CHRISTIAN LIBERTY AS PART OF WHAT SHOULD BE A NORMAL CHRISTIAN LIFE - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 11 OF 11

Righteous Living Christian Church Indianapolis (Irvington)

 

Thank you very much to all of you who have followed this series. Hopefully it has given you things to think about. And PLEASE let me know your thoughts in a comment.

Allow me to debrief in this blog in three parts. 

1. A return to context, particularly what follows Romans 14.
2. How does Christian Liberty fit in with Christian life as a whole?
3. What is the point of Romans 14 and Christian Liberty?

You ready? I am.

CONTEXT

Chapter 14 ends with a statement that what isn't of faith is sin. It goes right into Chapter 15 (remember there are no chapter and verse divisions in the original, and that they're added for reference), which states we ought to bear with the scruples of the weak and please others, not ourselves, according to Christ's example and be granted one mind with each other so as one we can praise and glorify God. Romans 15:7 repeats the theme of Romans 14:1, stating, "Receive one another as Christ as received you."

CHRISTIAN LIFE

Is Christian Liberty something that stands by itself? Let me give a list of important aspects of our everyday Christian life, and see if it fits.

Bible reading/study? Actually, it does. Each one reading Scripture comes with presuppositions, biases, opinions, traditions, knowledge (and lack thereof), and life experiences. Will they all be the same? Nope. Should they be? Only if God made us all identical. In other words, Nope. Thus, Christian Liberty is not only a part of group Bible studies but enables us to challenge our thoughts and grow as we listen to each other as equals.

Prayer? This one is tougher because prayer usually is between one and God, as well as agreeing with each other in prayer. If you want to say it doesn't fit here, I'll permit that. On the other hand, when we pray about struggles with other believers or learning to love them more, I believe there is a connection.

Fellowship? Does this question need to be asked? Clearly, Christian Liberty is a part of fellowship with fellow believers, especially when seen as a manifestation of loving one another.

Evangelism? I personally believe that Christian Liberty is designed for evangelism no less than for fellowship. Why? Because we have the freedom to go where God calls us. I know some friends who were in a Christian band. They arrived at the church they thought they were booked at and found an empty parking lot. They called their contact, and found out they were booked at a bar. Would your band play at a bar? Well, this one told the owner they sang Christian songs, shared between songs, and gave an altar call. The bar owner shrugged and said he needed a band. To make a long story short, a half dozen came to the band's church the next morning, got saved, and became active church members. This band exercised Christian Liberty by following Jesus into that bar. 

Righteousness/Holiness? A person acting in Christian liberty properly will be living righteously and holy; he/she won't be using it as a license to sin. However, do we agree what holiness/righteousness looks like? Uh, what about us all looking at things differently? Christian liberty discourages us from judging others when their view of holiness and ours differs.

WHAT IS THE POINT?

One weakness of the church (and human nature) is that we expect others to conform to our standards. Romans 14, as the rest of Scripture, teaches we should instead focus on others, letting them be themselves and be more concerned about us offending them than them offending us.

Okay. Series done. Your comments?

SHALL WE GO COUNTER-CULTURAL AND GO WITHOUT? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 10 OF 11

Manley's Irish Mutt Pub & Eatery, Indianapolis

Does anybody agree with me that we are plagued with an entitlement mentality here in the U.S.A.? Wait, let me rephrase that: Does anybody NOT agree with me that we are plagued with an entitlement mentality here in the U.S.A.? I didn't think so.

On one hand, American culture would love the concept of Christian Liberty, where each individual is encouraged to be themselves and to enjoy non-sinful items (that is, items they are not convicted are sin). But as you probably know (if you don't either you haven't read the previous 9 installments of this series or I've done a terrible job with my presentation) the passages promoting Christian liberty encourage not practicing that Christian liberty if it offends a fellow believer.

In both Romans 14:14 and 14:20, Paul states something that seems to contradict the Old Testament dietary laws: Nothing is unclean of itself. His point? The Gentile who grew up on bacon wrapped lobster dinners ate nothing unclean, because he never read Leviticus 11. Paul echoes that statement in 1 Timothy 4:3-5 and Titus 1:15.

