Scripture ReadingScripture ReadingRomans

14:1--15:7““Therefore let us Therefore let us pursue the things pursue the things which make for which make for peace and the peace and the things by which we things by which we may edify one may edify one another.”another.”

Keeping God’s People Keeping God’s People UnitedUnited

• Church composed of people from “every tribe, tongue and nation” Rev 5:9

• Different customs, educational levels, different economic & social levels

• Yet, we are to be “one” Eph 4:1-4

• Fellowship can be fragile

• God’s word shows path to unity word shows path to unity

Various Attempts Have Various Attempts Have Been Made To Develop Been Made To Develop

UnityUnity• Failure of DenominationalismFailure of Denominationalism

• Restoration Idea: “Speak where Bible Restoration Idea: “Speak where Bible speaks, be silent where it is silent.”speaks, be silent where it is silent.”

• “ “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, love.”liberty; in all things, love.”

• Recognized some distinction between Recognized some distinction between matters of “liberty” and “the faith”matters of “liberty” and “the faith”

• Word of God must make that distinctionWord of God must make that distinction

Unity Declared To Be in “The Unity Declared To Be in “The Faith”Faith”

• 1 Cor 1:10 1 Cor 1:10 “speak the same things”“speak the same things”

• 2 Jn 9-112 Jn 9-11 “abide in doctrine of Christ” “abide in doctrine of Christ”

• Jude 3 - “contend for the faith”

• “Have no company” with those who teach “another doctrine” Rom 16:17-18

• 1 Cor 4:17 “same things in every church”

• Clearly, unity is set in that which is bound

““The Faith” Describes 3 The Faith” Describes 3 Categories of ActionCategories of Action

• Things Commanded or ForbiddenThings Commanded or Forbidden

Only one course is right when things Only one course is right when things are commanded: obey God - are commanded: obey God - Mt 26Mt 26

Only one course is right when things Only one course is right when things are forbidden: refuse to act - are forbidden: refuse to act - 2 Jn 9-112 Jn 9-11

• But there is another category of action

““The Faith” Also The Faith” Also Describes Describes Matters of Matters of

LibertyLiberty - another category - another category of actionof action• These are neither commanded or These are neither commanded or

forbidden, but allowed (no time limit)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 Ex: circumcision Gal 5:6; 6:15; Gal 5:6; 6:15; 1 Cor 7:19 1 Cor 7:19 - a liberty, not a command- a liberty, not a command

““Liberty” Defined by Liberty” Defined by ScriptureScripture

• 1 Cor 8:91 Cor 8:9 “this liberty of yours” “this liberty of yours”

• 1 Cor 10:231 Cor 10:23 “all things are lawful” “all things are lawful”

• Thus “Thus “authorized libertyauthorized liberty” which ” which describes an area of action by brethren describes an area of action by brethren in which one may differ from another in which one may differ from another and both be accepted by Godand both be accepted by God

• Must not apply to “the faith” and Must not apply to “the faith” and create license to sin! Ex: adulterycreate license to sin! Ex: adultery

““Liberty” Defined by Liberty” Defined by ScriptureScripture

• 1 Cor 8:91 Cor 8:9 “this liberty of yours” “this liberty of yours”

• 1 Cor 10:231 Cor 10:23 “all things are lawful” “all things are lawful”

• Liberty = “non-essentials”, or things Liberty = “non-essentials”, or things not commanded or forbiddennot commanded or forbidden

• Matters of “indifference to God” (as Matters of “indifference to God” (as circumcision, meats, days, etc)circumcision, meats, days, etc)

• Either practice or non-practice of act Either practice or non-practice of act makes one no better or worsemakes one no better or worse

Background of Church at Background of Church at RomeRome

• Jewish Christians’ history with “meat” and Jewish Christians’ history with “meat” and days” (unclean meats and Sabbath, etc)days” (unclean meats and Sabbath, etc)

