is ubiquitous

Naturally, Strong next supports his contention that this legalism exists in all ages and is ubiquitous among humankind. He does so in nine examples in Scripture and church history. The result is a remarkable cumulative case.

1.      Adam is his first example; God placed a flaming sword between Adam and the tree of life (Gen. 3:24), showing that God was convincing Adam that eternal life couldn't be gained according to the terms of the first covenant. God saw a legal tendency in Adam's heart; the original covenant of works was apparently more than a mere echo there.

2.      Strong's second example is Cain, who desired to be in the Covenant of Works. Cain "offered sacrifices, but it was not in faith, or with an expectation to be accepted in the promised seed, and yet he expected to be accepted, and when he saw he was not, his pride was turned into rage."[2]

3.      The nation of Israel showed how implacable this legalism is in mankind. Strong says that Israel insisted on turning the Mosaic covenant into a Covenant of Works and "did seek righteousness and life by the obedience of it."[3]

4.      The rich young ruler of Matthew 19 exemplifies the tendency of people to desire a Covenant of Works. "Eternal life he thought must be got in a way of doing."[4] Jesus answered the young ruler according to his own principles when he told the young man to keep the law to gain life (Matt. 19:16–17).

5.      The Pharisees also show a strong works-orientation as they went about to establish their own righteousness (Rom. 10:3).

6.      The Judaizers, who accepted Jesus as the Messiah, insisted on combining faith with works (Acts 15:5).

7.      Strong says Roman Catholicism is a continuation of the Adamic nature's desire to relate to God by means of the Covenant of Works.

8.      Strong describes what has been labeled Neonomianism as yet another example of men's desire to be under the law. "Others turn faith into a work and say that it is faith that is accepted of God as the matter of our righteousness, instead of the righteousness of the moral law, and not the righteousness of Christ made ours by imputation."[5]

9.      Strong's ninth and final example may hit closest to home for many of us, and it shows how extremely insightful he could be in discerning fallen thinking, which might even still lurk in the minds of regenerated people. The majority of observable people demonstrate mankind's preference to be under the law. "How they… rest in the duty alone…and boast themselves of their own performances, and how far most men are after a duty from a humble-looking up to Christ for acceptance of it."[6]

Strong is saying that doing works without being aware of needing the Mediator to make those works acceptable to God (cf. 1 Pet. 2:5) is evidence of preferring the Covenant of Works. This is extremely insightful as well as patently biblical. And as experimental theology, it helpfully exposes fallen, Adamic thinking that is rampant in the natural man, which may still lurk in Christians.   The Spirit must mortify this tendency. Expecting my works to be acceptable to God merely because, "hey, I did them," is clearly anti-Christian. Just as we pray "in Jesus' name amen," all our works must be done in conscious dependence upon our High Priest.

Whether or not one agrees with every detail of the above nine points, it is clear that Strong has supported his main idea well. In fact, Strong's particular selection of texts is remarkably useful and shows great discrimination and judgment. It is clear that people in Adam are marked by a desire to relate to God by means of the Covenant of Works. Preference for the first covenant is a rampant problem that spans history, and every era is replete with it. It may even be in you, lurking, and needing to be spotted and mortified. Thank God that in Christ and by His Spirit, He has provided all that we need for empowerment against sin, which so easily entangles.

[1] William Strong, A Discourse of the Two Covenants (1678; repr., Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 22.

[3] Strong, Discourse, 23

[4]Discourse, 23

[5] Strong, Discourse, 24

[6]Discourse, 24