WOUNDED PILGRIMS

[editor]

Sondra,

You said this:

The strong are reminded not to despise the weak.  The weak are admonished not to judge the strong.  Both are exhorted, equally.NOT SO.  The weak in faith/judgmental believers are strongly exhorted to JUDGE NOT THAT YE BE NOT JUDGED as a general theme of the passage. The strong in faith are instructed that they should not live carelessly before those with a weak Conscience.  God does not, however, tell the Christian who walks in liberty that he needs to move to mars so no one will see his lifestyle that is lived according to liberty.

I couldn't agree more.  I wanted to present the idea in a manner that would be easier to swallow for some.  You will note that in my original post, where I introduce the idea, I say that a strong case can be made that the weak are being exhorted more than the strong.

Good points, all. 

We'll do the tenderness/mercy thing later.  We need to stick to this topic.

Brent

[summer007]

Brent, You really do a switch here you ask Mark who are the weak from Ro 14-15 and in those passages it has alot to do with un-clean foods and foods offered to idols. You seemed to be having more of a gripe with the "weak" who you thought were taking advantge of the situation the slothful, lazy, immoral etc. Who are riding on the Robinhood Govt's of todays society. I prefer Paul's way of I Cor 6:12 "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me but I will not be brought under the power of any". Paul knew an idol was nothing. Yet the weak brother would freak if the stronger ate food sacrificed to idols. Still it seems your problem with who are the weak is unresolved.  Summer.

[summer007]

Right Sondra. I don't know why it bothers him so much he's not even from her country. Summer.

[editor]

Brent, You really do a switch here you ask Mark who are the weak from Ro 14-15 and in those passages it has alot to do with un-clean foods and foods offered to idols. You seemed to be having more of a gripe with the "weak" who you thought were taking advantge of the situation the slothful, lazy, immoral etc. Who are riding on the Robinhood Govt's of todays society. I prefer Paul's way of I Cor 6:12 "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me but I will not be brought under the power of any". Paul knew an idol was nothing. Yet the weak brother would freak if the stronger ate food sacrificed to idols. Still it seems your problem with who are the weak is unresolved.  Summer.

I don't agree.  The danger to the weak isn't that they "freak" if the strong eat certain food, or drink wine.  On the contrary, Paul tells them not to judge those who do.

The danger to the weak is that they go ahead and eat or drink, and thus condemn themselves, due to their weak consciences.  The strong should not put them in a position to do that.   Meanwhile, the weak should learn that it's OK for others to eat and drink.

The modern version of the "weak" in today's evangelical world, are those who are hung up on hair lenght, wearing dresses, listening to certain music, never touching alchohol, avoiding public school, etc.

Sondra, what I am saying has nothing to do with a certain person, it is all rhetorical.  Please don't make it a personal issue.

Paul was judgemental towards certain people, does that make him weak?
Brent

[editor]

Right Sondra. I don't know why it bothers him so much he's not even from her country. Summer.

Please don't make this into a personal issue, it's not. 

I won't let anyone make a certain subject taboo.  This is not directed at anyone in particular, but a discussion about the strong and the weak, and how it applies to our current lives. 

You are both totally out of line by trying to make it out to be otherwise.  It didn't start out that way, and I won't let it go there again.

Brent

[summer007]

Okay Brent it would embolden the "weak" to eat things sacrified to idols and therefore defile his weak conscience, because he  thinks the idol is something. As far as this being personal, all one need do is read between the lines, but then I could be mistaken? Summer.

[editor]

Okay Brent it would embolden the "weak" to eat things sacrified to idols and therefore defile his weak conscience, because he  thinks the idol is something. As far as this being personal, all one need do is read between the lines, but then I could be mistaken? Summer.

See my PM

[M2]

Okay Brent it would embolden the "weak" to eat things sacrified to idols and therefore defile his weak conscience, because he  thinks the idol is something. As far as this being personal, all one need do is read between the lines, but then I could be mistaken? Summer.