• Gentile Christians history with idols and Gentile Christians history with idols and “things sacrificed to idols” “things sacrificed to idols” 1 Cor 8:41 Cor 8:4

• Christ set free from Law of Moses Christ set free from Law of Moses Gal :1 Gal :1 and made both “one”and made both “one” Eph 2 Eph 2

• “ “Meat” and “days” no longer bound but Meat” and “days” no longer bound but allowed (matters of liberty) to allallowed (matters of liberty) to all

• But became “doubtful disputations” to someBut became “doubtful disputations” to some

““Doubtful Disputations”Doubtful Disputations”• Matters which are outside “the faith”Matters which are outside “the faith”• Matters of judgment or opinion, not Matters of judgment or opinion, not

commanded or forbiddencommanded or forbidden• Yet which may be strongly held by those which may be strongly held by those

uninformed or weak in knowledgeuninformed or weak in knowledge• No clear passage can be presented one way No clear passage can be presented one way

or the other as a proof-textor the other as a proof-text• ““Receive”, but not to “doubtful Receive”, but not to “doubtful

disputations” – don’t major in minorsdisputations” – don’t major in minors• Hold these to yourself Hold these to yourself 14:13, 2214:13, 22

What is Their Danger?What is Their Danger?• When a brother holds strenuously to a When a brother holds strenuously to a

view that is not bound, but seeks to bind view that is not bound, but seeks to bind that view, it becomes a “doubtful that view, it becomes a “doubtful disputation” and would destroy unitydisputation” and would destroy unity

• How must this be treated?How must this be treated? Circumcision is nothing 1 Cor 7:19 It may be practiced Acts 16:3 But it cannot bound Gal. 5:3-5 Lest it become a “doubtful disputation”

Examples of “Doubtful Disputations”

• No located preacherNo located preacher• No uninspired literatureNo uninspired literature• One container for fruit of vine on tableOne container for fruit of vine on table• No Sunday night communionNo Sunday night communion• No Bible classesNo Bible classes• No women teachers in Bible classesNo women teachers in Bible classes• Women and head coveringWomen and head covering• Without a clear passage that authorizes or Without a clear passage that authorizes or

forbids, we should not dispute on itforbids, we should not dispute on it

Romans 14:1--15:7Discussion of Authorized

Liberties• Church at Rome had Jews/GentilesChurch at Rome had Jews/Gentiles

• Their customs, practices differedTheir customs, practices differed

• Yet they were to “receive” one another Yet they were to “receive” one another 14:1 14:1 and be “at peace”and be “at peace” v. 19; 15:7 v. 19; 15:7

• Not in sinful practices! Not in sinful practices! Eph 5:11; 2 Jn 9Eph 5:11; 2 Jn 9

• It is a tragic mistake to include sinful It is a tragic mistake to include sinful practices in practices in open-ended fellowshipopen-ended fellowship

• Whatever may be placed in Rom 14 is Whatever may be placed in Rom 14 is authorized to be received in fellowship!authorized to be received in fellowship!

Matters of Liberty Are Not Matters of Liberty Are Not SinfulSinful

• Note how Note how texttext describes them describes them “clean” v 14 “good” v 16 “pure” v 20

• It is gross violation to put sinful practices in It is gross violation to put sinful practices in this chapter and “receive”this chapter and “receive”

• Are adultery, social drinking, etc “clean” Are adultery, social drinking, etc “clean” “good” or “pure”?“good” or “pure”?

No sin involvedNo sin involvedNo need to stopNo need to stopNo need to contendNo need to contend

Context Cannot Be PervertedContext Cannot Be Perverted

Rom 13:12-14

Rom

14:1-15:7

Rom 16:17-18

Condemns Condemns Moral Sin!Moral Sin!

Condemns Condemns Doctrinal Sin!Doctrinal Sin!

Allows both Allows both doctrinal and doctrinal and moral sin??moral sin??

