Scripture Reading

1
Scripture Reading
Romans 141--157
Therefore let us pursue the things which make
for peace and the things by which we may edify
one another.
2
Keeping Gods People United

• Church composed of people from every tribe,
  tongue and nation Rev 59
• Different customs, educational levels, different
  economic social levels
• Yet, we are to be one Eph 41-4
• Fellowship can be fragile
• Gods word shows path to unity

3
Various Attempts Have Been Made To Develop Unity

• Failure of Denominationalism
• Restoration Idea Speak where Bible speaks, be
  silent where it is silent.
• In essentials, unity in non-essentials,
  liberty in all things, love.
• Recognized some distinction between matters of
  liberty and the faith
• Word of God must make that distinction

4
Unity Declared To Be in The Faith

• 1 Cor 110 speak the same things
• 2 Jn 9-11 abide in doctrine of Christ
• Jude 3 - contend for the faith
• Have no company with those who teach another
  doctrine Rom 1617-18
• 1 Cor 417 same things in every church
• Clearly, unity is set in that which is bound

5
The Faith Describes 3 Categories of Action

• Things Commanded or Forbidden
• Only one course is right when things are
  commanded obey God - Mt 26
• Only one course is right when things are
  forbidden refuse to act - 2 Jn 9-11
• But there is another category of action

6
The Faith Also Describes Matters of Liberty -
another category of action

• These are neither commanded or forbidden, but
  allowed (no time limit)
• Allows for judgments, opinions, different
  actions (must be lawful)
• Liberty to do differently than some other
  brethren (no inherent sin)
• Ex circumcision Gal 56 615 1 Cor
  719 - a liberty, not a command

7
Liberty Defined by Scripture

• 1 Cor 89 this liberty of yours
• 1 Cor 1023 all things are lawful
• Thus authorized liberty which describes an
  area of action by brethren in which one may
  differ from another and both be accepted by God
• Must not apply to the faith and create license
  to sin! Ex adultery

8
Liberty Defined by Scripture

• 1 Cor 89 this liberty of yours
• 1 Cor 1023 all things are lawful
• Liberty non-essentials, or things not
  commanded or forbidden
• Matters of indifference to God (as
  circumcision, meats, days, etc)
• Either practice or non-practice of act makes
  one no better or worse

9
Background of Church at Rome

• Jewish Christians history with meat and
  days (unclean meats and Sabbath, etc)
• Gentile Christians history with idols and
  things sacrificed to idols 1 Cor 84
• Christ set free from Law of Moses Gal 1 and
  made both one Eph 2
• Meat and days no longer bound but allowed
  (matters of liberty) to all
• But became doubtful disputations to some

10
Doubtful Disputations

• Matters which are outside the faith
• Matters of judgment or opinion, not commanded or
  forbidden
• Yet which may be strongly held by those
  uninformed or weak in knowledge
• No clear passage can be presented one way or the
  other as a proof-text
• Receive, but not to doubtful disputations
  dont major in minors
• Hold these to yourself 1413, 22

11
What is Their Danger?

• When a brother holds strenuously to a view that
  is not bound, but seeks to bind that view, it
  becomes a doubtful disputation and would
  destroy unity
• How must this be treated?
• Circumcision is nothing 1 Cor 719
• It may be practiced Acts 163
• But it cannot bound Gal. 53-5
• Lest it become a doubtful disputation

12
Examples of Doubtful Disputations

• No located preacher
• No uninspired literature
• One container for fruit of vine on table
• No Sunday night communion
• No Bible classes
• No women teachers in Bible classes
• Women and head covering
• Without a clear passage that authorizes or
  forbids, we should not dispute on it

13
Romans 141--157Discussion of Authorized
Liberties

• Church at Rome had Jews/Gentiles
• Their customs, practices differed
• Yet they were to receive one another 141 and
  be at peace v. 19 157
• Not in sinful practices! Eph 511 2 Jn 9
• It is a tragic mistake to include sinful
  practices in open-ended fellowship
• Whatever may be placed in Rom 14 is authorized
  to be received in fellowship!

14
Matters of Liberty Are Not Sinful

• Note how text describes them
• clean v 14
• good v 16
• pure v 20
• It is gross violation to put sinful practices in
  this chapter and receive
• Are adultery, social drinking, etc clean
  good or pure?

No sin involved No need to stop No need to contend
15
Context Cannot Be Perverted
Does Roman 141-157 allow contradictory
teachings and practices on important moral and
doctrinal questions?
Allows both doctrinal and moral sin??
Condemns Doctrinal Sin!
Condemns Moral Sin!
Rom 1312-14
Rom 1617-18
Rom 141-157
16
Different Brethren At Rome

• The weak brother (141)
• untaught 1 Cor 84-7
• did not have full knowledge
• convinced in own mind
• believed strong brother to be in sin
• was not weak in conviction
• was binding where God did not bind
• was drawing lines of fellowship

17
Different Brethren At Rome

• The strong brother (151)
• taught, had full knowledge
• able to practice eating observing
• did it to the Lord, convinced in mind
• warned not to be puffed up in mind
• warned not to cause weak to stumble by
  flaunting his knowledge and practice
• but no inherent sin allowed practice and
  fellowship to continue