Though it did start off with a specific incident, the topic is who are the weak/strong and how do the weak/strong relate to each other?
Once the topic gets personal it spirals downhill so it is best to keep it in generalities.

Marcia

[editor]

Okay Brent it would embolden the "weak" to eat things sacrified to idols and therefore defile his weak conscience, because he  thinks the idol is something. As far as this being personal, all one need do is read between the lines, but then I could be mistaken? Summer.

It wouldn't embolden the weak, it would destroy them.

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin.

If the weak eat, they are "damned."  That's why it's so important to not stumble them.

Unfortunately, people mis-read, and mis-apply this passage and use it to give the weak power over the strong, which is what they want anyways.

It goes like this:

I think it's sin to eat meat, and drink wine.  I state that it stumbles me that you eat meat and drink wine, and show you in the word why you must stop doing that.  You are forced to stop, for my sake.

That's wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!!

In that event, the proper thing to do is tell the weak to shut up and quit being judgemental!  Catering to them is totally wrong.  Even worse would be to coerce them into eating or drinking, when they think it's sin.  However, in their current state they are told to stop judging those with liberty.

Doesn't anyone see this?  You all seem to be interpreting this in the way Betty taught it.

Brent

[vernecarty]

It is quite revealing that the word Paul uses for "weak" in Romans 14 is frequently translated as "sick" in the NT, eg. Matt 10:8. That both weak and strong (and the word "strong" does not actually appear until chapter 15) are being admonished is clear.
Mature Christians who have liberty in Christ do indeed tend to contemn legalistic brethren who try to tie them up in knots. Legalistic brethren tend to be needlessly judgmental.
Paul in verse 10 says to both: Don't!


But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother?

Verne

[editor]

It is quite revealing that the word Paul uses for "weak" in Romans 14 is frequently translated as "sick" in the NT (eg. Matt 10: That both weak and strong (and the word "strong" does not actually appear until chapter 15) are being admonished is clear.
Mature Christians who have liberty in Christ do indeed tend to contemn legalistic brethren who try to tie them up in knots. Legalistic brethren tend to be needlessly judgmental.
Paul in verse 10 says to both: Don't!


But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother?

Verne

That's what I've been saying.  There is an admonition to the strong and weak in this chapter.  One is judgemental, while the other despises.

What's the problem here?

Brent

[vernecarty]

That's what I've been saying.  There is an admonition to the strong and weak in this chapter.  One is judgemental, while the other despises.

What's the problem here?

Brent

None that I can see...
Verne

[summer007]

Brent, Yes as the weak is emboldened to eat he is later destroyed by his weak conscience. I took for granted you knew the passage. Read I Cor 8-13. Marcia will try to stay on topic and not make personal references.Yet this isn't church, just a board to discuss topics if it's too robotic it gets more boring then an afternoon meeting. Summer.

[editor]

Brent, Yes as the weak is emboldened to eat he is later destroyed by his weak conscience. I took for granted you knew the passage. Read I Cor 8-13. Marcia will try to stay on topic and not make personal references.Yet this isn't church, just a board to discuss topics if it's too robotic it gets more boring then an afternoon meeting. Summer.

OK, we're on the same page.  It was a matter of not reading what you wrote exactly right.  No worries.

Brent

[editor]

I would think you could make your point without hitting the "Betty" hot button.  Of course, that strengthens your argument if you can throw a little "Betty" in there, but no, I don't see it either.  In reading Mark's original post, it was/is clear to me that he also is simply trying to establish who is the "weak" one and who is the "strong" one and suggests that the weak one doesn't approve of a certain lifestyle of another.  

Since everyone had to endure ongoing condemnation of one person in particular and since that same argument center's around that same person, I don't see why the name should not be mentioned - her identity is implied.  Her life is the life that is being talked about here as well as the principle.  As Summer put it "reading between the lines" makes it obvious that there is a recent example that this subject applies to.   

Sondra

This is refreshing!

I do believe this is the first thread that you didn't think was about you.  We are making progress here!

I repeat, this is NOT about any one person!