However, Paul also pointed out that to the Jew steeped on the Mosaic dietary codes would consider that bacon wrapped lobster unclean, and with that conviction, that tasty item would be unclean to him. So if the Gentile became a Christian and joined the Jew for a lunch and knew the Jew considered his usual to be unclean, Christian love would be getting a chicken sandwich to avoid offending him.

In verse 21, Paul said it was good to never eat meat or drink wine or do anything by which a brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. It's kind of interesting that this is the only place in the discussion where alcohol is mentioned. Some Christians believe it is wrong to drink. I don't. However, that doesn't mean I'm going to dirnk. I've always wanted to try a Mint Julep or a Grasshopper because I love mint, and they have mint. Have I ever had one? Unless you count the non-alcoholic Julep they have on New Orleans Square at Disneyland or the Keebler mint and chocolate cookie, no, and I probably never will. Not because it's a sin, but I don't want to either offend a believer who is convinced it is a sin or  introduce temptation to a new Christian who struggled with alcohol in the past.

I have one more installment after this, but permit me to use Manley's Irish Mutt as an example of things to think about with Christian Liberty. 

Being a dog lover, that name grabs my interest. The menu looks interesting as well. I could get a Baja Fish Taco or a Thai Shrimp Taco, though I might be as predictable as I can be and get a Chicken Parmesan sandwich or a BBQ or Buffalo Chicken Pizza. If you noticed the picture, though, the place identifies itself as a pub. The menu lists drink specials for each day of the week. 

So is it wrong for me to stop by the Irish Mutt and have a Thai Shrimp Taco and a Coke?

Let me give some issues to think about:

• Is there a difference between going to a bar that serves good food (Irish Mutt, Applebee's) and a restaurant that serves alcohol (Cracker Barrell, Pizza Hut, most Mexican restaurants)?
• If the Irish Mutt the only place I can get Thai Shrimp Tacos, is it fine to get it to go on occasion?
• Does it change the answer between a) going by myself, b) inviting a friend who has no problem with going or c) being invited by someone else?

Of course I can give you my thoughts, but:

1. It's too easy for me to give you my answers. You need to answer this yourself.
2. In answering this after thinking about Christian Liberty, you might discover that the answer you would have previously given might have some weaknesses for you to wrestle with.

I'm looking forward to hearing your answers!

ARE WE PURSUING BUILDING OTHERS UP? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 9 OF 11

  

Cross at The River Community Church, Cookeville, TN

If you look at lists of spiritual gifts, you'll find there's one of encouragement (exhortation). However, there is no spiritual gift of discouragement, nor one of criticism. This might be news to some people.

How does Paul describe the Kingdom of God? "For the kingdom of God is not food and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." Romans 14:17, NKJV. Too often we get hung up either on enjoying the foods God created (see 1 Timothy 4:3-5) or on avoiding certain foods. But is either extreme what the Kingdom of God is? 

Consider "righteousness", "peace", and "joy" as equal parts of the Kingdom of God. Sometimes we focus on righteousness, and volunteer to be the one who assigns a definition to that word and usually nobody else has peace and joy. Others see righteousness as contrary forces, that you have to be miserable to be righteous. 

Peace is a quality that shows up again two verses later: "Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another." Romans 14:19, NKJV. Is peace and building others up things that we pursue? 

Those who make their convictions a mandate for others are not following this verse. They might think they are, just as a tyrant may think conquering another nation would bring peace. Unfortunately, one party defines and enforces the requirements for there to be peace, which is that everybody else sees things their way. They may believe that they're building others up by proclaiming what they consider to be "the truth", but actually they are

Likewise, those who don't think you should judge them and misuse Christian liberty for their not-necessarily-godly desires are not paying attention to Romans 14:19. In fact, they're not really different than the above group. They may not demand unconditional surrender, but they aren't willing to give anything up for peace either. Likewise, they are more apt to build themselves up (or more accurately puff themselves up) than to try to strengthen someone else.

