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?

 

INTERVIEW WITH MEREDITH AND CHRISTIAN DUNCKEL OF UNDEFEATED

In the past week, I posted a pair of interviews with groups I discovered in the FB group "Female Christian Rock and Metal (Saving Jackie four days ago, Worhol the day before yesterday). Undefeated is another band I learned about that way. You may remember my interview with Becca Sugg of Reclaim The Day? Becca and Meredith competed for an award late last year.

Both Meredith (lead vocalist/guitarist) and Chris participated in the interview. I've chosen to use green to identify Meredith (afterward referred to as MD) and red for Chris (CD).

JR: How did you get interested in music, and how did that lead to the formation of Undefeated? Who's all in the band?

MD: I (Meredith-Lead Vocals/Guitarist) have loved
music from a very young age. Our parents were huge rockers back in the day, and have a whole God-story on how they’ve been led out of the secular scene, so we grew up with only contemporary music. Nothing wrong with that, but once we discovered the guts of rock and metal, we were hooked. I was part of a youth group who didn’t have room for anyone but the
“important” people. Longggg story short, this youth group brought in a couple bands from Canada and Massachusetts for a concert. The youth group worship team was going to open for them, and their electric guitarist bailed last minute, so I was asked
to step up. This was literally like the 2nd time I’d ever touched an electric guitar, so it wasn’t great, let’s be honest. aha.

After the concert, the manager of the MA band caught up with my mom and I, and said “I felt like God told me to encourage her.” I was invited to play a couple of songs at a worship festival that he hosted. We thought the worst thing that could happen was we wouldn’t go again, so we went! That event flipped a switch for me. The festival had all kinds of music, pop, rock, reggae, jazz, screamo. But the biggest thing, these people were like me! I just felt so included, and these people just understood who I was. 

 

A couple weeks or so later, I asked Christian (Drummer/Vocals) if he wanted to start a band, and he said “YES!” After splitting with our former bassist in 2020, we added our younger sister, Lis, to round out the now family band! 

JR: I saw (and loved) your recent video Cages. What inspired the song and the video? 

MD: Thank you! That was one of my favorites. We filmed it in an old broken down creamery in Boonville, NY! The sun was perfect that day, and the weird tan lines I got from the jewels/glitter on my face and arm lasted awhile, lol!

I don’t usually write songs off of personal experience, but they do tend to come around to mean something to me later. One of the main chorus lines is “Those caught up in cages, think freedom is a crime”, and that’s pretty fitting for the world state right now, is it not? I am very passionate about is the freedom that the true Christ brings, and I’ve recently just realized that a lot of my songs have that underlying theme running through them. So, the video was created around that one end scene, where Christian realized the back of the cage has been open the whole time, and he walked out free. 

JR: Glancing at your Facebook page, I've noticed a variety of venues: Firestream Festival and Revival, August 15th; Guest Worship with Christian Assembly of Schulyer, September 26th; Anti-Violence and Stop The Hate Concert at Watertown, NY, October 17th. Any stand out as being a blessing, a surprise, or simply memorable?

CD: The Anti-Violence show, even though it was cold. (End of October, outside, in upstate New York = FREEZING) It was close to home and the people there were amazing! Everybody was just helpful and it ended up becoming a great time and we met great people; it was really a blessing in disguise. I thought it was going to be a hassle but I ended up having a lot of fun there. 

Soulfest in New Hampshire was just memorable. I learned lots working with the stage crew there and
got to see bigger bands come through. I got to see what it takes to grow our band to the next level which was pretty cool.

JR: How have you dealt with COVID as a band?

MD: You know, we’ve just kept taking steps
where we felt like God was leading us. 

JR: What are the biggest challenges you find as a band, and where do you get the most support to face those challenges from?

CD: The biggest challenges I find being part of the band is the time aspect. I go to school full time and we have to practice at least 2-3 times a week. Granted, we have been slacking in that for the past month but we are getting back into the swing of things and I have to start managing my time better, be it in school or out of school. I also like to practice a lot by myself to be able to grow as an individual musician. This allows me to become better and help progress the band to where we want to go. 

I get the most support from my band mates and parents. Meredith and Lis are always encouraging and we work around each other to be able to keep the band alive and striving. Sometimes we get picky with each other but in the end we all know the direction we have to pull in and pull together. My parents also support my decisions to stick with band. They allow me to take school off to play/record or do other band things. They pushed me to really become the band mate I am today. 

JR: Thank you for your time. How can we keep up with Undefeated? Any thing coming up that you'd like to let us know about? Any prayer needs? And yell if you're in Indianapolis!  

MD: We loved being a part of this! So, thank YOU! :) Our website is up and running, so you can check us out there! We’re also on Facebook and Instagram. Catch our music videos on Youtube! We recently just started a TikTok, so follow us there to be a part of our shenanigans!

Anddddd we’d love to come to Indianapolis! Anyone want to host? :)