Charts (Lesson Three) Romans 14 and Fellowship with Sin

Romans 14-15

• Text and Context
• Immediate Context
• Distant Context

Opposing Theories

• Gnosticism
• Calvinism (TULIP)
• Abuse of Grace
• Abuse of Romans 14
• (Open-ended, Continual Fellowship in Sin)

• Must Be True to the Text
• Must Be True to the Context
• Must Be True to All the Bible
• Must Not Contradict Truth
• Must Not Violate God's Character
• Must Not Promote Fellowship with Sin

• Violates the Context
• Puts God in Fellowship with Sin
• Brings Sin into the Church
• Provides Basis for Open-Ended Fellowship with Sin

Attempts to put sin in the text violates Text and Context:

• Text - Romans 14 - 15
  • Matters Clean, Good, Pure
  • v. 14, 16, 20
• Immediate Context
  • Romans 13:11-14 (no moral sins)
  • Romans 16:17-19 (no doctrinal sins)
• Distant Context
  • Galatians 5:19-21 (works of the flesh)
  • Colossians 3:5-11 (put to death)
  • Ephesians 5:13-14 (reprove)
  • 2 John 9-11 (no fellowship with sin)
  • 2 Corinthians 6:14 (unequal yoking)

"In matters of faith, unity; In matters of judgment, liberty; In all things, charity."

• Receive one another (14:1 - 15:7)
  • Differences test our fellowship
  • Differences of "doubtful things"
  • Meats (2-3, 6, 15-17, 20-23)
  • Days (5-6)
• Why? God has received both (3-4, 18)
  • God is judge and master (4)
  • He declares practices to be:
    
    "clean" (14)
    "good" (16)
    "pure" (20)
    
• Do not judge or show contempt (10,13); but "pursue peace and edify" (19)

Things Commanded

• We have no choice, only one right way to act; must do them to adhere to God's pattern.

Things Forbidden

• We have no choice, only one right way to act; must not do them to adhere to God's pattern.

Things Allowed

• We have a choice; plurality of right actions; may do or not do them without inherent sin; depends on situation and personal conscience.

• One's mistaken concept of what is included in "The Faith" does not change a matter of indifference into "The Faith."
  
  
• "Doubtful Disputations" were matters of personal belief that were arrived at without revelation from God: opinions, judgments, strongly held personal beliefs.

Practices, Beliefs and Brethren:

• God accepts (vs. 3)
• Done "To the Lord" (vs. 6)
• We must not judge (vs. 10)
• Not "unclean" (vs. 14)
• "Pure" (vs. 20)

The only sin of this passage is that of judging a brother or practice sinful (vs. 10, 13) or eating while in doubt, offending conscience (vs. 20,23)

Faith or Authorized Liberty
Murder	Carnal Warfare
Women in Subjection	Covering Question
Teach Gospel	Bible Classes
One Cup (Fruit of Vine)	Number Containers
Divorce & Remarriage	Legal Papers
Worship	Funeral in Building
Preach Gospel	Call names, etc.

Allowing a weak brother to control fellowship destroys authorized liberties and violates Romans 14.

If an issue cannot be proven by "book, chapter and verse" to be in The Faith, Liberty must be allowed.

Notice how the text identifies these matters:

1. The herb eater was "weak in faith" not sinful.
2. It was equally right to eat or not eat meat.
3. It was sinful to condemn the meat eater.
4. One could eat or not eat "to the Lord."
5. Eating meat was "clean."
6. Eating meat was "good."
7. Meat eating was included in the category of "all things are pure."
8. God "received" the meat eater.
9. The meat eater was made to "stand" (versus fall) by God.
10. One could eat meat as long as he did not cause the "weak" to stumble.

1. Is man who commits adultery "weak in faith" or sinful?
2. Is it equally right to commit or not commit adultery?
3. Is it sinful to condemn the man who commits adultery?
4. Can one commit adultery "to the Lord"?
5. Is adultery "clean"?
6. Is committing adultery "good"?
7. Is adultery among things included in "all things are pure"?
8. Does God "receive" the adulterer?
9. Does the adulterer "stand" (versus fall)?
10. Can one commit adultery as long as he is not an occasion of stumbling to the "weak"?

