Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8 have been
erroneously used and misapplied to teach that certain religious activities
projects and methods of church work should be abandoned merely because they
offend the consciences of weak brethren. These chapters teach no such thing.
Romans 14:1-2 - Weak in Faith
The brother described in this chapter as "weak
in faith" has a unwarranted scrupulosity toward lawful and harmless
self-indulgences or pleasures. Due to his lack of understanding of God's
will, his faith is so weak that he cannot eat meat of any kind without
violating his conscience; he eats herbs only. As long as he thinks it is
wrong or doubts that it is right to eat meat, he cannot eat "of faith," and
he would sin if he ate it, because "whatsoever is not of faith is sin"
(v.
23).
The brother whose faith is strong can eat all
things without any doubt as to his God-given right to do so; because he
knows and is "persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of
itself; save that to him who accounted anything to be unclean, to him it is
unclean" (v. 14).
Since nothing is involved but an innocent
personal privilege neither the weak in faith nor the strong in faith has a
right in the sight of God to judge or condemn the other. The brother with
the weak faith must be received in Christian fellowship without any doubtful
disputation, even though he does hold groundless scruples (vv. 1-4).
Under certain circumstances, expediency may
require the strong brother to forego his lawful privilege to eat meat, for
the sake of his weak brother. (Expediency takes precedence over the lawful
right of innocent self-indulgence.)
Expediency forbids the strong brother's eating
meat or indulging in any purely personal pleasure, if and when his doing so
would persuade or influence the weak brother to do that which he thinks is
wrong. The strong would thereby show lack of love in deliberately causing
the weak brother to violate his conscience. By such conduct the strong
brother could overthrow the work of God, and destroy him for whom Christ
died (vv. 1-21).
The Point Illustrated
A man who had been a Seventh-Day Adventist from
his youth learned the plan of salvation and obeyed it. He could make
distinction between the law of Moses and the gospel of Christ with one
exception: he still thought that it was wrong to eat pork or hog meat of any
kind. He and other guests were invited to eat with a brother who knew how
this former Adventist felt about eating hog meat. But ham was served. The
host made a few jesting remarks about "unclean meat," and others laughed.
This made a refusal to eat the ham entirely too embarrassing for this
brother of "weak faith." Therefore, in violation of his conscience he ate a
little of the ham; he did not eat "of faith"; he sinned. Everyone who
influenced him to eat that meat sinned too; they did the very thing the Lord
forbids in Romans 14.
Under the circumstances that host should have
served food that his guests could eat without violation of conscience.
Neither the work of the church nor the method of doing the work was
involved, but only a personal lawful privilege, and that "liberty" should
have been relinquished on that occasion.
On the other hand, if that former Adventist had
tried to force his unwarranted scruples on others as an ordinance of God, it
would have been the duty of the strong to tell him plainly that he had no
right to legislate where God has not, and that "the kingdom of God is not
eating and drinking," neither the "weak" nor the "strong" should be
permitted to make it such.
1 Corinthians 8:1-13 - Weak in Conscience
The brother described in this chapter as being
weak in conscience can be emboldened or caused easily to engage in forbidden
religious performance without any compunction of conscience whatever. Having
been accustomed in former days to eating meat sacrificed to idols as an act
of worship of that idol, he is unable to expel from his mind the idea or the
opinion that he is worshipping every time he eats such meat. He does not
know that a thing "may be morally right, but religiously wrong." He is
unlike the weak brother of Romans 14, who had groundless scruples against
certain innocent deeds. Therefore, when he engages in the forbidden act of
eating such meats as worship, he does not violate his conscience; he defiles
it (v. 7).
Those who understand the will of God, and "by
reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil," know
that meat sacrificed to idols may be eaten to satisfy hunger, but must not
be eaten as a religious rite or act of worship. They are able to distinguish
between eating meat as an act of worship, and eating to satisfy hunger.
Therefore, they can eat such food without sin. "Howbeit there is not in all
men that knowledge"; they eat the meat religiously; they sin against God.
Here again, under certain circumstances the law
of expediency takes precedence over a lawful thing, and forbids the brother
with knowledge from exercising his lawful right to eat meat sacrificed to an
idol, even though he eats it for the sole purpose to satisfy hunger. If and
when the strong brother's eating that meat encourages the weak and ignorant
brother to eat it "as of a thing sacrificed to an idol," the brother with
knowledge becomes a stumbling block to the weak; he sins against his brother
and against Christ; he may cause his weak brother to perish. God has always
been exacting and undeviating regarding acts of worship and ceremonies.
Therefore, the brother with a properly educated
conscience must "take heed lest by any means this liberty" to partake of
innocent personal pleasures or indulgences "becomes a stumbling block to the
weak" (v. 9).
