We can live by it, or we can break ourselves against it.

Readership: All
Theme: The Snares of Sin
Length: 1,400 words
Reading Time: 7 minutes

Relaxing the Rules???

Starting in late 2020, commenter Eric Francis Silk (EFS), AKA Raphael Tisserand, has presented an observant argument in bits and pieces here and there which have addressed The Young Man’s Problem.

Scott summarized EFS’s arguments as such.

“His perspective is that there is nothing any one man can do in the current cultural context to thread this needle and land in a loving, Christian, lifelong marriage.

And he is ultimately right about that. This is a social problem that will only be solved once the societal level guard rails and supports for nuclear family formation and maintenance are restored.

That’s probably not happening in our lifetimes.”

All of EFS’s statements are rather accurate in describing the broken state of the current SMP/MMP. But the sticking point is where EFS advocated for a “relaxation of the moral Law” as a practical concession, assuming this would be beneficial in navigating the debased marketplace. Of course, this point of his argument is absurd, because moral Law is instituted by God, and humans cannot change moral Law any more than we can change gravity or the color of the sky.

I thought maybe what he meant to say is that we should allow greater grace in how we regard those who transgress the moral Law. But we already have plenty of that, so that’s a moot point.

img-1783681818-6a50d31a7b1271.14799854.jpgThe Rev. Maria Swearingen, center left, and the Rev. Sally Sarratt, center right, are welcomed into membership at Calgary Baptist Church by other clergy during a service on Feb. 26, 2017, in Washington, D.C. RNS photo by Adelle M. Banks. Image Source: Pulpit and Pen: Female “Pastors” in Baptist Churches: A Debate (2017/12/10)

EFS’s side of the argument had a few assumptions which he did not clearly state in the beginning. He also referred to some philosophical works readers are unfamiliar with and which needed to be placed into context of his argument. His main antagonist, Oscar, also carried his own set of presumptions, and may have latched onto some propositions which EFS probably didn’t mean to make.

My conclusion was that EFS’s viewpoint could not be described in just a few comments. It really deserves a full length essay. On January 1, 2021, I wrote a private email to EFS to invite him to write a guest post to explain his views in a more reasonable and articulate manner so that he could explain his position more fully. I do think his position is one that many men share, and it would benefit us all if this position could be put into elegant form.

So far, he has not followed through on this, and now, enough time has passed since my invitation that I think he never will. I am not surprised, because I believe such an argument simply cannot be formulated and still remain true to the tenets of faith.

Adam Piggot was considerably less generous to Eric and others who follow his view. He basically called them trolls. Adam wrote,

“If you don’t believe that the moral law is timelessly eternal, unbending, and unable to be changed, then you can go on ahead and try it for yourself, against the good advice of those at this blog. If you relax the rules, then you get USPCA and more of the moral rot that already surrounds us. So I think you don’t really know what you’re talking about, but it’s better for you to find out one way or another. But that’s between you and God, and not the official doctrinal stance, of course.”

img-1783682728-6a50d6a864add3.95147817.jpgImage Source: NBC News: Evangelical Lutheran Church elects first transgender bishop (2021/5/12)

We are Wholly Dependent on God

The time for discussion over this matter is now drawing to a close. Because I don’t want any readers to remain in doubt, either about the truth of the matter, or the official position of this blog, I will address Eric’s viewpoint as follows.

If one comes to appreciate his need for humility, mercy, and grace, then God is coming to know him.  If one comes to appreciate God’s Covenant Law, then he is coming to know God.

  • Some people want to be known by God without knowing neither God nor themselves. Sin is regarded as an end in and of itself. (This is the hedonistic “prodigal son” archetype.)
  • Others want to know everything about God without allowing God to know themselves. They are too proud, too self-righteous, or too fearful to be trusting. (This is the legalistic “elder brother” archetype.)

Christians recognize that human beings are sinful. The nature of sin builds Satan’s kingdom by destroying one’s sense of spiritual discernment and eroding the faith of others, among many other maladies. While it is an observable fact that many Christians discover faith or “find God” after engaging in morally illicit pursuits, the immorality itself is not what inspires faith, but rather, it is the deeper acquaintance with one’s self, one’s desires and needs, and one’s brokenness that causes a man to look beyond his mortal state and realize his need for God. God cannot be “found” through intentionally indulging in sin any more than mystical faith can be developed through legalistic Pharisaism. We cannot “reverse engineer” the process nor can we “earn” our own salvation, respectively.

  • People who believe lawlessness is congruent with scripture are Antimonianists. They have little regard for moral righteousness and the value thereof.
  • People who advocate loosening up the “rules” are actually endorsing lawlessness, which is something we already have too much of. If one rejects the moral Law, then he’s rejecting Christ.
  • If one clings to the “rules” as a self-justifying defense to avoid trusting God, then that is legalism. If one rejects faith, then he’s rejecting God’s love and grace.
  • People who believe the Christian religion is all about “following the rules” and “being a good person” are legalists. They have little appreciation for compassion, grace, and love.

As RedPillApostle wrote,

“We may not like God’s standards, because they are impossible for us to follow. I break them every day, many times a day and I am convinced that I do this in ways of which I am not even aware. This is where faith, grace and forgiveness come in, because the standards are easy to understand, but the application of them in life are not.”

img-1783683129-6a50d83924bd02.68692606.jpg

Conclusions

In summary, “Following the rules” vs. “NOT following the rules” is NOT The Way. Faith in Christ is The Way. “Following the rules” is the default setting for unbelievers and for those immature believers who have not yet explored their faith and have not yet developed a discernment of Moral Law (Hebrews 5:12-14).

For those who haven’t yet figured this out, all I’ll say is that human beings don’t have the spiritual authority to change the moral law. We only have the choice of whether to observe it or not. We can either live by it, or we can break ourselves against it. The moral law will not change, no matter what we do. That’s why it’s called a “Law” (by any definition).

However, we do have some latitude about how much of the law we can reasonably expect ourselves and others to follow. Getting these discrepancies and incongruences between the ideal and the real squared away in our mental assessment of self and our practice of living is colloquially called “coming to terms with one’s self”, and doing so under the authority of Christ is a fundamental part of one’s redemption. For readers who are unfamiliar with this, I recommend reading a couple previous posts, Elements of Emotional and Personal Maturity (2021/9/8) and Knowing One’s Self (2021/10/30).

Assuming that Eric is posing his idea with sincere intent, I would conclude that he is a searcher or possibly a new believer who still needs to come to terms with himself.

In the possibility that Adam is right — that EFS is indeed an insincere troll… He wins the consolation b00bie prize (maybe literally). Nice try, but this frame fails in the final analysis.

Related