|
Morning Thoughts |
|
Romans 14:23,
"And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for
whatsoever is not of faith is sin." This morning, different verses of the Bible get brutalized in their application. Quite often, the brutalization of the text comes when the applicator fails to either consider the context or the sense of the verse, but equally often his application is accepted by many as it fits some cursory glance of the language of the verse. For example, if one were to consider the language of Philippians 4:13, a cursory glance might see "all things" in the verse as anything and everything in life. However, the Bible will not uphold or support such an application of the term "all things through Christ which strengtheneth me" as not all things without exception come from His strength nor are pleasing to Him. Therefore, we must be careful and deliberate in our studies of God's word to glean more than just a cursory glance of things and seek to prove all things and hold fast that which is good. (I Thessalonians 5:21) Quite often, the phrase of our verse above "whatsoever is not of faith is sin" is taken out of its context and used to show many erroneous concepts. While not an exhaustive list of all such fallacies, applications have been made that 1. everything non-spiritual is sinful, 2. unregenerates sin in EVERY activity, 3. natural activities must be borne out of faith, and probably others that I have not come in personal contact with. Were any of these options true thoughts about the intent of the language of our verse, we would be posed with many unanswerable questions. For example, taking our family on vacation to relax and enjoy one another's company (a non-faith activity) would be sinful. An unregenerate doing the most basic of daily functions such as eating, sleeping, washing clothes, etc. would be sinful actions. Such thoughts fail to distinguish between natural and carnal or moral and holy. An unregenerate can participate in natural functions (as previously mentioned) that are simply natural functions of daily life but not be actively engaged in the carnality of sinful desires. His behaviour of perhaps not being unfaithful to his wife or employer, not stealing, etc. would be considered moral but not righteous and holy behaviour. Therefore, the text again poses any number of problems to run it in such a cursory fashion, but such applications also pose a great injustice not only to the text but also its immediate context. Paul is not labouring to show that natural activity is always sinful. Neither is he throwing rocks at man's depravity. Rather, he is in the midst of a very different discussion: Christian liberty. One of the great faults of man (whether in natural or spiritual exercise) is that he believes "my way is the only way." If we are honest with ourselves, we believe that what we do is the best way to do something or maybe the only way we are capable of doing it. If we did not, we would seek to do something differently. However, one of the hallmark behaviours of Christian deportment is the liberty and compassion of tolerance (on acceptable subjects) for others to do things slightly differently than we do. Paul has been labouring for a whole chapter to show that certain subjects are open for liberty in our behaviour and the way we approach things. Certainly he is not talking about allowances on moral issues, for the Bible is clear that liberty is not extended in such matters. Adultery, theft, murder, and other moral inequities are not fields for licentious liberty to be extended. Neither is Paul leaving the doctrinal field open for debate on matters of salvation, redemption, adoption, atonement, election, or other foundational points. These matters must be adhered to and earnestly contended for. (Jude 3) Rather, Paul is talking about "lifestyle decisions" that do not make someone any more or less sound doctrinally nor any more or less pure morally. The two examples that Paul employs are diet and observance of days in Romans 14. We could insert many other examples, but Paul chose these two to prove the point. We are no better or worse, spiritually speaking, by our diet or the observance of days (such as sabbath keeping). Indeed, these two things do help us naturally in maintaining healthy bodies and getting rest on a regular basis, but they cannot and should not be used as barometers for our spiritual health and well-being. Therefore, if someone wants to rest for a full day out of the week and be a vegetarian, that is perfectly fine to have that lifestyle. If someone else wants to eat meat and not keep a sabbath-type rest, Paul says let every man be so persuaded in his own mind. (Romans 14:5) What does pose a problem is when one man forces his lifestyle upon another. Without allowing the Christian liberty in such matters, we may end up trying to "prove too much" in our teaching. Paul exhorted Timothy that all meats were to be received with thanksgiving and to shun those teachers that came preaching heresies such as the abstinence of meats or forbidding to marry. (I Timothy 4:1-5) It is not a problem for one man to remain single or refrain from certain meats, but it is a great problem for him to proclaim in a teaching way that all men be as he is in that regard. By making it a doctrinal mandate, he is neglecting the liberty that we have in Christ to choose certain patterns of life that are not mandated by Scripture. Moving towards our verse, we are approaching the point that Paul has in mind with things not of faith being sin. As Paul closes the chapter, he begins to exhort brethren not to pose a rock of stumbling for their fellow brethren. For example, if we believe that eating meat is all right, but another brother does not, why destroy that brother with our meat? This is not to say that we must be vegetarians also, but why make a big issue of it, try to force it upon him, or even do it in front of him? The kingdom is not about meat and drink, so why let meat and drink stand in the way of our fellowship one with another? (Romans 14:17-21) If I know that certain parts of my lifestyle choices are offensive to a brother that refrains from such, Paul says my course is not to engage in those things in front of him. One of the easiest examples here is the subject of alcohol. No where does the Bible prohibit the use of alcohol altogether, but it specifically prohibits the excess of it that leads to drunkenness. (Ephesians 5:18, I Peter 4:3) However, drinking anything alcoholic can be offensive to some (particularly to those that have problems with it). Therefore, even knowing that taking a drink (even for the stomach's sake) would offend - or as Paul terms it "destroy" - our brother, why not refrain from it in his presence? As his weak conscience might be defiled by our behaviour, the price is too high even though the action is not in and of itself sinful. Furthermore, what if our action emboldens our brother to partake similarly? Even though we know that our action is not wicked nor done through wicked intent, his knowledge is weak, his conscience is weak, and he perchance indulges in it all the while thinking it to be sinful. While the action itself is not a sin, his mind perceives it to be so. What if he has made a promise to keep himself from a certain thing? He is now guilty of a broken vow and therefore sinful. Paul's point is that a brother eating meat or some other lifestyle choice that he intended to keep himself from is sinning as it breaks his vow to do so. While the action itself is not prohibited in Scripture, he has personally prohibited himself from it and now believes he sins while doing it. That sting of conscience will be weighty and burdensome, and sadly, quite avoidable. However, by extending liberty one to another, we who are strong can help bear the infirmities of the weak, and in so doing not please ourselves. (Romans 15:1) This helping of one another, not forcing one another to be just like us, and seeking to better the brethren and not please ourselves are all part of a mindset that goes hand-in-hand with Christ's teaching to love our neighbours as ourselves. May we extend liberty to one another in our daily deportment while always standing fast for those uncompromising principles of Scripture, praying that the Lord give us the wisdom to distinguish between them.  In Hope, Bro Philip |