18
If Romans 14 Permits Fellowship with Sin

• The strong (taught) brother actively
  participates in the sin! (151 - we/Paul)
• The weak (untaught) brother is opposed to sin!
  Total reverse of actuality and truth!
• Apply this to adultery, social drinking,
  immodesty, gambling, dancing, etc.
• This view reverses the context and puts sinners
  in fellowship with God while asking faithful to
  be quiet and accept them

19
Arguments for Fellowshipping Sin

• But weak brother thought it was sin
• Now the fellow who thought it could be a sin to
  eat those meats had to look at the other fellow
  and think he was sinning. Had to. In Rome, the
  fellow who thought it was a sin to eat any kind
  of meat would have thought you sinned if you ate
  a piece of meat. And yet Paul taught them that
  they should accept one another Bob Owen, We
  Differ, Can We Fellowship? Concord, NC, Feb 19,
  1995)

20
Arguments for Fellowshipping Sin

• But weak brother thought it was sin
• But he was wrong! The act was not sinful.
• He was commanded to stop judging his brother
  who ate the meat because God had received him
  143
• It was a matter of indifference to God 1 Cor
  88 no matter what some thought
• It was an authorized liberty, not a sinful
  practice to be received
• There was no inherent sin in the practice

21
Honestly Believed Error Can be Received

• In 1st Timothy and Colossians, as we saw, its
  the error of forbidding foods and honoring days
  and yet Paul treats that differently though its
  the same error from Romans 14. And the question
  is why are these cases different. And I hope you
  can see, now that weve been discussing this is
  the very obvious reason why those cases are
  different. Its not that the doctrinal error is
  different. Same error, but the approach to it is
  different. (contd)

22

• For one reason and one reason only. The people
  in Romans 14 are just honestly mistaken about
  what Gods will is. Now Paul says Youd better
  accept him. The people in 1 Timothy 4 and
  Colossians 2, they know what the apostles of
  Jesus Christ teach, they know what they are
  saying Christs doctrine is, but they dont care.
  They have their own tradition theyre following,
  their own self-made religion that they are
  following. Thats the difference. (for entire
  lessons, see Marty Pickup, Valrico church of
  Christ, www.valricocofc.org)

23
What is Wrong With This Approach?

• Assumes inherent sin in Rom 14 while strong did
  not sin by eating meats
• The weak brother did not sin unless he bound his
  belief
• In 1 Tim 4 and Col 2, false teachers had bound
  error which came from demons
• What if some honestly believed the error?
• Is ignorance an excuse for sin Acts 1730
• Honestly mistaken error will send souls to hell
  see Paul 1 Tim 112-13
• Johns disciples Acts 191-5

24
Can We Fellowship Some Sexual Sins?

• In 1 Corinthians 5, remember, youve got the case
  of the incestuous man there, a man living with
  his fathers wife and Paul says the man is an
  immoral man. Verses 1 and 2, he said this is
  immorality of such a kind that even the Gentiles
  wouldnt tolerate that. So he classifies this man
  as an immoral man in his incestuous sexual
  relationship with his fathers wife. And look at
  what Paul told the Corinthian brethren to do with
  that man to deliver him over to Satan, and he
  gave several synonyms remove him from your
  midst, cast out the old leaven, dont
  associate with him. In other words, hes saying
  dont fellowship this person. Dont accept him as
  a faithful Christian

25

• Alright, but in the very next chapter, youve
  got other Corinthians who are going to the temple
  and having sex with the temple prostitutes in
  Corinth. Now Paul condemns that vehemently but
  Paul still treats them as saints. He still
  addresses them as saints. And he never says in
  chapter 6 that those who are committing
  immorality with these temple prostitutes, you
  deliver them over to Satan, remove them from
  you midst.
• Why do you think thats the case? Why? Whats the
  difference? Same error in practice, right? I
  mean, its still sexual immorality, okay? But
  whats the difference? Why does Paul not say that
  those in chapter 6 should be delivered over to
  Satan and no longer accepted as a Christian?
  (ibid)

26
Were the Corinthians Ignorant of Sexual Sin?

• Okay, so this was their background and they had
  done this in their pre-Christian life and so, in
  other words, I think what youre getting at is,
  these people were not, at least at this point,
  they were not saying, We know this is sinful,
  but were going to keep doing it, Paul. There
  were just continuing to live the same sexual life
  style they had lived before they were Christians
  and they hadnt got all this that, Wait a
  minute, thats wrong. You cant do that. It
  does matter what you do with your body, as Paul
  teaches them in chapter 6. (ibid)

27
Were Some Ignorant That Sexual Acts Were Sinful?

• Were those in 1 Cor 6 just honestly mistaken?
  (see v. 9-11)
• Did Paul ignore the practice or condemn it?
• How long could they continue to visit the temple
  before being held accountable?
• If they were still saints in the practice, why
  not leave them in ignorance?
• Is sexual immorality parallel to Romans 14
  pure, clean, good?

28
If Misuse of Romans 14 is Accepted

• Practice of sin must be allowed v 1
• All debate about sin must stop v. 22 (compare
  Jude 3 - contend)
• Moral and doctrinal error will increase
• False teachers cannot be stopped
  2 Jn 9-11 2 Tim 41-4 Jude 3
• Satan will win the battle by default!

29
Preaching This Kind of Lesson

• Does not suggest anger or animosity
• Does not suggest closing doors - rather open up
  for Bible study - Acts 1711
• Proof of error being taught is available to
  those who doubt present need to study
• Private study, open communication to those
  interested in deeper study
• Goal Eph 41-3 unity of Gods people