“But what might be surprising in all of this, if we are paying close attention, is that there were Pharisees who were followers of Jesus! …. With this in mind, I want us to go back to the gospels and look carefully at Jesus’ interaction with the Pharisees.” - P&D
Tired of losing debates? Would you like a sure-fire way to win arguments? Consider learning from one of the best. The Pharisees had plenty of experience in theological controversy. Most notable was their interaction with the theological heresy of Christianity. Through the employment of several forms of fallacious arguments they managed to discredit Jesus and his follows and effectively “win” the debate. One prime example of their methodology is found in chapter seven of John’s Gospel. A careful examination of this passage uncovers some valuable lessons that modern controversialists can utilize for silencing the opposition.
So you want to be a hypocrite … If you believe the gospel, you’re at a disadvantage. You may not ever achieve the elite-level hypocrisy we find in Matthew 23, which probably requires a Pharisee-like depth of unbelief. But don’t be discouraged. Even believers can achieve several forms of high-quality hypocrisy.
Since all humans lapse into hypocrisy from time to time without even trying, I’m confident that, with just a little work, even you can achieve a noticeable level of expertise.
Here’s how.
“…we are hypocrites about being hypocrites. We hear the pastor mention the Pharisees during the Sunday sermon, and we smugly draw a bit of a caricature in our minds. The Pharisees are those other Christians we’ve known who ‘just don’t get it.’” - Ref21
Posted with permission from As I See It, which is available free by writing to the editor at [email protected].
T. Robertson (1863-1934) was a paragon of excellence in Bible scholarship—fully committed to biblical inerrancy, thorough in his research and study, and clear and readable in his writing. He stands even today unrivaled in his mastery of the New Testament.
Read the series.
Many dispensationalists are mistaken about the impetus for obeying the Mosaic Law, and they’re mistaken about Paul’s main point in his letter to the Galatian churches.1 These errors compound one another and, like an investment gone mad,2 they produce great confusion among Christians.
I’ll repeat something I wrote in the first installment of this series:
Read the rest of the series.
This is a sad little story, because we see sad little men rejecting their great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. They have made void the word of God through their tradition (cf. Mk 7:13). In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus’ early confrontations with the Pharisees come quickly, one after the other. This particular account is where the water boils over.
Loathing toward legalism (and perceived legalism) is commonplace in today’s evangelical ministries, including those of fundamentalist heritage, and Galatians often plays a prominent role in how we think about legalism and Christian liberty.
But liberty is often misunderstood, and overreactions—as well as under-developed reactions—to legalism seem to be a growing problem. It’s no coincidence that the Galatian error, and Paul’s remedial teaching, is also often misunderstood. The result is that a letter that has great potential to help us with our present-day understanding of law, grace and liberty ends up contributing to confusion instead.
So the question in focus here is, to paraphrase the title, what was the Galatian problem?
An Argument to Turn to Jesus Before the Bar
“In all my travels around the church in America, I rarely hear of people applying the teachings of Jesus or Paul to put church members on trial,” Mr. Jones said. “But when I do, it’s inevitably in a very conservative and controlling church. They’re the modern-day Pharisees.”
