| Author | Message | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 154 Registered: 9-2006  |
Here is Zondervans Amplified version of Romans 14:21. The right thing to do is eat no meat or drink no wine (at all), or (do anything else) if it (hurts your brothers conscience or) makes him stumble, or offends, or weakens him. He goes on to say in verse 22 to advise keeping ones own personal convictions of these matters to ones self. In verse 23, same amplified version. 14:23 But the man who has doubtsóMisgivings, an uneasy conscienceóabout eating, and then eats (perhaps because of you), stands condemned (before God), because he is not true to his convictions and he does not act from faith. For whatever does not originate and proceed from faith is sinóthat is, whatever is done without a conviction of its approval from God is sinful. Now when my strict brother comes to visit here, I know it ainít going to kill me to do without T.V. for a week and I think the wife will live over it too. I dare not do anything to bruise his conscience or his tender scruples. If my Adventist friend visits here I ainít going to haul out the possum and say here, have some. And this is a matter of my own conscience. I have more of a desire to see him built up spiritually than to please myself. I really donít know all the ins and outs of these matters, and sometimes I am uncertain, I just have to pray for guidance for each day and depend on the Holy Spirit to do the best I can. In Romans chapter 14 I think Paul painted a rather broad picture of how we should conduct ourselves and I take it too heart. This thread has caused me to take a fresh look at my own soul, I thank you for that. River | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4999 Registered: 12-2003  |
Honestwitness, interesting comments about your own church-going and your husband's. First, according to River's quote from the Amplified Bible, our duty is not to cause our weaker brother to bruise his conscience because of our pressure or shame or flaunting. Apparently your own church-going is not causing your husband to bruise his conscience regarding his own Sabbath observance. I'm thinking that perhaps the issue here is not so much an issue of the strong/weak brother but an issue of your relationship to your husband as a Biblically submissive wife. I don't know the dynamics between you. On the one hand, I've known some people who were cruel in their maniuplation and insistence that their believing spouses not break ranks with Adventismóand if they did, they exerted force and guilt to insist that the believing spouse keep their convictions secret from the children and family, etc. In other words, they lied and forced the believing spouse to lie by silence and pretending in order to hide their convictionsóon pain of retaliation of various kinds. No one should submit to this kind of cruelty. On the other hand, I have known other cases of couples in which the Adventist was unready to consider leaving the womb of the culture and the beliefs, but the spouse moving toward mainstream Christianity was able to honor the Adventist by continuing to worship with him/her while simultaneously talking, as God provided opportunities, about what they were learning in Bible study. They would share things to read, insights, etc. I suspect, HonestWitness, that your situation might be more one of how God wants you to behave as a wife than it is an issue of the strong/weak brother. For one thing, there are issues at work when dealing with Adventists that are frankly culticóthere are spiritual issues at work that are different from the issues of new Christians who are willing to walk away from their past and embrace Christ but are still weak in their faith. I will pray, HonestWitness, that you will know God's will regarding your situation with your husband. Colleen | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 155 Registered: 9-2006 |
As I reread Romans chapter 14 for about 3rd time, Paul seems to be addressing what our terminology today is ìThe blame gameî. If we deliberately decide or endeavor to put a stumbling block in the way of another Christian, therefore demeaning his conscience, because of what we view as a weaker thing, then who is the weaker? We have not learned love in its true form, nor shown it. Now it seems to me that this chapter is from ìChristian to Christianî. There may very well come a time when dealing with cultic doctrines, the world and so forth, that we have to throw on the breaks lest we begin to seer our own conscience. To deceit, I owe no tribute. Now as I said, if my Adventist friend visits, I ainít going to haul out the possum and sweet taters and say ìhere, eatî, and that is within my means, however I donít intend to paint myself into a corner either. It seems to me too seer my own conscience would be as big a folly as the former. River | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 512 Registered: 7-2000 |
