The PuritanBoard - The Law of God

The PuritanBoard - The Law of God http://www.puritanboard.com/ Oh how I love your law! It is my meditation all the day. (Ps. 119:97)]]> en Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:05:06 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.puritanboard.com/images/retro/misc/rss.jpg The PuritanBoard - The Law of God http://www.puritanboard.com/ Hypocrites Concerning Matters of Liberty http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/hypocrites-concerning-matters-liberty-55680/ Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:15:48 GMT I have posted this before, but those threads were deleted due to some other difficulties. Anyway, I'll post it here in relation to the current thread titled "Drinking," for further discussion. I've posted it in the Law of God because I believe the Law is the standard from which we may measure the morality of a thing. It's a little longer than a usual post, so feel free to just ignore it if you like. :)

Hypocrites Concerning Matters of Liberty

Matthew 15:1-9

1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Hypocrites. Everyone’s a hypocrite. To some degree, also, all Christians are hypocrites. In fact, sometimes, especially Christians are hypocrites. Sometimes this hypocrisy is due to ignorance of what the Scriptures teach. Sometimes it’s due to secret sinful indulgences in which people want to continue, unfettered. Then, at other times, it’s simply due to an extra-Biblical “piety” that has caused even the most well-meaning of people to make commandments out of the traditions of men.

Jesus asked a scathing rhetorical question to the Pharisees: Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? He was pointing out their blatant hypocrisy of claiming to be the spiritual authorities of their day, but antithetically nullifying (in their minds, anyway) the commandments of God by their spiritual “insights.” Now, as noted earlier, some do this out of spiritual ignorance. There are instances in which both ignorance and an extra-Biblical “piety” play a part. Consider, for example, the subject of Christians drinking alcoholic beverages.

Most professing Christians in America, because of the prohibition and temperance movements of times past, ignorantly and automatically assume that the mere intake of alcohol for the Christian is sinful. They think this not for Biblical reasons, but for pragmatic reasons. They also believe this to be an honorable and noble cause because of the past abuse which has been rendered due to sinful men’s over-indulgence of alcohol.

To the serious-minded Christian, no doubt, it can be very tempting to jump on this throw-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater bandwagon, believing it will somehow accomplish a declension in the abuse of alcohol. In fact, though, the opposite is true and can be attested to by the fact that since the time of prohibition, many have seen alcohol as inherently evil. Thus, it’s considered rebellious to partake. Thus, those wanting to rebel will usually abuse this gift of God, in order to show their rebellion, get back at, or irritate those whom they will.

The drinking of alcohol is just one example and is not intended to be the focus of this entry. what I am trying to expose here is the sin and hypocrisy of professing Christians who seek to bind the conscience of other believers concerning things considered as indifferent by Scripture. Sadly, their attempt to legitimate such an idea cannot be adequately substantiated by Scripture, and most appeals then are pragmatic, not according to the principle of Sola Scriptura.

Scripture speaks clearly concerning the Christian’s treatment of things indifferent. Involved herein is the principle of Christian Liberty. Two instances which immediately come to mind are Romans 14, and a portion of 1 Corinthians 10. You see, Christian Liberty of things indifferent works, at least it should work, both ways. The 14th chapter of Romans can almost be divided perfectly in half. The first section discusses the subject of passing judgment on other Christians for their personal convictions on things which are scripturally indifferent. The second portion examines the ultimate crux of the matter: Not being a stumbling block to the “weaker” Christian.

1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. 2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. 3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. 4 Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. - Romans 14:1-4

Here, Paul makes clear that the stronger Christian ought to welcome the “weaker” Christian, but never for the purpose of arguing over opinions (of things indifferent). By “weak” Paul means immature. Now, this doesn’t mean anything negative, necessarily. It simply means, more than likely, a new convert who is not yet mature or educated enough to understand that, for example, meat which has been previously sacrificed to idols insn’t unclean, in and of itself. Therefore, a Christian may freely eat such meat since, to him, it is just meat and is something that can be enjoyed to the glory of God. Paul issues a two-fold admonition here. He says to these two “types” of Christians, “Do not think less or sinful of the other for either his indulgence or his abstinence of the food, because such a matter is indifferent.” Basically, Paul thinks a man should go with his own conscience, but not try to bind the conscience of another, since it cannot be proven Biblically that one must or must not partake. Each one should be convinced in his own mind.

