permissive legalism

Legalistic people suck
Legalism makes me sick
I wonder what makes them tick?
I wanna go puke on it
Ephesians verse 2:8 states
God has saved us not by works but by grace
So what's it gonna take?
There's no getting through to you- MxPx ("I'm the Bad Guy")

I have never liked the lyrics above because being accusatory doesn't solve anything, but the words fit too well into my topic today not to post them.

Probably the biggest sticking point for whether the typical American accepts Christianity is their perception of sin. I struggled for a long time reconciling what I saw as legalistic and permissive passages in Scripture, as a lot of people do. I still do struggle with it a bit and I probably always will. I now believe I have a better understanding of why the dichotomy should not be between legalism and permissiveness, though. The dichotomy should be between legalism and commitment.

I have always believed, as I do now, that legalism is the process of setting up exacting rules for what is right and wrong. I used to take it a step further, though, and believe that it was only the people who followed those exacting rules or who forced others to follow those rules who were being legalistic. Until recently, it did not sink in with me that the permissive person who assumes that God is fine with the things that he or she is doing is often legalistic as well.

The foundational tenet of Christianity is that humans are hopelessly fallen and need a savior, and that salvation is impossible without Christ because of our fallen nature. We can't be good enough on our own. This is where trying to live by a set of rules, or legalism, is pointless. My epiphany was that most people who rationalize why some thing that they want to do is not sin use the same legalistic mental framework to determine whether it is sin. "Did the Bible explicitly forbid it? Were there any apparent loopholes? In that case, it's not really a sin." They may have fewer rules that they follow, but they are slaves to legalism nonetheless. The whole process of labeling the activity as sin or not is legalism even if the person ultimately determines that the activity in question is not sin.

This fact that both the pious and the permissive can be legalistic illuminates a passage for me that has long confused me, though it is one of my favorites. Paul opens Galatians 5 by condemning those who were telling new converts that they had to be circumcised to be saved. We're free from the Law, Paul notes, so circumcision holds zero value toward salvation. The first twelve verses in the chapter seem to be pretty straightforward, as they state that we aren't bound to follow the Law. Verse thirteen gets a little sticky, though.

"You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature rather, serve one another in love."

So, I'm free but I'm not supposed to indulge the sinful nature? Doesn't that mean I am still under a legalistic system? Verses 19 through 21 go further and even detail a list of things we're not supposed to do, almost like a set of rules.

"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God."

So, how can we reconcile this? Even with what I am about to say I still have trouble reading the acts of the sinful nature from any perspective other than a legalistic perspective. I think the key is in the verses prior to the description of the sinful nature. The following are verses 16 through 18.

"So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law."

If we focus solely on whether we take a strict or a permissive view of the rules rather than focusing on living by the Spirit we have missed the point. Unfortunately, the passage above is a vague statement that both the strict and the permissive can twist for their own purposes fairly easily. To get around this I turned to another passage that has similarly confused me in the past. In Romans 7 Paul talks about his sinning even though he did not want to, but in Romans 8 he says that those who are controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. The bridge between the two passages that addresses the apparent contradiction is Romans 7:25.

"Thanks be to God--through Jesus Christ our LORD! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin."

Our natures are slaves to the law of sin on this world no matter what we do, but we can give our mind to God's law. Legalism asks whether some action is a sin and worthy of punishment or not. This is not the system that God intended. The mind that is truly given over to God is concerned with loving God and neighbor, and through that love knows the right actions without a rule book. It is important to note that the mind will not win every battle with the nature. Paul's didn't. Legalism is not nearly so forgiving. Even with the mistakes, the mind that is truly committed to God is ultimately saved and receives no condemnation.

So legalism and permissiveness, if they both rely on establishing black and white rules, are two futile sides of the same coin. The real question is whether you are willing to make your mind and heart a slave to God. I have discussed in a separate post that this commitment will be painful if it is legitimate, but the pain does lead to a reward.

As I work through this myself I hope to hit more on the topic of what specifically making your mind and heart a slave to God entails. I don't know when I will post this, but I expect that it will reflect on the apparent sinfulness of almost everyone listed in Hebrews 11. Look forward to it.