Originally posted by Knight
Clete I believe you are in error.
:shocked:
Yeah well, I'm right and you're wrong and there's nothing you can say to change my mind, so there! :sozo2:
:chuckle:
It was wrong for those in the Body to be a stumbling block for those that were still under the dispensation of circumcision because those folks were still under the law and they had to continue to keep the law which is the message of Romans 14. This type of dispensational tension no longer exists! Now that there is only one dispensation in operation there is no "weaker brother" in the same sense as there was during the time of Paul's ministry.
I don't disagree with this but I'm not sure that it means I was wrong in what I said. I do not believe it is ever right to violate one's conscience.
The only thing in operation here is that if one thinks they need to observe certain laws then it is they who are attempting to put themselves under the law.
I agree with this as well and in doing so they are doing themselves more harm than good but violating their conscience is not the way to correct the problem.
Therefore, Jim falsely thinking that it is unlawful to celebrate holidays is his own stumbling block and loving brothers in Christ should convince, and rebuke him with all longsuffering (although I do believe mocking is in order with the abortion statements).
Again, I agree (sort of).
I agree that Jim has indeed erected for himself a set of rules to follow and in so doing has placed himself under law. However, I would not attempt to convince him to celebrate Christmas
until I had convinced him that it was not unrighteous to do so. Until he is set free from the bondage he has placed himself under, he sins if he breaks his own rules; he makes himself a hypocrite.
This is no different than rebuking Catholics whom think missing mass is a sin, Clete you wouldn't argue that we shouldn't attempt to convince Catholics otherwise would you? You wouldn't argue we were wrongly being a stumbling block for them would you?
Well yes, with all due respect, actually I would. I would attempt to convince them that they are not under law and that setting up rules diminishes the payment Christ paid at the cross, etc. But until they are convinced, if they violate their conscience then they sin in doing so.
Allow me to give an illustration that will perhaps get across the point I'm trying to make. Let's say that the owner of the business you work for buys a bunch of fancy paper weights with the company logo on them to give to all the employees. Let's also assume that you do not know that he intends to give them to the employees and that you assume that they are there for some other reason and that you do not have permission to take one for yourself. If you do take one, you sin, period. Even though there is no real "law" that says you've stolen anything. The fact that you believed that what you were doing was wrong at the time you committed the act and so for you it was wrong, even though you stole something that in reality already belonged to you. In the same way, if Jim, believing that it is wrong to celebrate religious holidays does so in spite of his conscience, he sins. If we want to attempt to convince him that it is okay to celebrate Christmas in the freedom that is found in Christ then we should do so with all vigor. But if we entice someone to violate their conscience we do indeed become a stumbling block to them.
The same principle applies in the opposite direction as well. Take speeding for example. I, personally, don't detect any wrong doing on my part when I drive something less than ten miles per hour over the speed limit. But what if I'm in the mood to do 90 mph, some 15 or 20 mph over the speed limit here in Oklahoma, BUT I DO NOT DO IT. Have I done a good thing? Well, it depends on why I didn't do it. If I didn't do it because I know it is wrong to do and I don't want to do wrong, then yes, I did a good thing by keeping my foot off the floor board. But if I didn't go that fast because I was afraid of getting caught, then I have received my reward in full, the reward being that I don't have to pay the state of fat wad of money. But as far as God is concerned, I'll receive no reward for that "good deed" because it wasn't done from a pure heart. It was legalism in action; fear was my motivation, not love.
We human being have a pull on us toward legalism, it's very much like gravity, we cannot escape it's pull as long as we are on this planet in this mortal flesh. When we see Him though, we will mount up on wings as eagles for we will be free from this flesh and the legalism which it loves so much! When Adam ate of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (a symbol of the law), something changed in him that effects every last human being that has descended from him (save One). We are constantly trying to put ourselves under the law. When we get past doing it overtly our flesh attempt to do it in less obvious ways. It all has to do with WHY we do what we do or don't do that which we abstain from. If we are doing or not doing because some rule somewhere says we aught or aught not, then Christ profits us nothing in respect to that area of our lives. That is to say, we cannot live out the freedom we have in Christ if we hand cuff ourselves. If on the other hand we act, not because there is some rule but because we love God and we love our neighbor in spite of the lack of rules then we do rightly and we will receive our reward when we see Him on that great day! This is the Gospel of Grace, which was hidden in God from the foundation of the world and revealed first by Jesus Christ to and through the apostle Paul.
The simplest way I have found to determine whether I have placed myself under law is to ask myself one very simple question. If I do, or do not do such and such, will I feel guilty? Put anything in there you like. If I do not attend church this week, will I feel guilty? If I do not give a tithe, will I feel guilty? If I do not get water baptized, will I feel guilty? If I do get water baptized, will I feel guilty? If I celebrate Christmas, will I feel guilty?
If the answer is yes, then you need to next ask WHY would I feel guilty about that? If the answer to that question has to do with a rule, or something that you owe God, or that you "aught" to do or not do, then you have in fact placed yourself under law and are not walking in the Spirit and are robbing yourself of the victory which Christ won for you by having raised from the dead.
The simply fact is that you cannot be do it right, you cannot do it, period. You cannot live the Christian life! It is not possible. If you are trying, you are wasting your time. We who are in Christ have died, in Him. How can you have a rule that says that dead man over there is not allowed to celebrate Christmas? What are you going to do to him if he does? Kill him some more? NO!!!! Christ died ONCE for all! So when we place ourselves or someone else under the law we place Christ back on the Cross, that will not do!
And while we have died in Christ we do live! But it is no longer our life but His! Is Christ under the law? Is there a rule that Christ must follow? I don't think so! And I, being in Him, cannot be placed under any man's set of rules and if I attempt to follow any such religious rules then I am operating in my flesh and Christ is profiting me nothing.
Okay, I rambled on a bit there, but that is the Gospel as I see it. If Jim wants to have a rule against Christmas then he is operating in his flesh and losing out on a free victory over sin available in Christ. But as long as he has that rule in place he must follow it or else he compounds his error by becoming a hypocrite by having violated his conscience even though he has not broken any real law, he believes he has and so he has; thus the dangers of legalism.
RESTING in Him,
Clete
P.S. Jim, I have more than one post of yours I need to respond to. Please be patient and I’ll get to them as soon as I can. Thanks!