What are we doing, individually and corporately, to pursue the things which make for peace or to edify one another?

A NEW YEAR'S... MAKE THAT A NEW DAY'S RESOLUTION - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 8 OF 11

Saving Castaways by Franciszek Ksawery Lampi

 

How many of you have made New Year's Resolutions? How many have kept any of those Resolutions for the first 38 days of this year? Did I see any hands raised?

Romans 14:13, New King James Version, reads "Therefore, let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way." (Emphasis added).

I think Paul gives us a great resolution. But is this meant to be a New Year's Resolution, which doesn't last long? Or should we consider it a New Day's resolution, one we make every time it's a new day? It's achievable to attempt to keep this for 24 hours, isn't it?

I've seen a couple of lists of verses that encourage judging to counter the misuse of "Judge not, lest you be judge" (or is it to justify disobeying the command Jesus gave us in Matthew 7:1), and I see a lot of verses and concepts ripped out of context. The most common is "Judge with righteous judgment" (John 7:24), which in the context it belongs in was actually directed to Pharisees who were judging Jesus for healing on the Sabbath! Do those who make this claim want to be associated with the Pharisees? The most ridiculous is "There's a book in the Bible called Judges." Uh, those judges include rash Jephthah and lustful Samson; are those to be our models as well? But they ignore verses like Romans 14:4 and 14:13, as well as James 4:11-12 (again, is this willful?).

One interesting thing: the NKJV rendering above translates the same Greek word two different ways in the verse. Let me share that verse again, highlighting that word and its differing translations: "Therefore, let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way." 

Am I right in saying we too quick in judging others when they offend us and too slow judging ourselves that we don't offend others? 

As we continue reading in Romans 14:14-16, we see that we should willingly limit our liberties so as not to cause others to stumble. Let me give an example. Let's say an unsaved friend I'm witnessing to invites me to dinner and not knowing I don't drink pours me a glass of wine. I have the freedom to drink that wine (or more likely for me, sip it). However, if a mutual friend is also invited and I know that other friend has either a problem with Christians drinking or is overcoming a problem drinking, then I would refuse that wine, hopefully before the other one has to say anything, for their sake.

This reminds me of something I've heard from John MacArthur. If we have to choose between offending an unbeliever or a fellow believer, who should we offend? Some would, for the sake of the Gospel, avoid offending the unbeliever. MacArthur suggests the opposite, based on Scripture (primarily 1 Corinthians 8-10). One reason is preferring the unbeliever over the believer tells the unbeliever we're more concerned about the unsaved than the saved and diminishes the motivation to get saved.

Of course, when we think of avoiding placing a stumbling block before a weaker brother/sister, we tend to think of smoking or drinking or gambling or tatoos or to some listening to rock music. These apply, but allow me to give another activity that might offend your fellow believers: Heresy hunting.

Some will say "What? How can you say that we're not supposed to call out false teachers and expose errors? Are you saying we should tolerate error?" No, we shouldn't. However, some people aren't merely pointing out false teachers when they see wrong teaching; rather, they are looking for heresies to attack and actually delight in it.

Why do I say heresy hunting (you could call it doubtful discernment, as the Jubilee Bible 2000 translates Romans 14:1, as I mentioned at the beginning of this series) is a stumbling block? Let me ask a few questions.

1. Are they known more for what they're against than what they're for? In other words, are they quick to criticize and condemn and save their rare words of praise for those who share both their negativity and the targets for that negativity?
2. Are they showing a lack of love to those they oppose? For example, do they insult and poison the pot towards their opponents? Do they overlook anything positive or correct that those who disagree with them say or do? Do they (the heresy hunters) act like they're looking forward to their adversaries being judged by God?
3. Are they proud and exalting themselves as the one who knows God's mind? Do they assume that those who disagree with each other aren't studying Scripture or loving God with the same diligence they are? Do they believe they've got all the right answers to debates that have lasted centuries if not millenniums?
   

