What Legalism Isn't

Legalism is one of those terms that gets tossed around frequently in religious discussions. Calling someone legalistic is convenient when you’re losing an argument because it sounds devastating and it instantly puts the accused on the defensive. In my own experience, folks rely on it to close their case without ever making one. What I mean is, they treat it like an emergency brake to stop the conversation instantly because the thought of obedience is making them uncomfortable.

That’s not always how things play out. At any rate, the problem is that, while everyone assumes the term is negative, most of the time, the person using the word can’t define it. They just know it means “bad.” So instead of clarifying truth, the label shuts down honest-to-goodness discussion and replaces it with suspicion.

Here’s how a couple of dictionaries define it:

Strict, literal, or excessive conformity to the law or to a religious or moral code—the institutionalized legalism that restricts free choice (Merriam-Webster).

Excessive adherence to law or formula. In theology: dependence on moral law rather than on personal religious faith (Oxford Dictionary Online).

So when people say, “legalism,” thy could mean any of the following:

Strict adherence to law.

Strict adherence to the letter of the law while neglecting its intent—that is, outward conformity without the heart (mere ritualism).

Dependence on law or personal works as the basis for salvation—trusting one’s own righteousness rather than God.

These aren’t the same thing.

Yet all three often get lumped into the same bucket. That’s how you end up with people treating sincere obedience as if it’s the same thing as self-righteous pride—which is a category error.

Since the word legalism never appears in Scripture, we need to be very clear what exactly we mean.

Because the Bible never condemns taking God seriously.
The Bible never rebukes someone for obeying too closely.
The Bible never treats obedience as the enemy of grace.

What Scripture does condemn is very specific:

Adding human rules to God’s commands.

Obeying externally while the heart is cold.

Trusting your own righteousness instead of God’s.

If we don’t distinguish those, we will accuse the wrong people of the wrong things—and we may end up slandering the very obedience God praises.

So before anyone uses the word legalism again, we need to ask:

Which definition do you mean?

Does Scripture condemn that?

So let’s ask the obvious question: Is strict obedience to God wrong?
No. And Scripture could not be clearer about it.

God did not tell Joshua, “Be casual with my commandments, do your best, I’ll understand.”

He said:

“Be careful to do according to all the law… do not turn from it to the right or to the left… meditate on it day and night… be careful to do according to all that is written in it” (Josh. 1:7–8).

I think that's as good as any baseline to work from. God expected accuracy. God commanded precision. God praised diligence.

That’s not legalism.
That’s obedience.

The Pharisees were not condemned for taking God too seriously. They were condemned because they added their own rules (Mk. 7:7–9), ignored the heart of God’s law (Matt. 23:23), and performed their religion instead of living it (vv. 23:27–28).

Their problem was not zeal — their problem was pride.

To accuse careful obedience of being “legalistic” is to accuse Jesus Himself, because He said:

“I always do the things that are pleasing to Him” (Jn. 8:29).

If following God closely is legalism, then Christ was the chief legalist.

But we should know better. Scripture says the opposite — He is our perfect example.

“Therefore we also have as our ambition… to be pleasing to Him” (2 Cor. 5:9).

So let’s be clear:

Obedience is not arrogance.

Submission is not self-righteousness.

Careful adherence to God’s word is not legalism.

Legalism is adding, performing, or trusting self.


Obedience is loving, trusting, and following Christ.

Now, what about mere ritualism — going through the motions while the heart is checked out?

God rejects that too.

God told Israel: “Bring your worthless offerings no longer… I cannot endure iniquity and the solemn assembly” (Is. 1:13). Jesus said the same thing centuries later: “This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far away from Me” (Matt. 15:8).

So yes — empty religion is sin. But notice something important:

Ritualism is NOT obeying too closely.
 Ritualism is obeying without the heart.

This is not usually something people teach out loud — nobody stands up and says, “Just show up, mumble a prayer, and pretend to care.” But it is still possible to live that way. So the call in Scripture is not to abandon obedience, but to ensure that obedience is joined to a sincere heart of faith, reverence, and love.

The answer is not less obedience.
The answer is real obedience — obedience driven by love (Gal. 5:6).

“For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments” (1 Jn. 5:3).

So yes, ritualism must be confronted — but it must be confronted for what it actually is:

Not taking God too seriously, but not taking Him seriously enough.

Third, is the idea of salvation based on good works or moral effort wrong? Let’s be clear:

If you think your good works earn salvation, you have rejected the Gospel. Paul writes:

“Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due” (Rom. 4:4).

If salvation were earned, it would not be grace — it would be payment. And God owes no one a paycheck.

Salvation is God’s gift:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them” (Eph. 2:8–10).

Grace does not eliminate obedience; grace produces obedience:

“For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age” (Ti. 2:11–12).

The problem arises when one trusts in himself. Jesus told a parable about:

“some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt” (Lk. 18:9).

The Pharisee believed his actions made him righteous. The tax collector understood his need for mercy. The same warning appears in another place:

“For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God” (Rom. 10:3).

The correct posture before God is:

“So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, ‘We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done’” (Lk. 17:10).

Two people may obey the same command. One obeys because he trusts and loves God. The other obeys because he trusts and loves himself. Only the first is justified. And we cannot always see the difference from the outside—so we must judge actions by Scripture and leave motives to God.

The point of all this is not to make us suspicious of obedience, but to call us to the kind that flows from loving trust in Christ. Jesus never condemned careful adherence to God’s will; He condemned adding to God’s word, performing righteousness for show, and trusting in ourselves. Real obedience grows out of grace—it is the response of one who knows he is forgiven, dependent, and humbled before the Lord who saved him. So the question is not whether we obey, but whether our obedience is rooted in love for God or in pride in ourselves. Christ is the model of both perfect submission and perfect trust: “I always do the things that are pleasing to Him” (Jn. 8:29).

If we claim to follow Him, then our aim must be the same—not to earn anything because we are worthy, but to walk in His steps because He alone is worthy.