My reading of Romans 14 is that of Paul talking to fellow believers. I'm not convinced that 'weaker' is the best translation. It's more a case of 'susceptible to sin' by something we do. I have a friend, who is a pastor, and a recovering alcoholic. I don't have any problem with alcohol, I often will have wine or beer when eating out. But I won't when I'm out for lunch with this pastor friend of mine. He has told me that every day he craves alcohol. By me ordering alcohol, which he would then smell, may be enough to push him 'off the wagon' and into a blind drunk that could ruin his ministry. This friend is not weaker in the faith, but he is certainly weaker when it comes to alcohol. In a similar fashion, I do sometimes find myself at Adventist potlucks. I don't bring meat to them, as I know how they view it. If they ask my view about the matter, I have no problem telling them that I don't agree with a vegetarian diet. But, I'm also aware of their beliefs and feelings, plus it's their church. But, if someone wants to come over to my house, and complain about my T.V. watching---well, go back home! We all need space to be ourselves, and I sure wouldn't walk on eggshells around a legalistic long-time friend. In fact, I'd have half a notion to do a few things to make him a bit uncomfortable. Your friend, River, doesn't strike me as much of a grace filled Christian. In fact, your friend sounds like a number of SDA's I've known! Bill | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 156 Registered: 9-2006 |
Hi there Bill, You wrote: My reading of Romans 14 is that of Paul talking to fellow believers. I'm not convinced that 'weaker' is the best translation. It's more a case of 'susceptible to sin' by something we do. But, if someone wants to come over to my house, and complain about my T.V. watching---well, go back home! We all need space to be ourselves, and I sure wouldn't walk on eggshells around a legalistic long-time friend. In fact, I'd have half a notion to do a few things to make him a bit uncomfortable. Your friend, River, doesn't strike me as much of a grace filled Christian. In fact, your friend sounds like a number of SDA's I've known! As I stated earlier, I do believe Paul used rather broad terms and gives examples of meat, drink and days. Now HLM2ís reference at the beginning of the tread was Romans 14:1-4 and so to pin it down ìhe is a weak believer(or) weak in the faithî. In the broad sense I think we are being exhorted to conduct ourselves in a certain manner, we can all think of certain situations in our lives that we could apply this too. But I believe it goes deeper than that even, not only to apply these principles in our lives but to practice it until it becomes second nature. In order to understand verses 1-4 we need to read backward and forward to get the whole picture. In verse 9 of chapter 13 he sums the commandments in a single command ìLove your neighbor as yourselfí. If we have not found true Christian love in our hearts we can probably just forget about chapter 14. That dog is not mature enough to hunt yet, keep feeding him love biscuits, sprinkled liberally with prayer and worship and then he will begin to hunt. Ya got to feed him every day though, not just Sunday. If only on Sunday, heís not going to have the strength too hunt. If we have found Gods love in our hearts then we will not be hesitant but eager to welcome that brother and to feed him with love, kindness and scripture and be prepared to lay aside our own preferences where ever it lies within us to do that. Now to take it to the other extreme, now we have cases even today on this forum where Adventist have ragged on their the ex-Adventist friends, sons and daughters and no longer accept them to the point where they are bedraggled, weary and feel left completely alone, ones who sit alone after these people are gone or the phone goes dead or whatever and the tears flow by the buckets. Javagirl I hear you. I dare say the love of God is not in those people who leave folks bruised and beaten. I have even heard of physical striking on church courtyards. The ones that are involved are breaking both covenants and their Sabbath keeping is a farce. That dog will not hunt in chapter 14. True Christian love is the standard by which we can measure the depth, breadth and height of chapter 14, if we do not have it, to try to put into practice the letter of this teaching is a farce and the dog wonít hunt. One time there was two old boys who decided to go ìCoon huntinî so the dogs finally treed a coon and so one of the boys said ìIíll go up and get him out of them limbsî so he climbed up there and there just happened to be a wildcat up there and amidst all this caterwauling going on , the old boy yells down ìShoot, Shoot!!î and the old boy on the grounds says ìIím afraid I will hit you!!î and the other old boy yellís ìJust shoot up in here, me or this wildcat has got to get some relief.î The moral is that if you do not know what to do, just let go both barrels with love, somethingís bound to give. At times I am positive that we may end up being ìthe weaker brotherî and so need that love and grace to be given, we may just find our own selves up in a tree with a wildcat. Who knows as too whether it just might that ìweaker brotherî who steps up to the plate? River | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 514 Registered: 7-2000 |