But am I doing any better right now? Sometimes I struggle determining if an offense to an action is genuine weakness or if the "offended brother" is what one of my Bible College teachers called "Professional weaker brethren." Am I ever guilty of reluctantly abstaining from something I enjoy with resentment toward the one I'm offending?

I have the painting "Saving Castaways" by Franciszek Ksawery Lampi at the top of the blog. Are we being quick to save those castaways? That's what God has called us to.

Are you following Paul's Spirit inspired advice in not judging one another? Is there anything we do that offends fellow believers that we need to abstain from?

WHO ARE WE ACCOUNTABLE TO? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 7 OF 11

Rock Island State Park, Tennessee

Yesterday, I focused on Romans 14:4, and pointed out that other believers are accountable to God, not us, so we're not to act as their judge. Today, the focus is on Romans 14:7-12, and the fact that everybody is accountable to God. Verses 7-9 point out that we don't live for ourselves but to God, because we are God's. The next three verses remind us that we all will appear before God and give account of our lives (see also 1 Corinthians 3:9-17; 2 Corinthians 5:10; 1 Peter 1:17).

How often do we see ourselves as belonging to the Lord? We call Sundays the Lord's Day, but is the focus of the day the three hours in the morning when we assemble together to worship or on the three hours to six hours in the afternoon when the NFL takes over the TV? 

Even with church, do we REALLY see ourselves as the Lord's? Let's look at the music. Some people want a nice contemporary worship time, resembling the music they listen to at home. Others want a more traditional worship that they're more comfortable with. But are we more concerned with the accompaniment or with the words coming out of our mouth and especially if they reflect what's in our mind and heart?

Now, let's move to the sermon. Which of these two thoughts are more frequent while the Pastor is preaching:

1. I needed to hear that. God needs to work with me on that area so I'm pleasing Him more.
2. Is (fill in somebody else's name) here this morning? I hope so: he/she really needs to hear this message.

Too often we're focused on the shortcomings of others when we really need to instead turn our eyes inward and realize we are going to give account of ourselves before God. We're too worried about specks in others' eyes to see the planks in our own. 

Do you realize you are here solely for God's glory? Are you aware you will someday stand before Him?

WHO ARE YOU TO JUDGE ANOTHER MAN'S SERVANT? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 6 OF 11

White Rhinoceros, Louisville Zoo.

David Bergland's Libertarianism in One Lesson is "You own yourself." Is he right?

My first response was to disagree with that unbiblical idea. Do believers own themselves? No, God owns us - we're bought with a price by God (1 Corinthians 6:20); we're His sheep (John 10;27). Are unbelievers free from being owned by God? No - "The earth is the LORD's, and all its fullness, The world and those who dwell therein" (Psalm 24:1); this includes all who are alive.

But then, Bergland's book is not about theology and God but public policy and man. His point is that we are not owned by anybody else but that we have individual liberty. Not limitless liberty: we're not free to harm or defraud others. But others lack the right to run our lives.

Do we own ourselves, or does God own us? Either way, we don't own others. And yes, I could say they don't own me, but that's not the point I want to make. We. Don't. Own. Other. People. Clear enough?

That is the point Paul's trying to make in Romans 14:4 - "But who are you to judge another man's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand." 

Yes, the most quoted and the most misquoted Bible verse in Matthew 7:1 about judging not; too many try to use this to bully believers into tolerating and even accepting sinful behavior. But another often misquoted Bible verse is John 7:24, and that's misquoted by believers. That verse says "Judge with righteous judgment." Those who use (or more accurately misuse it) forget (accidentally or not) that John 7:24 is not a command to Jesus' disciples as Matthew 7:1 is, but a rebuke to the Pharisees who were judging Jesus. 

Romans 14:4 (and also James 4:11-12) are ignored too often. We need to remember that fellow Christians are God's servants. Yes, we're to warn those plainly committing sin (Galatians 6:1; James 5:19-20; 1 John 5:16), but we're not to judge.

By the way, if you look at the previous verse, you'll notice two things.

