Docstoc

Beware Of Professional Weaker Brethren _Michael Patton_

Document Sample
Beware Of Professional Weaker Brethren _Michael Patton_ Powered By Docstoc
					          Beware Of Professional Weaker Brethren
                                     Michael Patton
My daughter, Katelynn, who is eleven, wants to start wearing make-up. I have a rule: No
make-up at all until she is twelve. My wife does not agree with me. She thinks I am
being legalistic. I can‟t help it. That is just the way I think. I can justify it in ten different
ways with my hands tied behind my back. The problem is that none of my justification is
really black or white. It is one of those things that the Scripture does not speak on. My
wife‟s argument makes sense too. However, I have scruples about the issue. These
scruples bend my understanding and create their own passions. One more year and the
scruples will be gone as Katelynn will be twelve.

Make-up is not the issue. I don‟t want to go there. We all have scruples. That is not
really a technical theological term, though it is in the dictionary. This is how it is defined:
“An uneasy feeling arising from conscience or principle that tends to hinder action.”
However, when it comes to our faith, scruples are hard to deal with. You have these
militating terms: grace and liberty.

When grace and liberty clash with “scruples,” more often than not, unfortunately, the
scruples win. Why? Because we are so quick to sacrifice our liberty for the sake of the
“weaker brethren.” Yes, this “weaker brethren” card is often pulled and legalists love it.
In fact, it is used most often by those who are legalist wearing the disguise of those who
are free. It is not that this card is illegitimate—it is not as if there are not true weaker
brethren—but it is abused and the result is slavery.

I remember Chuck Swindoll talking about this saying: “Be careful, there are some
people out there who are „professional weaker brethren.‟”

“Kristie, I have scruples with this make-up thing. Maybe I cannot find a verse or a solid
principle upon which to rest my theological head, but you need to be sensitive and
understanding to my hang-ups for the sake of my spirituality. One more year and my
scruples will be gone.”

I highlighted some key words that legalists will use to manipulate the situation.
“Sensitive,” “understanding,” “hang-ups,” “sake,” and most importantly, “my.”

From the other side, liberty is so often sacrificed.

“I don‟t go to the movies because I don‟t want to cause anyone to stumble.”

Often implied translation: “You should give up your liberty too if you want to be spiritual
like me.”
“I don‟t ever drink alcohol because a weaker brethren might see me and fall into sin.”

Often implied translation: “I have scruples with this issue and you should too.”

“If someone saw me befriending this person, they may think I am condoning their
actions. Therefore, I sacrifice my liberty for the sake of their frailty.”

Often implied translation: “I can‟t be friends with people who are that sinful.”

Okay, to the passage: Romans 14.

“As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions”
(Rom 14:1 ESV).

“So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. Do not, for the
sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for
anyone to make another stumble by what he eats” (Rom 14:1 ESV).

You see, here Paul is talking about one who is “weak in faith” who has scruples over the
food that someone else was eating. Some were vegetarians and did not eat meat at all
(probably because of its connection to the idol temples). They thought that it was
morally wrong to eat meat. Paul makes it clear that it is not wrong in and of itself: “I
know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself” (14:1a).
However, because someone thinks it is wrong, for them it may be: “But it is unclean for
anyone who thinks it unclean” (14:1). Therefore, when one of these “veggie only” guys
is around, be careful or you might cause him to stumble (i.e. he will see you eating
meat, and do what he believes to be wrong).

However, we can take this too far. I don‟t think we are obligated to bow our liberty to
everyone who has a problem with our actions. A “weaker brother” is one who is truly
weaker, not just one who has a misguided interpretation of things. He is weaker
because he has not been educated in these issues. You must understand, he is not
supposed to or expected to stay “weaker.” Eventually, he is suppose to become
stronger. Unfortunately, far too often these weaker brethren realize their power and
become “professional weaker brethren.”

Don‟t misread Paul. He certainly had no desire to compromise his liberty. We must
temper the Romans passage with Galatians:

“But it was because of the false brethren secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy
out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. But we
did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would
remain with you” (2:4-5).

These “false brethren” should have played the “weaker brethren” card.
“Hey, Paul, you cannot do that or I will stumble.”

“Paul, what if there is someone who has scruples with what you are doing? Do you want
them to stumble?”

In fact, they may have played these cards. However, Paul did not put up with it. Not for
a second. Why? Because when you do, the Gospel is lost. Notice Paul said he did not
subject to them even for an hour “so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you.”
Without liberty, there is no good news. Bondage only begets bondage. The Gospel is
about being free.

Think about this: If we were to give in to every so-called weaker brethren what would
the result be? We would always be bowing to the least common denominator. All
actions would be off-limits. Think of all the things people have scruples with:

1. Going to movies

2. Dancing

3. “Mixed” bathing

4. Caffeine

5. Tobacco

6. Reading Harry Potter

7. Watching Glen Beck (because he is a Mormon)

8. Reading C.S. Lewis (because he denied inerrancy)

9. Sending my kids to public schools

10. Wearing flip flops to church

11. Drinking alcohol

12. Reading any Bible other than the KJV

13. Listening to Rock music

14. Going to church on Sat rather than Sun

15. Making a purchase that others think is a sinful waste of money

16. Playing video games that have blood

17. Taking anti-depressants
18. Women wearing pants

19. Saying “oh my God”

20. Going to a “seeker” church

For all of these things, I really do have representatives in my life right now. Every one of
them would be offended if I crossed their line. If I were to follow this “no-offense” policy,
I would be completely immobile in my life and actions. So would you.


“It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be
subject again to a yoke of slavery” (Gal 5:1 NAS).

We need to be sensitive, but not to the point where we are simply fueling others‟ faulty
understanding and legalism. People will control you to the degree that you let them. If
you allow this to go on without discernment, not only will you be immobile, but you will
have lost your liberty. Lose liberty, lose the Gospel.

Believe it or not, there are people out there who hate our liberty and will do anything to
make us lose it. Beware of “professional weaker brethren” (and those who yield to
them).



16395 Township Rd 205

Glenmont, OH 44628

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:2/16/2011
language:English
pages:4