13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of: 17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. 18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. 19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. 20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence. 21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. 22Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. 23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. – Romans 14:13-23

Next, Paul speaks to the matter of not causing a weaker brother to stumble. Now, when it comes to the subject of alcohol, I believe this is a much misused passage by those who proclaim it sinful to partake thereof. Their thoughts would affirm this kind of statement:

Look, drinking alcohol, in and of itself, is not sinful. But, I believe, because of the abuse that alcohol indulgence has caused over the years, that we ought not partake, because it will cause people to stumble.

These mostly sincere, but nonetheless wrong people will appeal to Romans 14:21, but apparently have overlooked, discarded, or altogether ignored verse 16. There is a balance when it comes to Christian Liberty:

Firstly, we’re not to use our Christian Liberty as license to sin.

Secondly, we should not indulge in Christian Liberty by rubbing it in the face of the weaker brother who may be caused to stumble.

However, this does not mean that a Christian can cry out, “You’re making me stumble!” every time they see a brother engaging in something that is scripturally indifferent. This is precisely Paul’s point in verse 16. The stronger brother needs to patiently, lovingly, but firmly educate the weaker, so as to show him how things scripturally indifferent are not, in and of themselves, sinful to every individual in all circumstances or situations. This education, mind you, ought not be done for the purpose of merely justifying the stronger Christians partaking, but should be done with the intent of edifying and maturing the weaker brother, in Christian love and charity.

The goal for Paul’s admonition here is not simply so the stronger brother can glory in being “smarter” or further along than the weaker. Nor does he have in mind the stronger being justified in all he does. Rather, the goal is the unity of the brethren and the avoidance of one passing judgment on the other for either their partaking of, or abstaining from, things which are not really addressed by Scripture, and this is the building up of Christian love.

Now we consider 1 Corinthians 10:23-33

23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. 24 Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth. 25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: 26 For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof. 27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.28 But if any man say unto you, this is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof: 29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man’s conscience? 30 For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? 31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. 32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: 33 Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

Here, the context is not merely believers, but also unbelievers. Look, we, being Reformed, need to be honest. We’ve all, I’m sure, been guilty of doing something that we shouldn’t have done in a certain situation, and then attempted to justify it under the guise of Christian Liberty. If you haven’t, that’s great! However, I know that I’m certainly guilty of having done so. This being said, we would do well to remember this statement.

All things are lawful, but all things are not expedient

That is, all things which are not contrary to God’s Law, nor unlawful by demand of the State are OK. But just because such is the case, doesn’t mean they’re helpful or, for that matter, necessary. What we must guard against, as Christians, is the over-indulgence of things indifferent and the flaunting thereof. This is the thrust of Paul’s words in the first portion of the passage at hand.

Paul then says that sometimes we abstain from things scripturally indifferent for the sake of not our own conscience, but the conscience of the unbeliever. This is where the indulgence of Christian Liberty can prove detrimental. For example, it is not wise, in the presence of unbelievers, to talk about, say, alcoholic beverages in the same manner they do. Why? Because typically, in the life of the unbeliever, drunkenness is heavily associated with such discussion and is usually the aim of his drinking in the first place (I’m not saying this is always the case, just typically). Now, engaging in such discussion, unless one is showing the utter foolishness of the said behavior, might give the unbeliever the impression that such practice is somehow acceptable. In turn, this could mislead them. Instead, just as it may be with the weaker brother, with time and opportunity, you could make your case Biblically with much patience, so there’s no excuse for anyone’s misunderstanding.

The fact is, brothers and sisters, there is no rigid instruction in this matter, because each situation for each Christian is unique and distinct from another’s. However, there are Biblical principles to guide us in the way we should go, as can be shown by the aforementioned passages. What we must avoid is trying to make commandments out of our personal convictions of things which are scripturally indifferent, lest we be hypocrites like the Pharisees.

Now, may we be faithful to Scripture, sensitive to our consciences as guided by the Holy Spirit, and seek not our own good, but the good of our neighbors. Grace and Peace. ]]> The Law of God Joshua http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/hypocrites-concerning-matters-liberty-55680/ Drinking http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/drinking-55658/ Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:23:22 GMT Hi All,

OK, I'm going to open a can or worms here, but I have to know how the Presbyterian members here feel about the drinking of alcohol? I abstain from drinking, not because I'm a baptist, but because I'm convinced by scripture not to cause a brother to stumble (Romans 14:21). Nowhere in scripture is alcohol prohibited for the Christian, that I understand and don't judge anyone who does; getting drunk is another question. Before I was saved I drank a lot. I know if I was to drink I couln't stop at one or two drinks. I've seen brothers in Christ stumble over another brothers drinking to the point he would get drunk. I also have seen small group classes that serve drinks during bible study and this seems to send the wrong signal to the world outside (IMO).

