Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnpreacher  That to me is a total contradiction. Perhaps others should not be surprised that there are tee-totalers on the PB. But yet bwsmith had her "feet held to the fire" over her conviction, even though as far as I remember she never used the word sin when it came to drinking. | No, as I pointed out to you, Romans 14 did not apply to bwsmith as the weaker brother.
Her feet were held to the fire because the manner in which she was arguing against the thing was un-Biblical and, also, not the manner in which the "weaker brother" is commanded to act in such situations. I guess you don't want to continue to debate this issue but merely start a whole new thread where this issue is brought up again.
Here is what I said with respect to Romans 14 when you referred to her as a weaker sister Quote:
Originally Posted by SemperFideles Again, no she can not. I would ask you to read Calvin in his commentatry on Romans 14 for I believe he is spot on. bwsmith is the wife of an Elder. She is not (or should not be at least) a neophyte in the faith. That's the first point.
The second point is that Romans 14 is primarily addressing those who have scruples that were based upon the Mosaic ordinances that they haven't quite shaken off. In other words, the reason the weaker brother in Romans 14 still has a problem eating pork is that he grew up in a time when it was strictly forbidden to eat pork. The person who has come to fully understand his freedom in Christ is to be in a place where they realize that no food or drink can defile. In this case, abstinence has never been a Biblical command that the Jews would then have to "shake off."
Third, even when we allow for broader application, at the very least the "weaker brother" is not permitted to judge what another brother eats or drinks and say that they dishonor the Lord somehow in their doing of it. Paul's point, to a large extent, is "mind your own business" and that if it's a sin for you then be content with your scruples but don't try to put another brother or sister under the yoke of your scruples. Thus, even if I concede bwsmith is the "weaker brother", the Biblical rebuke to "mind her own business" would be appropriate as essentially an attempt to restrict the liberty of others by announcing "...this is unwise behavior...." | I would point out, as well, that the injunction by Paul is that we should not use our liberty to tempt another brother to do something that they believe in their conscience they would not do. This was not the concern of bwsmith. She was not worried that she would sin, she was worried that others would sin. If bwsmith, again, had expressed a Gospel motivation, admitted she had a personal scruple, and did not personally partake and might be tempted to sin by others if they drank around her, then the case could be made that she is the weaker sister.  I closed the other thread because I am quite weary of the justifying of the unwise use of Scripture with reference to the things we call wise normatively. If you want to continue to discuss on this thread, it will not resurrect that discussion any further. You've had your 2-3 posts about how unjustified the criticism is so let's let it rest.
If you want to discuss Christian Liberty in general then that is fine. Frankly, however, if what I have said about Gospel motivation in the other thread has not sunk in, I'm not sure how this discussion can possibly proceed along positive lines as Romans 6 would be just as normative to discuss Christian liberty as Romans 14.
I have commended that you read Calvin on Romans 14 so I'll quote him below. It should be noted that if we cease doing everything that we fear might "offend a weaker brother" there is no end to the things we could find a person to be offended by. Quote:
1. Him indeed, etc. He passes on now to lay down a precept especially necessary for the instruction of the Church, — that they who have made the most progress in Christian doctrine should accommodate themselves to the more ignorant, and employ their own strength to sustain their weakness; for among the people of God there are some weaker than others, and who, except they are treated with great tenderness and kindness, will be discouraged, and become at length alienated from religion. And it is very probable that this happened especially at that time; for the Churches were formed of both Jews and Gentiles; some of whom, having been long accustomed to the rites of the Mosaic law, having been brought up in them from childhood, were not easily drawn away from them; and there were others who, having never learnt such things, refused a yoke to which they had not been accustomed.
Now, as man’s disposition is to slide from a difference in opinion to quarrels and contentions, the Apostle shows how they who thus vary in their opinions may live together without any discord; and he prescribes this as the best mode, — that they who are strong should spend their labor in assisting the weak, and that they who have made the greatest advances should bear with the more ignorant. For God, by making us stronger than others, does not bestow strength that we may oppress the weak; nor is it the part of Christian wisdom to be above measure insolent, and to despise others. The import then of what he addresses to the more intelligent and the already confirmed, is this, — that the ampler the grace which they had received from the Lord, the more bound they were to help their neighbors.