Strong:
Informed, able to practice, right understanding, doing it to the Lord, convinced in own mind, gives God thanks. Danger: Cause weak to stumble; set brother at nought.

Weak:
Uninformed, unable to practice, poor understanding, doing it not to the Lord, convinced in own mind, gives God thanks. Danger: Judge his brother, violate his own conscience.

• Who Is the Weak Brother?
  • Untaught in Matters of Liberty, a Doubter (Romans 14:1-3)
  • Without Knowledge (1 Corinthians 8:7)
  • Questions for Conscience' Sake (1 Corinthians 8:7)
  • Seeking to Bind Where God Has Not Bound
    • Disputes (vs. 1)
    • Despises strong brother, shows contempt (vv. 3,10)
    • Judges as sinful (vv. 4, 10, 13)
  • Makes View a Test of Fellowship (Acts 15:1)
• Scripture Does Not Allow This Man to Control Fellowship!
  • Examples: One Container in L.S., Bible Classes

1. There was no inherent sin in the practice of the strong brother.
2. Receive "one another".
3. Do not despise.
4. Do not judge - bind where God did not.
5. Allow strong brother to practice.
6. Hold personal conscience to self.
7. Weak brother could continue in non-practice.
8. Strong brother could continue in practice.
9. God received them both!

Applied in New Testament to: Meats, Days, Circumcision, Jewish Customs (1 Corinthians 9:20)

Applied today to: Bible Classes, multiple containers, Christmas, movies, national customs

Weak Brother Destroys Practice of Authorized Liberties.

Sinful	Liberties	Authorized
Murder	Carnal Warfare	Romans 13
Sunday School Org., Superintendent	Classes	1 Timothy 3:15
Women Not in Subjection	Covering - No Covering	1 Corinthians 11

Moses E. Lard:

"These thoughts are his own private opinions respecting things about which there is no command. He, therefore, has the right to hold them without interference from others. The things which his thoughts respect are in themselves indifferent; and therefore the thoughts which relate to them are indifferent. Consequently, so long as the thoughts do not lead him who holds them into wrong, he is not to be disturbed in them."

Robertson L. Whiteside (pp. 266-277)

• "matter of opinion or indifference"
• "must be confined to such matters"
• "opinions and personal rights"

Bryan Vinson, Sr. (pp. 259-275)

• "Now, if it was a matter of faith and authorized duty, instead of being one of opinion and therefore a matter of indifference, such a qualification would not be proper" (re: Romans 14:3).

A.W. Dicus (pp. 99-104)

• "In this chapter he deals with things or matters that are indifferent within themselves."

Notice:

THE FAITH	"MY FAITH"
Preach it, contend for it, Mt. 28; Gal. 1:23; Jude 3	"Have it to yourself before God" Rom. 14:22

They have tried:

• to redefine "adultery"
• to put it under "moral law"
• to put it under "depart" (1 Cor. 7:15)
• to put it under "grace,"
• to put it in the "local church autonomy"
• to put it under necessity (1 Cor. 7:1), etc.

Leroy Garrett:

"The implications of all this to unity and fellowship are weighty. It means that the gospel itself, not our doctrinal interpretations, is the basis of our being one in Christ and in fellowship with each other. That is, when one believes in Jesus and obeys him in baptism, he is our brother and in the fellowship. ... This is oneness and this is unity. That fellowship is strengthened and made joyful by doctrine, but it is the gospel and not doctrine that determines fellowship. ... In doctrinal matters there can be and will be diversity of opinion and interpretation. It was so with the apostles themselves. But this is good, for we stretch each other's minds and help each other to grow in knowledge in our mutual search for truth..."

Carl Ketcherside:

"No honest opinion held by one who is in Christ Jesus and who respects his lordship, is 'another gospel.' Since it is the gospel which forms the basis of the fellowship with the Father, the Son and with one another in Christ, such an opinion can never be made a test of union or communion in Christ. A man may hold a view as to the perserverance of the saints, the manner of the resurrection, or the second coming of our Lord, and he may prove to be as wrong as one could be, but he cannot be debarred from citizenry in the kingdom of heaven by the other subjects...."