1. Paul states those who exercise liberty fall into the trap of hating or showing contempt of those who are abstaining (Romans 14:1-2 calls those who don't eat meat "weak in the faith"), and those who don't practice liberty judge those who do. Put the two together, and those prone to judge appear to be those weak in the faith.
2. Paul closes Romans 14:3 by stating God accepts him. Who does God accept? Anyone who comes to Him. So when we're judging a fellow believer, we're judging someone God has accepted. Uh, should we be doing that? Really?
   

I'll once again ask a question that I asked yesterday: Does this extend to sin and doctrinal issues? Remember - both examples Paul gives are considered by some to be sin or bad doctrine. 

One guideline I heard - ask yourself if you want to judge/correct/warn a fellow believer. If you don't really want to, maybe God has called you to not be afraid and lovingly confront them. If you are ready to straighten out your brother or sister, though, it's probably best to let someone else do it who can do it with gentleness and humility and who knows that they're dealing with God's servant.

Are you aware that you're not your own, but that you're God's servant, that you belong to Him? Are you also aware that your brothers and sisters in Christ are also God's servant and they answer to Him, not us?

DOES CHRISTIAN LIBERTY EXTEND TO SIN ISSUES AND DOCTRINAL DISPUTES? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14, PART 5 OF 11

 

Squirrel at our house; nice pose, huh?

 Are there limits to Christian liberty as in Romans 14? If there are, are they based on solid Biblical teaching, or are they excuses to silence those who disagree with us?

Romans 14 gives two examples of where Christian Liberty applies in verses two through six: eating meat or not, and observing certain days or not. I will look at those aspects, but let me first deal with possible limits.

I had a friend who believed we have freedom in those area, but only those two areas: that if an issue isn't given freedom, there isn't any. I find that contrary to Scripture as a whole. Most would agree that food and day-observance were merely examples that extends to other issues. However, I've heard two areas where this freedom does not apply. One is if we're talking about sin, and the other is doctrine.  

Do I believe that Romans 14 extends to behavior the Bible attends as sin? God forbid! If the Bible says an activity is wrong in the sight of God, then it's wrong. A change in opinion or polls doesn't change that. The same is true with doctrine: Christian Liberty doesn't allow for teaching works salvation or denying the Deity of Christ.

Yet, those Paul who was writing to DID consider eating meat to be a sin issue. Likewise, those WOULD identify day-observance as a doctrinal matter.

Needless to say, some who set up the limits are interested in excluding behaviors they consider wrong. Some would say it's a sin to listen to rock, so they justify condemning Christian rock music. There are Calvinists who have concluded they figured things out theologically, and anybody who falls short of their standard is an Arminian and thus teaching a false Gospel.  

It is true that many Christians want to unite from those they should be divided from. Yet, it's no less dangerous to divide from those we should be united with. Those who want to divide may believe they're seeking truth, but they have an appearance of wanting to shorten the list of those they're called to love and have been taken captive by pride.

A careful look at the two examples in Romans 14 show Christian Liberty is expanded beyond where we may think. For example, 1 Corinthians 8-10 deals with eating meat sacrificed to idols. After all, the pagan's "gods" don't have much of an appetite when they're offered food, so then it goes to the discount aisle of Main Street Grocery Store. Some avoid eating any meat because they don't want to take a chance of eating food offered to idols and thus taking part of idolatry; others don't care where the meat came from and like the good price.

I naturally assume that Romans 14 deals with the same issue, but in studying this chapter, I've realized this issue is not specified here. Yes, it is logical to consider that the above issue is covered in Romans 14, but it isn't limited to it.

Moving to verses 5-6 which talks about observing days: At first, I assumed it was important festival days from the Old Testament such as Passover. Then, looking at the wording, I came to believe that it's referring to the Sabbath. Reason? It refers to day in the singular; if it's referring to the holy days, it would be in the plural. Also, it is the more radical suggestion to the Jewish mind.