Does Roman 14:1-15:7 allow “contradictory teachings and practices on important moral and doctrinal questions?”

Different Brethren At Different Brethren At RomeRome

•The “weak” brother The “weak” brother (14:1)(14:1) “untaught” 1 Cor 8:4-7 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

Different Brethren At Different Brethren At RomeRome

•The “strong” brother The “strong” brother (15:1)(15:1) “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

If Romans 14 Permits If Romans 14 Permits Fellowship with Sin:Fellowship with Sin:

•The “strong” (taught) brother actively The “strong” (taught) brother actively participates in the sinparticipates in the sin! (! (15:115:1 - we/Paul) - we/Paul)

• The “weak” (untaught) brother is The “weak” (untaught) brother is opposed opposed to sinto sin! Total reverse of actuality and truth!! Total reverse of actuality and truth!

• Apply this to adultery, social drinking, Apply this to adultery, social drinking, immodesty, gambling, dancing, etc.immodesty, gambling, dancing, etc.

• This view reverses the context and puts This view reverses the context and puts sinners in fellowship with God while asking sinners in fellowship with God while asking faithful to be quiet and accept themfaithful to be quiet and accept them

Arguments for Arguments for Fellowshipping SinFellowshipping Sin

• “ “But weak brother thought it was 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)

Arguments for Arguments for Fellowshipping SinFellowshipping Sin

• “ “But weak brother thought it was sin”But weak brother thought it was sin” • But he was wrong! The act was But he was wrong! The act was not sinful. sinful.

• He was commanded to stop judging his He was commanded to stop judging his brother who ate the meat because God brother who ate the meat because God had had received him received him 14:314:3

• It was a matter of indifference to GodIt was a matter of indifference to God 1 Cor 8:8 1 Cor 8:8 no matter what some thoughtno matter what some thought

• It was an authorized liberty, not a sinful It was an authorized liberty, not a sinful practice to be “received”practice to be “received”

• There was no inherent sin in the practiceThere was no inherent sin in the practice

““Honestly Believed Error Can Honestly Believed Error Can be Received”be Received”

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

““For one reason and one reason only. The people in For one reason and one reason only. The people in Romans 14 are just honestly mistaken about Romans 14 are just honestly mistaken about what God’s will is. Now Paul says “You’d better what God’s will is. Now Paul says “You’d better accept him.” The people in 1 Timothy 4 and accept him.” The people in 1 Timothy 4 and Colossians 2, they know what the apostles of Colossians 2, they know what the apostles of Jesus Christ teach, they know what they are Jesus Christ teach, they know what they are saying Christ’s doctrine is, but they don’t care. saying Christ’s doctrine is, but they don’t care. They have their own tradition they’re following, They have their own tradition they’re following, their own self-made religion that they are their own self-made religion that they are following. That’s the difference.” (for entire following. That’s the difference.” (for entire lessons, see: Marty Pickup, Valrico church of lessons, see: Marty Pickup, Valrico church of Christ, www.valricocofc.org)Christ, www.valricocofc.org)

What is Wrong With This What is Wrong With This Approach?Approach?

• Assumes inherent sin in Rom 14 while strong did Assumes inherent sin in Rom 14 while strong did not sin by eating meatsnot sin by eating meats

• The weak brother did not sin unless he bound his The weak brother did not sin unless he bound his beliefbelief

• In 1 Tim 4 and Col 2, false teachers had bound In 1 Tim 4 and Col 2, false teachers had bound error which came from demonserror which came from demons

• What if some honestly believed the error?What if some honestly believed the error?• Is ignorance an excuse for sin Is ignorance an excuse for sin Acts 17:30Acts 17:30• ““Honestly mistaken” error will send souls to hell – Honestly mistaken” error will send souls to hell –

see Paul see Paul 1 Tim 1:12-131 Tim 1:12-13• John’s disciples John’s disciples Acts 19:1-5 Acts 19:1-5