Hey River---Jerry Clower fan, huh? That reminds me of a story Jerry tells about a guy driving his little car along. Somehow, the poor guy wrecked, wiping out a cattle truck in the process. The guy wakes up at the bottom of a ravine, in terrible pain with a broken leg. He's got all these bellerin', hurtin' cows down in the ravine with him. So, he's really hoping for rescue---and soon! About the time he's ready to give up hope of rescue, two big state trooper show up at the top of the ravine. The troopers start down the ravine. One of 'em hollers, 'Hey Ed, what's wrong with that cow over there?'. Ed hollers back 'Jimmy, looks like her legs broke'. Jimmy hauls out a big 357, and 'blam!', shoots the cow between the eyes. Ed then hollers over 'Jimmy, there's another one over here with what looks like a broke leg'..blam! One more cow gone. About that time, one of the troopers spies this guy laying in the ravine with a broke leg. He hollers over to him, 'And sir, what might be wrong with you?'. And the guy at the bottom of the ravine hollers 'Not a thing, not a thing'! We need to be careful not to shoot the wounded when it's not needed. Bill | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 158 Registered: 9-2006 |
Hey Bill, I do believe we have got to the "meat" of this thing. Now I got to get myself off the floor and quit rolling around. River | ||
| Javagirl Registered user Username: Javagirl Post Number: 326 Registered: 6-2005 |
Bill and River, please keep up the banter. It has provided me a few needed laughs the last week or so! River, not all SDA's cross the parking lot to avoid me, there are those who cross the gym in front of many people to give me a hug as well, and I am grateful for that. But back to the thread... I am enjoying this one. Thank you Mary and all for the research. | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 160 Registered: 9-2006 |
As I have examined my own soul in light of Romans chapter 14, yesterday morning I really began to examine my own heart for the Christian love I spoke of, it was on my mind the whole day as I spent the day attending church services and afternoon rest. Paul said in Romans 13:10 Love does no wrong to oneís neighboróit never hurts anybody, therefore love meets all the requirements and is the fulfilling of the law. Zondervans Amplified Bible. So I ask myself, do I possess dormant love or do I extend what love I do possess and is the small amount of love that I do possess adequate? Now I speak of agape love and not human love. Do I hold dormant the small amount I do possess or do I extend it to those who come my way? As I meditated on this I remembered Jesus words (Luke 6:38 KJV) Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again. And I thought, would this apply to the principle of giving of what love we do have and then look to the Lord to add too the meager portion we have now? And as I studied on this I remembered Jesus parable of the pound, Luke 19:12-26. I did want to share my thoughts with you all, and this does seem to be where I have gotten too on Romans 14: 1-3 so far. Now I realize I possibly have the subject a little bit askew but I am convinced in my own heart that it all has to do with true performance of Romans chapter 14. I am also convinced that if we do not extend the love of Christ which lies within our own hearts, we will not be able to perform Paulís exhortation even among our own Christian brotherhood which by nature must contain this ìweaker brotherî. I am also convinced that I myself carry about my own set of luggage, those sins which does so easily beset me and I know this, I already know about them and God knows about them and I donít need a Christian brother to judge me or criticize me or despise me. How about you? God help us to look beyond our brotherís exterior demeanor and see his need and extend a prayer, a friendly handshake of acceptance. His opinionated demeanor may very well reflect his uncertainty and even loneliness in his surroundings and so needs perhaps encouragement. I am reminded this morning of one of the fellows who lived nearby, showed no signs of anything wrong at work, took his dear rifle, parked his truck on the banks of the river, took a last look at the wide flowing waters I suppose, and blew his head off, leaving a note to his ex-wife and children. Paul was as serious about chapter 14 as a sore tooth. If the weaker brother thing means no more to us than a curiosity, then God help us. River | ||
| Helovesme2 Registered user Username: Helovesme2 Post Number: 718 Registered: 8-2004  |
What about the people who use the 'weaker brother' argument to manipulate people - the "if you don't do things like I believe they have to be done, you're going to hurt me" argument? | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 3070 Registered: 3-2004  |
That is just plain being manipulative and that person has no regard for the weaker brother/sister. I have a sister that does not like it when one does not do things the way she likes. She even told me that she could not understand how one could vote a certain way(it was a Republican thing) and still be a Christian. Right now she and I are not talking to each other, at my initiation. I told her I would not talk to her again unless it was in the presence of a counselor, whch she had suggested. She suggested I find the therapist, which I did. It took me a year to do it. Now my sister wants to know my motives for doing it. She wants to know that so she can plan what to say. All I am telling her is that she suggested it and I agreed and that she is my sister and is worth it. I do not know what she will say, but I suspect that she will not go because I am not telling her the motives she wants to hear. That is being manipulative and I will not be manipulated. This is my experience with manipulative people. I just pray for her and turn her over to God. Thank God she does not live near by. She lives in CA and I live in NV-4 hours away by car. Every so often she visits our younger sister whom I live near. So when she is there I do not go over to the younger sister's house. Diana | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 162 Registered: 9-2006 |