However, David Stern in the Jewish New Testament Commentary made a valid point: We automatically assume that "the day" that is esteemed is connected with Judaism. But it doesn't say which day, meaning it could be any day - Jewish feast day, Christian calendar event, or the Academy Awards. He's not saying that it doesn't apply to the Passover or the Sabbath, but that it's not limited to them.

The focus of this chapter is that we need to receive one another, and we too often look for a good alibi to exclude others.

Are there any areas where you are quick to exclude other Christians that probably shouldn't be excluded? How about ways you try to reach out to others and showing liberty and tolerance?

DO WE HAVE OUR WELCOME MATS OUT? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 4 OF 11

 

Statue of Meriwether Lewis meeting William Clark, Falls of Ohio State Park, Clarksville, IN

Are we receptive to others like we should be?

I consider Romans 14 to be the key manifesto on Christian Liberty, but we need to remember why we have liberty as a believer. Is it about us? Or about others? 

You may remember my list of translations of Romans 14:1. The Jubilee Bible 2000 renders this as "Bear with one who is sick in the faith...", but the others I listed start with words like "Receive," Accept," and "Welcome."

As we start in this study, it is important to realize that we're talking about the Church. Of course, a smart aleck (like myself) would ask if I meant the local church or the universal church. And of course, I'd answer that question, "Yes."

Naturally, the focus is on the local church. Paul is writing to the Church in Rome. If they have a fellow believer from another city visit, then they are included. Keep in mind, though, that the first nine of Paul's letters listed were written specifically to churches, not to individuals in the church. Some were to be shared, like he asked the Colossians to do with Laodicea, but the focus is more centralized.

It is obvious that we're living in a different context. There were no denominations in Paul's days. There were the beginnings of movements like the Ebionites (some of which were Judaizers) and the Gnostics (not unlike today's New Age movement), but the sects were those who departed from the faith. The Reformers and several of our denominations nowadays are the opposite: they start a new movement because they are in an environment of error and seek to return to the safe harbors of Scripture. Also, the only reason a 1st century believer would stop attending one local fellowship and start attending another was solely because of a physical move: worship styles or children ministries or celebrity preachers weren't an issue back then.

Let's go back to the context. In the seven verses preceding Romans 14, we see an emphasis on loving one another and walking in the light. The former one is a theme throughout the New Testament, with Jesus, Paul, Peter, and John (plus the author of Hebrews, should you think it's not Paul) directly saying we're to love one another and James and Jude implying that command.

I may have said this before (maybe even previously in this study), but Christians tend to unite with those they should be divided from and divided from those they should be united with. How do we know? Are they fellow believers? Do they believe Jesus is the Christ/Messiah, God come in the flesh, Savior of the World, who died for our sins and rose again bodily the third day? Do they believe that salvation is a gift of God, not wages we earn by good behavior, and that it is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone? Are they seeking to please Him and not themselves in how they live, and are they displaying the fruits of the Spirit? If so, they're probably a fellow believer and you are to welcome them.

 

 

 

ROMANS 14: THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 3 OF 11

 

Observation tower stairs, Edgar Evins State Park, Tennessee

For those unfamiliar with the program "Through the Bible with Les Feldick," Les taped four 1/2 hour programs each month. He spent 71 programs on Romans. The final four covered Chapters 12-16. Similarly, I heard that at my Bible College, the professor ran out of semester as he got to Chapter 12. 

In the previous installment, I gave a quick overview of the book of Romans, and dealt with four major points of the first eleven chapters. For review, they are:

1. No one is righteous (Rom. 1:18-3:18).
2. Christ paid the penalty of our sins so we can be justified by Him through faith (Rom. 3:19-5:21).
3. As Christ died for our sins and was raised, we should die to our past sinful life and live life in the Spirit (Rom. 6-8).
4. God has cast off Israel due to their unbelief and grafted the church in through faith, but if and when they turn from their unbelief, they will be restored according to the Sovereignty of God (Rom. 9-11).