Carl Ketcherside:

"I regard every sincere, contrite person on the face of the earth who believes in Jesus as the Son of God as God's child in prospect. He is God's child because he has been begotten of my Father but has not been born into the family relationship."

"My comments here will be based on Romans 14:1 -- 15:13. This section of Paul's most sublime epistle deals with doctrinal differences among baptized believers." (p. 2)

Roman Christians were mistakenly making "meats" and "days" matters of doctrine and attempting to bind in these areas. Paul wrote to correct this concept of substituting doctrine for personal judgment.

• Areas of Judgment: Receive (vs. 1; 15:7)
• Areas of Doctrine: Don't Receive (2 John 9)

"The doctrine -- note, doctrine -- held by either group was tolerable to Paul. The attitude displayed by both groups was intolerable....

These same issues are still matters of doctrine -- not opinion -- among people in our churches"

1. These were matters of judgment.
2. They were being treated as doctrinal and Paul corrected that.
3. He also corrected intolerable attitudes

"First, I believe we must accept one another as brothers beloved of God. 'Accept one another, then,' pleaded Paul, 'just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God' (Romans 15:7). ...Like it or not, we are brothers and sisters in Christ. That brothers differ on the millennium, work of the Holy Spirit, church organization, instrumental music, having a glass of wine, the role of women in church leadership, and a dozen other issues does not change the fact that they are all children of God."

First-Order Truth:

• "issues that relate directly to the meaning of Christ and his atoning death."

Second-Order Truth:

• "discipleship issues such as drinking wine versus teetotalling"

Third-Order Truth:

• "group distinctives such as instrumental versus a cappella music"

"Without abandoning or compromising the first-order truths of the gospel ... we must stop labeling as 'apostate' and withholding (or withdrawing) fellowship over second ... and third-order ... truths. This means that people on both sides of these issues who have judged and condemned each other ... must repent of their past behaviors, be willing to admit their wrong and consciously undertake a more Christlike treatment of one another. We are free to hold and practice our different points of view, but we are not free to judge one another any longer."

IF Christ accepts us in:

Millenniel Error
Holy Spirit Error
Organizational Error
Instrumental Music Error
Use of Alcohol Error
Public Use of Women Error
Dozens of Other Errors

Why Would Christ Not Accept Us In:

Faith Error?
Repentance Error?
Baptism Error?

"And so, when we are dealing with factious individuals that destroy the unity and the enthusiasm and the souls that could be reached with such enthusiasm, when we are dealing with the public proclamation of false doctrine or when we are dealing with issues that all are necessarily involved in, then we're not dealing with the things that this chapter described, but rather we're dealing with individual issues such as we had on the chart earlier. Now you notice that this last chart is lots smaller than the other one. There aren't that many congregational issues. There are a whole lot more than we'd like for there to be. But there are exactly ten times as many on the first chart as on the one we just looked at. And I think that really understates the relationship. There are many more individual issues over which brethren fall out regarding and these are the things discussed in this chapter for which there is no excuse when we have dissension and falling out among brethren regarding instructions."

Note:

Two Charts: Congregational and Independent
Individual Issues: "discusses in this chapter"
Individual Issues: "as on the chart earlier"

"Notice the commands, not suggestions, not advice, but the commands that are given regarding these issues, the scruples, the individual conscientious decisions made among brethren: some wrong, some incidental, but differences that we have over such matters. He commands in vs. 1, "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, yet not for decisions of scruples."

"And that's why we've had all of these dissensions, tens of thousands of them, much more than the hundred that we had on the board a few minutes ago. Enough things that we have to divide over. but not nearly as many as what we have divided over and we ought to be ashamed.

"And the answer to it is in the divine wisdom that we have from this chapter."

"Have no fellowship with unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." (Ephesians 5:11)

Are These Works of Darkness?

Abortion?
Bartending?
Reading Girly Magazines?
Evolution?
Divorce/Remarriage?

"Receive one who is weak" (Romans 14:1,3)

Do Not Receive
"Have no fellowship with unfruitful works of darkness" (Ephesians 5:11; 2 John 9-11)

But Patton's Open-Ended Fellowship is based on "Receive" in Sinful Practice With "No Time Limit in Romans 14"

Apply to:

Idolatry
Social Drinking
Marriage, Divorce & Remarriage

"We have been so resolute in assuming Romans 14 refers only to 'matters of indifference,' that we've robbed ourselves of one of the few passages that truly addresses how we may tolerate each other when we differ doctrinally. Anything addressed in God's word is a matter of doctrine/teaching. Genuine 'matters of indifference' deal with issues of which God's word says nothing at all, like what color carpet to put in the church building, etc."