Helovesme2, What Diana said. Diana, You Sister must be kin to my younger brother. With him it's his way or the highway. Kind of a sad state of affairs ain't it? River | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 3072 Registered: 3-2004 |
River, I agree that your brother and my sister must be related!! And I agree that it is sad as I know my sister is not happy. Manipulative people are not happy persons. I also want to tell you that I appreciate and like your sense of humor. God gave you a good dose of humor, so continue using it. Diana | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 5007 Registered: 12-2003 |
Mary, yesówhat Diana said! I guess we've all had our epsides with people who use Scripture (of all things!) to maniuplate people into satisfying their own narcissistic cravings! It's horrifying, really..praise God HE is faithful, even when humans twist His words and misrepresent Him. Colleen | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 2333 Registered: 3-2005 |
Excellent thread, as I am now just catching up. I think we have to be careful that Romans 14 does not mean abstaining from meat and wine in front of a pharisee spirit. Because I could care less about offending those who are holier than thou. However, it is defintely talking about not drinking around recovering alcoholics and flaunting your freedom among our SDA friends who we would like to witness to. And that brings up the point about Romans 14:5,6: "One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord." Since this text comes about 20 verses after Paul clearly makes reference to the decalogue in Romans 13, this text, even more than Colossians 2 convinced me that the Sabbath was no longer binding on the consciences of New Testament believers. But we have to acknowledge that there are still Sabbatarians such as Missler, seventh-day Baptists, and many others who are still keeping Saturday. I believe they are misinterpreting the differences between the Old and New Covenants. But Paul clearly allows the keeping of Sabbath on those who don't as of yet have a full meaning of the New Covenant. This is why I tread lightly on this issue when I try to witness to current SDAs about the full meaning of the gospel. I have found if you hit them over the head with the Sabbath first, then I will get no where with them, in fact, they are offended and won't hear anything else you have to say. I learned this lesson personally when dealing with my father, who many of you have read about in Proclamation as being the strictest possible dyed in the wool SDA. I started with the 2300 days and the sanctuary, and shared Desmond Ford's material, and he spent two years studying that doctrine and then abandoned the sanctuary doctrine. However, I knew he was a believer even though he was strong on the Sabbath. But then he came at me hard on the Sabbath issue practically attacking me and being pharasaical with regard to the Sabbath, and imposing it on me. It was then that I had the opportunity to present my views on the Sabbath, and then it was about seven years later, after a long personal study, that he also gave up the Sabbath and now goes to a Sunday church. My point being, that even on this Sabbath issue, we have to be careful if we want to impact SDAs. Since Romans 14 does give the freedom for a true Christian to still keep the Sabbath, and if that person is a genuine believer, then it may be wise to be gentle on this issue. Because once a person sees how false the doctrine of the sanctuary is, and that it was based on a false vision of Ellen White, then the whole basis for Adventism and even Sabbatarianism starts to fall. This question came up on the Missler thread, and I read your response Colleen, but I am still wondering why necessarily to single out SDA Christians vs. SD Baptist Christians or Michael Card or Chuck Missler? Any one who is imposing old covenant laws on Christians should be singled out. So I agree with you Colleen from what you said about the bondage that SDA Christians are under because of that false vision of the halo around the fourth commandment. It had a serious hold on me for a very long period of time. But, on the other hand, if someone came up and told me that I wasn't trusting Jesus alone for my salvation, when I was going to the Seventh-day Baptist church for two years after leaving Adventism, then I would have been offended. I finally came to the truth about Sabbath after only a long serious study, as my dad did, so therefore, I cannot conscientiously, in light of Romans 14 try to make someone feel guilty because he still keeps the Sabbath, because I would feel then that I would be violating that brother's conscience. However, if he was telling me that I was not a Christian or had the mark of the beast, then I would feel very justified in taking a stronger position with that person. Everyone has different experiences while leaving Adventism. Some have related experiences where they definitely had to give up keeping Sabbath to believe they were trusting Christ alone, but I don't believe that that is necessarily true with others who are transitioning out of SDA, or of those who are questioning their faith. Stan | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 5012 Registered: 12-2003 |