 Paul starts with practical application at this point in this letter (remember, he didn't divide his letters into chapters and verses any more than we do) with three concepts: 

1. We should present ourselves as a living sacrifice to God (Rom. 12:1).
2. We should not be conformed to the world but renew our minds and think soberly (Rom. 12:2-3).
3. We are one body in Christ, functioning as members through spiritual gifts (Rom. 12:4-8).
   

 You may notice common ground between the two lists I just gave you, but there's a difference: The list of four doctrines are what we believe, and the next three is how we think and act based on that belief. Those three points deal with the following: 

• A checklist of behaviors consistent with the above foundations (Rom. 12:9-21).
• How we are to live as citizens (Rom. 13:1-7).
• Love being seen as how we are to live (Rom. 13:8-10).
• The call to live and walk as being in the light of the Lord, not the darkness of the world (Rom. 13:11-14).

And finally:

• How to watch out for each other and live out our differences (Rom. 14:1-15:7).

This brings us to where I'm going to focus for the next week. Y'all ready?

ROMANS 14: THE GREATER CONTEXT - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 2 OF 11

 

Cool Creek Park, Westfield, Indiana

One bit of Bible study advice I've known since I started attending Bible College: "A text without a context is a pretext." So I will spend the next two sessions developing the context of Romans 14.

First, we need to look at where Romans fits into Scripture. Christians believe that there is a two part division of Scripture: The Old Covenant (or Old Testament) and the New Covenant (New Testament). The former focuses on Israel with a look at the coming Messiah and His Kingdom. The latter focuses on Jesus as the prophesied Messiah (Greek word for Messiah is Christ) and His present tense Kingdom in the Church (as well as looking for the future Kingdom when He returns). Romans - or more completely, the Letter of Paul to the Romans - is a New Testament book.

Allow me to take a step back here and point out that not all editions of Scripture, while having the same books, do not have them in the same order. The Jews have a different order of the books (and some of the books were combined - "The Book of the Twelve" is the same as the twelve Minor Prophets). Likewise, some of the New Testament texts would have a differing order of the four Gospels or may have the General Epistles preceding Paul's, but it is just a rearrangement of the same contents.

One interesting phenomenon is that Paul's letters are immune from this variation. Every edition starts with the letters to Churches, starting with Romans to the Thessalonian letters, and followed with the letters to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. Les Feldick indicates that the fact it always has been in this order is God's design. On the other hand, Frank Viola proposes that the order is based on book length, starting with the longest (Romans).

Paul didn't plant the church in Rome, though some believe he did indirectly, being started by those discipled by Paul. In reading this letter, it is evident that his audience was mixed between Jews and Gentiles. Most believe Paul wrote this letter in Cornith, at the end of his third missionary journey on his way to Jerusalem, where he was arrested and eventually sent to Rome.

A common trait in Paul's letters was to start with doctrine and then move to practical application, and Romans is no exception. The first eleven chapters are doctrinal, and the remaining five are practical. (Keep in mind that the Biblical authors did not divide their writings into chapters and verses; these were done later for reference.)

Allow me to give a list of doctrinal foundations given that chapters 12-16 (including our focal point on chapter 14) are built on.

1. No one is righteous (Rom. 1:18-3:18).
2. Christ paid the penalty of our sins so we can be justified by Him through faith (Rom. 3:19-5:21).
3. As Christ died for our sins and was raised, we should die to our past sinful life and live life in the Spirit (Rom. 6-8).
4. God has cast off Israel due to their unbelief and grafted the church in through faith, but if and when they turn from their unbelief, they will be restored according to the Sovereignty of God. (Rom. 9-11).
   

 Are you all ready for a break after this? I am! So I'll be looking more at the context for the 14th chapter of Romans in my next installment.

But for those brave enough to answer a question I post in my blog (I haven't had many takers thus far), here's a question for you: With the four points I listed above, how would you say we should live? What does that look like?

DOUBTFUL DISCERNMENT? RARE OCCURRENCE? I DOUBT IT. - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14, PART 1 OF 11

At Louisville Zoo

 

 I'm starting a study on Romans 14. In the next two installments, I'll be dealing with the context of this chapter and how it relates to the chapter. Today, I'll just give "a brief introduction." How many believe it will be brief? Well, I'll let you be the judge of it.