The Point Illustrated
A brother with "knowledge" understands that
instrumental music is nothing, and that he ordinarily has the liberty to
play on instruments of music for pleasure or entertainment in the home, but
never as an act of worship anywhere. Howbeit, there is not in all men that
knowledge; but some being used until now" to instrumental music in worship,
are not able to distinguish between instrumental music as an act of worship,
and instrumental music as entertainment in the home or elsewhere. Therefore,
under some conditions, a brother with "knowledge" must forego this "liberty"
of accompanying his singing with mechanical instruments for pleasure and
entertainment in the home, lest the weak brother be "emboldened" to return
with good conscience to his instrumental music in worship to which he was
long accustomed, and which he has tried to think is acceptable to the Lord.
These restrictions of "liberty" in the field of
innocent pleasure are binding not only for the sake of weak brethren, but
also for the sake of unbelievers (1 Cor. 10:23-33).
These difficult Bible chapters of deference to
ignorant and weak brethren pertain only to personal liberties of the strong,
and must not be applied to the work of the church. An interpretation or an
application of these passages, which contradicts some other part of God's
word, is wrong. For the Bible does not contradict itself. Therefore, weak
and ignorant brethren must not be permitted to do any one of three things:
1. They must not bind their wishes and scruples
on others, or legislate where the Lord has not. Commandments of men always
make void some part of God's word (Matt. 15:1-6). Christians are forbidden
to subject themselves to "precepts and doctrines of men" who say, "Don't
handle, don't taste, don't touch" (Col. 2:20-23). "The Spirit saith
expressly, that in later times some shall fall away from the faith" by
submitting unto religious laws which the Lord has not enacted (1 Tim. 4:14).
In matters of private and personal liberty, the brother with knowledge is to
voluntarily forego certain pleasures in gracious deference to the ignorant
brother, and not because the weak brother has ordered or even requested it.
If the weak brother demands it, then the brother with knowledge is forbidden
by the Scriptures to submit.
2. The weak brother must not be permitted to
prevent anyone from doing anything the Lord has commanded. When the apostles
were charged by man to preach no more in the name of Jesus they replied, "We
must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:28,29). Whether that "man" be an
officer of the law or an ignorant brother, the people of God must not let
that "man" prevent them from doing the Lord's will as revealed in his word.
3. The ignorant brother, weak in faith or
conscience, must not be permitted to prevent either an individual Christian
or a church from employing any righteous method of doing the work assigned
by the Lord. The writer did not have "methods" of doing church work under
consideration at all in these two chapters. Applying these restrictions of
"liberty" in Romans 14 and I Corinthians 8 to methods of teaching in classes
or the number of containers used in the Lord's Supper or the way the
collections are taken or anything else, except liberties in thefield of
innocent andpersonal indulgences, would remove the oversight of the Lord's
work from the elders, and place it in the hands of cranks. The elders and
the churches could not so much as begin the work assigned, if they were
required to find ways and "methods" to fit the whims, opinions, scruples,
and consciences of all the ignorant brethren. The elders have no more right
to surrender the oversight to a few cranks in the congregation than they
have to surrender it to the elders of another local church.
Some have argued that Romans 14 and 1
Corinthians 8 teach that churches should not use instrumental music in
worship, to contribute money from their treasuries to Bible colleges or
missionary societies or any other centralized agency, because many good
brethren cannot conscientiously support and participate in these
unscriptural innovations, and all admit the work can be done acceptably
without these unscriptural things, and, therefore, in deference to weak
brethren, and in obedience to these two chapters, these things must be
abandoned. These chapters teach no such thing, and he who argues that they
do, must prove two things:
1. He must prove that the Holy Spirit in these
chapters is discussing church work as well as private and personal liberties
in things inherently innocent.
2. He must prove that the objectors to these
innovations are ignorant of the truth, and that they would not object if
they had more knowledge of the word of God.
These innovations - instrumental music in
worship, church contributions to human societies and centralized agencies
are unscriptural and wrong, and they should not be used in the work and
worship of the church; but the mere fact that their use violates somebody's
conscience is no proof at all that they should not be used.
Summary
Two kinds of weak brethren are described by Paul
in these two chapters under consideration. Their only point of similarity is
their ignorance of God's word.
The weak brother of Romans 14 has an unwarranted
scrupulosity against partaking of things innocent and harmless and lawful.
Strong brethren are warned lest they cause the weak brother to do that which
he thinks is wrong.
The weak brother in 1 Corinthians 8 does not
know the difference between doing a thing as an act of worship, and doing
that same thing for some purpose other than worship. Strong brethren with
knowledge are warned, lest they cause the weak brother to return with "good"
conscience to unauthorized acts of worship which may still have a strong
appeal to him.
Guardian of Truth - February 7, 1991
Other Articles