Not for the debatings of questions. This is a defective sentence, as the word which is necessary to complete the sense is wanting. It appears, however, evident, that he meant nothing else than that the weak should not be wearied with fruitless disputes. But we must remember the subject he now handles: for as many of the Jews still clave to the shadows of the law, he indeed admits, that this was a fault in them; he yet requires that they should be for a time excused; for to press the matter urgently on them might have shaken their faith.
He then calls those contentious questions which disturb a mind not yet sufficiently established, or which involve it in doubts. It may at the same time be proper to extend this farther, even to any thorny and difficult questions, by which weak consciences, without any edification, may be disquieted and disturbed. We ought then to consider what questions any one is able to bear, and to accommodate our teaching to the capacity of individuals.
2. Let him who believes, etc. What Erasmus has followed among the various readings I know not; but he has mutilated this sentence, which, in Paul’s words, is complete; and instead of the relative article he has improperly introduced alius — one, “One indeed believes,” etc. That I take the infinitive for an imperative, ought not to appear unnatural nor strained, for it is a mode of speaking very usual with Paul.
He then calls those believers who were endued with a conscience fully satisfied; to these he allowed the use of all things without any difference. In the mean time the weak did eat herbs, and abstained from those things, the use of which he thought was not lawful. If the common version be more approved, the meaning then will be, — that it is not right that he who freely eats all things, as he believes them to be lawful, should require those, who are yet tender and weak in faith, to walk by the same rule. But to render the word sick, as some have done, is absurd.
3. Let not him who eats, etc. He wisely and suitably meets the faults of both parties. They who were strong had this fault, — that they despised those as superstitious who were scrupulous about insignificant things, and also derided them: these, on the other hand, were hardly able to refrain from rash judgments, so as not to condemn what they did not follow; for whatever they perceived to be contrary to their own sentiments, they thought was evil. Hence he exhorts the former to refrain from contempt, and the latter from excessive moroseness. And the reason which he adds, as it belongs to both parties, ought to be applied to the two clauses, — “When you see,” he says, “a man illuminated with the knowledge of God, you have evidence enough that he is received by the Lord; if you either despise or condemn him, you reject him whom God has embraced.”
4. Who art thou who judgest, etc. “As you would act uncourteously, yea, and presumptuously among men, were you to bring another man’s servant, under your own rules, and try all his acts by the rule of your own will; so you assume too much, if you condemn anything in God’s servant, because it does not please you; for it belongs not to you to prescribe to him what to do and what not to do, nor is it necessary for him to live according to your law.”
Now, though the power of judging as to the person, and also as to the deed, is taken from us, there is yet much difference between the two; for we ought to leave the man, whatever he may be, to the judgment of God; but as to his deeds we may indeed form a decisive opinion, though not according to our own views, but according to the word of God; and the judgment, derived from his word, is neither human, nor another man’s judgment. Paul then intended here to restrain us from presumption in judging; into which they fall, who dare to pronounce anything respecting the actions of men without the warrant of God’s word.
To his own Lord he stands or falls, etc. As though he said, — “It belongs rightly to the Lord, either to disapprove, or to accept what his servant doeth: hence he robs the Lord, who attempts to take to himself this authority.” And he adds, he shall indeed stand: and by so saying, he not only bids us to abstain from condemning, but also exhorts us to mercy and kindness, so as ever to hope well of him, in whom we perceive anything of God; inasmuch as the Lord has given us a hope, that he will fully confirm, and lead to perfection, those in whom he has begun the work of grace.
But by referring to the power of God, he means not simply, as though he had said, that God can do this if he will; but, after the usual manner of Scripture, he connects God’s will with his power: and yet he speaks not here of perpetuity, as though they must stand to the end whom God has once raised up; but he only reminds us, that we are to entertain a good hope, and that our judgments should lean this way; as he also teaches us in another place,
“He who began in you a good work, will perform it to the end.” (Philippians 1:6.)
In short, Paul shows to what side their judgments incline, in whom love abounds.
| |