I noticed that a lot of the Presbyterians here speak of drinking and even have alcohol avatars. Do you all not see any problem with drinking as a a follower of Christ in that it may cause another to stumble or give the appearance of evil to your Christian reputation? I don't feel I'm being legalistic in asking, just curious how you justify drinking. ]]> The Law of God SolaSaint http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/drinking-55658/ 2d Cmd, Tithe and Sacrilege http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/2d-cmd-tithe-sacrilege-55643/ Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:16:57 GMT In light of some recent threads dealing with the tithe, I thought it might be of interest that the Westminster Larger Catechism defines a refusal to tithe as sacrilege, and a violation of the Second Commandment... In light of some recent threads dealing with the tithe, I thought it might be of interest that the Westminster Larger Catechism defines a refusal to tithe as sacrilege, and a violation of the Second Commandment:

Quote:

Q. 109. What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

A. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are... simony; sacrilege;[549] all neglect, contempt, hindering, and opposing the worship and ordinances which God hath appointed.

[549] Romans 2:22. Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Malachi 3:8. Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.

Cheers, ]]> The Law of God Christusregnat http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/2d-cmd-tithe-sacrilege-55643/ 2nd Commandment and ESPN http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/2nd-commandment-espn-55549/ Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:39:46 GMT On my way in to school today I was listening to ESPN Radio. The announcer was reading some story about the Vatican telling us that we will see aliens in ten years or something like that. Of course the jokes went on and on especially to all the... On my way in to school today I was listening to ESPN Radio. The announcer was reading some story about the Vatican telling us that we will see aliens in ten years or something like that. Of course the jokes went on and on especially to all the Trekkies and other grown men living in basements with their moms making out with their arms.

One of the things he said was still a mark against these guys, but I found parallels to the 2nd. He was asking, "what if when the aliens get here they are offended by our representations of them. What if they despise the idea of us pretending to be them. Seriously think about it. Derek Jeter does not hang out with guys who always wear his jersey. It annoys him. He finds it insulting. Dude grow up. Jeter hangs around normal people. The only athletes that like to have their friends wear their jerseys are the egomaniacs that only psycho fans can enjoy being around anyway." (10 minute monologue condensed and paraphrased by me)

I am not doing complete justice to what he was saying, but you get the point. I started thinking. Why is it that we can grasp this concept of images and how disrespectful it is in regards to each other, but somehow when it comes to worship most are completely oblivious to the disrespect?

Well just my thought for the day. ]]> The Law of God Chaplainintraining http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/2nd-commandment-espn-55549/ Application of the 2nd Commandment http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/application-2nd-commandment-55435/ Sat, 14 Nov 2009 01:03:09 GMT Being fully convinced that images of God/Christ are a violation of the second commandment and that to make or possess these types of images is idolatry, how should we treat members of the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic churches or anyone who... Being fully convinced that images of God/Christ are a violation of the second commandment and that to make or possess these types of images is idolatry, how should we treat members of the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic churches or anyone who partakes in the idolatry of images?

Quote:

1 Corinthians 5:11
But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler--not even to eat with such a one.

I have friends that are Eastern Orthodox and my parents and brother both have images of Christ all over their homes. Over the past year I have really struggled with having fellowship with my family and friends over this issue in particular.

Is the verse quoted above applicable to the situation? ]]> The Law of God gene_mingo http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/application-2nd-commandment-55435/ Legalism and Antinomianism http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/legalism-antinomianism-55087/ Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:09:50 GMT Since both are equally heretical, how does a church maintain the orthodox middle ground? This seems to be a very problematic area and it seems to be difficult for churches to realize when they are moving too far in either direction. Thanks, ... Since both are equally heretical, how does a church maintain the orthodox middle ground? This seems to be a very problematic area and it seems to be difficult for churches to realize when they are moving too far in either direction.