First, though, let me give the first verse of this chapter in some different versions:

• "Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things."  NKJV
• "Now as for a person whose trust is weak, welcome him - but not to get into arguments over opinions." The Complete Jewish Bible  
• "Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions." NASB
• "Accept other believers who are weak in faith, and don’t argue with them about what they think is right or wrong." NLT

Last but not least, I'd like to share my favorite, the rendering of the Jubilee Bible 2000:

• "Bear with the one who is sick in the faith, but not unto doubtful discernment."

I love that phrase, "doubtful discernment." Looking at the internet, I see a whole lot of "doubtful discernment." There are a lot of brothers and sisters in Christ who consider themselves great at discerning, some of which call themselves Heresy Hunters. But whether it edifies or strengthens the body of Christ is very doubtful.

 

In dealing with Christian Liberty, the classic places are Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8-10. Both places (and especially 1 Corinthians in dealing with the self-centered, divided brethren) strongly speak about being willing to cast aside our freedom so we don't make our brothers and sisters to stumble. That is important. But Romans 14 also deals with those who are judgmental and contemptuous toward those who disagree with them.

 

I hope you are blessed by this devotional series. But let me ask: Are you falling into the trap of doubtful discernement? Or, as our swimming friend above, are you bearing with the weak in faith?

 

Pentecost and Other Holidays (or Holy Days or Hollow Days)

 

Pentecost by Emil Nolde

 

I got excited today. The pastor at our church mentioned today was Pentecost Sunday. If I remember correctly, the last time I heard Pentecost Sunday mentioned (other than my mentioning it) was 1959. Which, considering that was the year I was born, and Pentecost is in the spring while my birthday's not until fall...

In the Old Testament, God gave Israel seven holidays - or more accurately holy days - to observe (Lev. 23). An eighth one, Purim, is mentioned in Esther, though it is not commanded by God.

You can divide Christians in two groups. One group sees Christmas and Good Friday/Easter as the high points of the calendar, with some observing a time of preparation for those two days (Advent in the first case, Lent and Holy Week for the later). The other group points out neither holiday is commanded and delight in pointing out pagan connections to justify their non-observance. My mother-in-law referred to Christmas and Easter as hollow days.

Then, we can look at the issue through the extremes. Some can be ritualistic - I've heard of Christians judging those who are non-observant. Others take the cliche of celebrating the Resurrection and/or Pentecost every Sunday, though one can wonder if they are really celebrating either event any Sunday. 

Other questions arise in dealing with celebrating holidays is which ones should Christians observe. Should the Church recognize Passover and Day of Atonement and maybe even Pentecost as God commanded via Moses to Israel from Mount Sinai? As Christians, is it permissible to observe either church holidays like Lent, Advent, and All Saints Day or cultural holidays like Mothers' and Fathers' Day, Halloween, and Thanksgiving and patriotic celebrations like 4th of July and Veteran's Day? 

The answer needs to be Biblical, but allow me first to give a focus on two issues which I consider biblical: the autonomy of the local church and the Priesthood of the believer. What a local congregation does should be based on the decision of that congregation. Likewise, whether an individual chooses to observe (or not) a particular day is between him and God. 

I believe that conclusion is supported by Romans 14:5-6: "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day the same. Let each be firmly convinced in their mind. He who observes the day observes it to the Lord, and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not esteem it. He who eats eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks, and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks." In other words, both observance and non-observance are permissible when done to the Lord.

My favorite holiday is Thanksgiving, and I consider it a holy day. I would love to celebrate Reformation Day, All Saints Day - though I would define "saint" a little differently than a Catholic or Orthodox - and Pentecost regularly, when I think of them. Other holidays that often get overlooked (including by me) that can be observed to the glory of God include President's Day, Juneteenth, and Labor Day. And last but not least (or is it least but not last), there's Groundhog's Day.

Happy Pentecost, and let me close by asking: How do you observe your favorite holidays/Holy Days to the Lord?