Note:

Comparison between "matters of indifference" and "doctrinal" differences, as relating to Romans 14.

Some issues are indifferent to God - 1 Cor. 8:8; Gal. 5:6

If we may differ doctrinally & maintain fellowship - (Rom 14) - Then unity in diversity is God's will.

Ed Harrell - Christianity Magazine

"It is obvious that Christians sometimes disagree about spiritual instruction even in matters of considerable moral and doctrinal import. That behavior uniformly practiced throughout the history of Christianity is, I believe, the issue addressed in Romans 14."

"Romans 14 tolerates contradictory teaching and practices on important moral and doctrinal questions."

November 1988

Covers error taught regarding divorce and remarriage (pp. 6-9).

April 1989

Covers error "in matters of 'faith.'"

May 1989

Covers error of "considerable moral and doctrinal import" (p. 6).

May 1990

"Tolerates contradictory teachings and practices on imporant moral and doctrinal questions" (p. 6).

"Matters of Considerable Moral and Doctrinal Import," and "Contradictory Teachings and Practices on Important Moral and Doctrinal Questions" ...

Where Can Fellowship Be Limited On:

• Institutionalism
• Homosexuality
• Profanity
• Pornography
• Social Drinking
• Abortion
• Evolution
• Premillennialism
• Instrumental music
• Baptism, etc.

"In Romans the fourteenth chapter, a similar principle is discussed.... And many brethren today have come along and have said, 'These passages can not be applied to any matter where the Scripture teaches on it. The only thing that they, that is, these passages can be used to answer, are matters of indifference.' Those are our terms. And I have heard this preached too. You know it. They say, 'It's only on matters of indifference.'"

"I'm talking tonight about fellowshipping. And I'm doing it in a context of a series of discussions on the marriage question."

"So let me suggest in the Scriptures there are some cases discussed in detail where brethren had some differences of conviction. They differed in their belief. They differed in their practice. And yet they not only could continue to fellowship, but they were taught by Paul, the Lord through Paul, that they should continue to fellowship. 1 Corinthians 8 and 10 is usually the more familiar passage."

"Is the divorce thing a matter of ... is it an issue? Sure it is. how should it be decided? Every local congregation is going to take each individual case and pass its own judgment what would be the impact in this congregation if we accept that couple. If it's going to be harmful to the group, then that group, they ought not accept them."

"But the person in a questionable marriage, everybody doesn't see that as an adulterous situation. Now we are back to a local church has to look at each situation and say, 'What is this condition and what would be the impact in our group?'"

"Is the divorce thing a matter of..is it an issue? Sure it is. How should it be decided? Let me tell you how it ought to be decided. Every local congregation is going to take each individual case and pass its own judgment what would be the impact in this congregation if we accept that couple. If it's going to be harmful to the group, then that group, they ought not accept them. But I can't sit in Tampa, FL and write the prescription for all the situations that might come up on divorce and remarriage for all the churches in the country. And nobody else can, by the way. Some are trying to do it, but they can't do it."

Note: Reference is to an adulterous couple.

Local autonomy decides if it will fellowship them. No one else has the right to judge them. What about Premill., other doctrinal sins? Has God not "Prescribed" the answer? Would that church be viewed as a faithful church?

"First of all, I said a moment ago, in the fellowship of Jesus, is it ever justified in tolerating some doctrinal disagreements? The 14th chapter of Romans teaches that as plainly, to me, as it can possibly be taught."

"Now the common interpretation of this book is that those who are 'strong' are correct in their doctrinal positions and the ones who are 'weak' are incorrect. I don't believe that will square with the teaching of that chapter."

"Now there are some doctrinal disagreements that can be tolerated within the fellowship of Jesus Christ."

Difference:

Same Exegesis
Inconsistent Application

What About: (on MDR)

(If Ind,, not congregational, doesn't shame the group, no