Thanks,

David ]]> The Law of God DD2009 http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/legalism-antinomianism-55087/ Sabbath Concerns http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/sabbath-concerns-55014/ Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:34:44 GMT This may have been answered already in a previous post but I just felt like I need an answer to this question. I work at a job where I let them know up front before they hired me that I was not comfortable working Sundays for religious reasons. My... This may have been answered already in a previous post but I just felt like I need an answer to this question. I work at a job where I let them know up front before they hired me that I was not comfortable working Sundays for religious reasons. My schedule does not conflict with my Church attendance but I am still required to work Sundays and I cant really get out of working so I just don't know what to do I cant quit because then I have no income (outside of social Security Disability) so I don't know what to do related question also is buying a sandwich and a cup of Coffee which is essentially your dinner for the night wrong? Unrelated most everybody at my Church holds to a NCT view of The Sabbath so I don't know how to relate my concerns about violating The Sabbath to them seeing as they mostly believe it is a type of belief in Christ. ]]> The Law of God Parsifal23 http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/sabbath-concerns-55014/ <![CDATA[Looking for In-Print Material on "Continental" v. "Puritan" on the Sabbath]]> http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/looking-print-material-continental-v-puritan-sabbath-55001/ Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:45:12 GMT Hi all,

Given that it's popular to pit the "Continental" view of the Sabbath against the "Puritan" view, I am wondering if anyone can point me in the direction of anything in-print that makes that case or just uses the terminology. I have the following that do, but am looking for more in-print resources:

R. C. Sproul, Now, That's a Good Question!
R. C. Sproul, Truths We Confess

Any others? ]]> The Law of God dannyhyde http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/looking-print-material-continental-v-puritan-sabbath-55001/ The permissibility of purchasing from wicked companies http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/permissibility-purchasing-wicked-companies-54978/ Tue, 03 Nov 2009 05:51:55 GMT When is it permissible to purchase goods from a company if it is known that they are wicked in their means of production? Certainly the presence of sin in the means of production cannot immediately disallow us from purchasing from the company... When is it permissible to purchase goods from a company if it is known that they are wicked in their means of production? Certainly the presence of sin in the means of production cannot immediately disallow us from purchasing from the company (otherwise we couldn't buy anything), but it seems there is a line somewhere (e.g. a company who unabashedly uses sweat shops, and whose proceeds go to benefit an abortion clinic).

Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 10 come to mind, especially vv. 25 ff. But I'm not sure how to apply that to this context, as he is referring to not making others stumble, not to the investigation of truly evil practices. ]]> The Law of God Confessor http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/permissibility-purchasing-wicked-companies-54978/ Law Enforcement labor on the Sabbath? http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/law-enforcement-labor-sabbath-54970/ Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:23:32 GMT Hello there, this specific question may have been addressed previously on the board, but I couldn't find it if it has.

My question is whether or not it breaks the puritan view of the Sabbath for a police officer to work on Sunday? or a firefighter? I am applying for a job as a police officer, but this question is making me wonder whether or not this would even be godly of me to do, seeing as how I would certainly be required to work some Sundays? Is there any exceptions, given the nature of the work? Does a Marine in battle break the Sabbath if he is forced to defend a company of troops? If crime exists on Sundays and people's lives must be defended, and evil supressed through law, what would a people do if everyone was a Christian in the town and there was a need?

Any and all help would be greatly appreciated. ]]> The Law of God TKarrer http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/law-enforcement-labor-sabbath-54970/ The 5th Commandment and the Two Tables of the Law http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/5th-commandment-two-tables-law-54816/ Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:10:55 GMT

Quote:

"This law, after his Fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon mount Sinai in ten commandments, and written in two tables; the first four commandments containing our duty toward God, and the other six our duty to man."
-WCF XIX.II

I have read some theologians positing that the 5th commandment might be considered part of the first table - part of our duty before God in some sense. Now, I think it's clear the Confession is right to place it in the second table because clearly parents are people (duh ;) ), but do you think there might be some merit in the idea that obedience to parents might, in some way, fit in the first of the two greatest commandments as much as the second? I'm interested to hear some thoughts on this. :popcorn:

Edit: IOW, could the 5th commandment fit under "Love the Lord your God" as much as under "Love your neighbor"? ]]> The Law of God austinww http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/5th-commandment-two-tables-law-54816/ Cross and 2nd commandment http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/cross-2nd-commandment-54634/ Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:23:19 GMT Is a picture of a cross (minus a pic of "Jesus") consisered a violation of the 2nd commandment? ]]> The Law of God Unashamed 116 http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/cross-2nd-commandment-54634/