Can We Fellowship Some Can We Fellowship Some Sexual Sins?Sexual Sins?In 1 Corinthians 5, remember, you’ve got the case of In 1 Corinthians 5, remember, you’ve got the case of

the incestuous man there, a man living with his the incestuous man there, a man living with his father’s wife and Paul says the man is an immoral father’s wife and Paul says the man is an immoral man. Verses 1 and 2, he said this is immorality of man. Verses 1 and 2, he said this is immorality of such a kind that even the Gentiles wouldn’t tolerate such a kind that even the Gentiles wouldn’t tolerate that. So he classifies this man as an immoral man in that. So he classifies this man as an immoral man in his incestuous sexual relationship with his father’s his incestuous sexual relationship with his father’s wife. And look at what Paul told the Corinthian wife. And look at what Paul told the Corinthian brethren to do with that man: “to deliver him over brethren to do with that man: “to deliver him over to Satan,” and he gave several synonyms: “remove to Satan,” and he gave several synonyms: “remove him from your midst,” “cast out the old leaven,” him from your midst,” “cast out the old leaven,” “don’t associate with him.” In other words, he’s “don’t associate with him.” In other words, he’s saying don’t fellowship this person. Don’t accept saying don’t fellowship this person. Don’t accept him as a faithful Christianhim as a faithful Christian … …

““Alright, but in the very next chapter, you’ve got Alright, but in the very next chapter, you’ve got other Corinthians who are going to the temple and other Corinthians who are going to the temple and having sex with the temple prostitutes in Corinth. having sex with the temple prostitutes in Corinth. Now Paul condemns that vehemently but Paul still Now Paul condemns that vehemently but Paul still treats them as saints. He still addresses them as treats them as saints. He still addresses them as saints. And he never says in chapter 6 that those saints. And he never says in chapter 6 that those who are committing immorality with these temple who are committing immorality with these temple prostitutes, you “deliver them over to Satan,” prostitutes, you “deliver them over to Satan,” “remove them from you midst.”“remove them from you midst.”

Why do you think that’s the case? Why? What’s the Why do you think that’s the case? Why? What’s the difference? Same error in practice, right? I mean, difference? Same error in practice, right? I mean, it’s still sexual immorality, okay? But what’s the it’s still sexual immorality, okay? But what’s the difference? Why does Paul not say that those in difference? Why does Paul not say that those in chapter 6 should be delivered over to Satan and no chapter 6 should be delivered over to Satan and no longer accepted as a Christian? (ibid)longer accepted as a Christian? (ibid)

Were the Corinthians Ignorant of Sexual Sin?

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

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?”

If Misuse of Romans 14 is If Misuse of Romans 14 is Accepted:Accepted:

• Practice of sin must be allowed Practice of sin must be allowed v 1v 1

• All debate about sin must stop All debate about sin must stop v. 22v. 22 (compare (compare Jude 3Jude 3 - “contend”) - “contend”)

• Moral and doctrinal error will increaseMoral and doctrinal error will increase

• False teachers cannot be stopped False teachers cannot be stopped 2 Jn 9-11; 2 Tim 4:1-4; Jude 32 Jn 9-11; 2 Tim 4:1-4; Jude 3

• Satan will win the battle by default!Satan will win the battle by default!

Preaching This Kind of Preaching This Kind of Lesson:Lesson:

Does not suggest anger or animosityDoes not suggest anger or animosity Does not suggest closing doors - rather Does not suggest closing doors - rather open up for Bible study - open up for Bible study - Acts 17:11Acts 17:11 Proof of error being taught is available Proof of error being taught is available to those who doubt present need to studyto those who doubt present need to study Private study, open communication to Private study, open communication to those interested in deeper studythose interested in deeper study Goal: Goal: Eph 4:1-3Eph 4:1-3 unity of God’s people unity of God’s people