Stan, I completely agree that anyone who believes the Bible instructs them to keep the Sabbath does not understand that Jesus fulfilled it. Without having been a SD Baptist or personally knowing how Michael Card and Chuck Missler actually think about the day, I'm reluctant to say the day has a destructive spiritual claim on themóeven though I suspect there is a blurring of their freedom in Christ. I only personally know about Adventism: and I know that for an Adventist who was overtly taught that the Sabbath is a salvation sign, a necessary part of the life of a saved person, the final test of loyalty (instead of Jesus Himself)óbecause of these things, Adventists must give up the day ultimately in order to know they are fully trusting Jesus. I'm not saying that an Adventist can't be saved while keeping the Sabbathóbut I am saying that an Adventist can't fully live in his or her freedom in Christ as long as he upholds the day. Again, the reason I single out Adventists is that they, even more (I believe) than any other Sabbatarians, have been taught that Sabbath is the ultimate test of loyalty. They will always be hedging their bets if they hang onto the day even when their heads know Jesus is enough. This deception creates powerful spiritual bondage and fear in a person's soul. It won't resolve unless one risks surrendering the day to Jesus. Colleen | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 3074 Registered: 3-2004 |
Colleen, You said that SDAs "will always be hedging their bets if they hang onto the day". That is exactly what I did until I learned about EGW and started reading the NT in 2004, even though I did not feel guilty going dancing on Friday nites. I would go to church occasionally, just to be there in case I needed it. What a crazy way to live, isn't it? Thank God I do not have to do that anymore. Praise God for bringing me into the large family of Christians and teaching me that all I need is Jesus. He is so awesome. Diana | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 596 Registered: 10-2002  |
I agree with both Stan and Colleen on this. The teaching of "Sabbath" (whether on Saturday or Sunday) is very common in Christianity, and although it is not correct, it is possible to know Christ and even rest in Him -- although I believe there is a great freedom to be found in coming out of the "shadow" and into the Light of what the Sabbath was given for in the first place. The more difficult root is the dependance on the 10 Commandments in these parts of the Body. There is a mix-up in the Body between championing morality (and spending all energies on attempting to purify society) versus championing the Righteous One who had died for all of us immoral ones (and extends life-changing grace to us whose deeds do not deserve it). About Adventists, I have a couple friends who still keep the Sabbath, even though they go to a Sunday church. They don't impose it on others, though. There are some different root problems, though, but not nearly as bad as the SDA root of Sabbath-keeping. So I'm fully comfortable leaving them in God's hands in full "Romans 14" fashion. In general, Adventists (especially foundational Adventists) do need to experience direct teaching/revelation about the true meaning Sabbath, and the experience of coming to terms with the Biblical Sabbatismos is one that is extremely fruitful and necessary. However, at the basic conclusion of that, some people still enjoy doing it, and so... Romans 14.  | ||
| Aliza Registered user Username: Aliza Post Number: 104 Registered: 8-2006 |
When I visit relatives in the deep south, I've noticed it's very common to find houses with the 10 Commandment signs planted in their front yards. Now I don't personally know a single one of these people but it's always made me sad to see because I'm guessing there's a lot of confusion about understanding the New Covenant and our Sabbath rest in Jesus. My guess is these are people who are very sincere about their faith. I've often wondered if then SDAs could purposefully target these people. I've never heard a sermon on Romans 14 but I certainly hope that understanding that chapter would be a blessing to anyone approached by others with Pharisaical attitudes on any particular practice. Has anyone ever heard a sermon on this passage? Aliza | ||
| Susans Registered user Username: Susans Post Number: 186 Registered: 8-2006 |
Aliza, This is a sermon on Romans 14 that my former pastor, Ken Ortize, of Calvary Chapel in Spokane, Washington, gave in 2000. Try this link - it's the first part of Romans 14. http://66.236.24.34/mp3/45-ROM/45-ROM-014-001a.mp3 If that does not work, let me know and I'll post a longer way to get to the mp3 file. Susan |
