Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ Eating before your weak brother causing him to perish

[luchnia]

It shows who is still walking after the flesh.
Those in Christ walk in the Spirit, after they have been baptized into Christ and into His death.
New converts are to be open to the teachings of the bishop...right?
If they are not, they have placed their own agenda ahead of the church's teachings.
That is idolatry.

God wills that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth and that should be our will. Claiming you are His as you do, you should have an understanding of His will and not be against it in such matters.

Treating a brother who stumbles in the manner you claim or making a brother stumble is so far from the love of God it shows His desire is simply not allowed. That is more than likely because of your self-proclaimed position (agenda ahead of the church's teachings).

Perplexing to see your thoughts in various posts concerning some of these things. It is not surprising, but it is very disheartening and probably grieves the Spirit. You would likely be the last person that God would desire be around a brother in Christ who has fallen because he stands judged by you without a chance of repentance to God.

[Hill Top]

It shows who is still walking after the flesh.
Those in Christ walk in the Spirit, after they have been baptized into Christ and into His death.
New converts are to be open to the teachings of the bishop...right?
If they are not, they have placed their own agenda ahead of the church's teachings.
That is idolatry.

God wills that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth and that should be our will. Claiming you are His as you do, you should have an understanding of His will and not be against it in such matters.

Treating a brother who stumbles in the manner you claim or making a brother stumble is so far from the love of God it shows His desire is simply not allowed. That is more than likely because of your self-proclaimed position (agenda ahead of the church's teachings).

Perplexing to see your thoughts in various posts concerning some of these things. It is not surprising, but it is very disheartening and probably grieves the Spirit. You would likely be the last person that God would desire be around a brother in Christ who has fallen because he stands judged by you without a chance of repentance to God.

How can a church be of one mind if one person is offended by anything the rest of the church sees as OK?
"His desire" is the key above.
Shouldn't the "offended" be pursuing God's desire?
God's word says it is OK to eat men, so one who is offended by eating mean is actually offended by God's word on the matter.
Would that be tolerated in your church?
When I converted, God's desires became my desires.

[luchnia]

How can a church be of one mind if one person is offended by anything the rest of the church sees as OK?
"His desire" is the key above.
Shouldn't the "offended" be pursuing God's desire?
God's word says it is OK to eat men, so one who is offended by eating mean is actually offended by God's word on the matter.
Would that be tolerated in your church?
When I converted, God's desires became my desires.

What does each have to be in one mind about? You are I are not of one mind about many things, so what does that mean toward this context? Is a weaker brother still a brother in Christ before he has fallen? Because he is weaker does not make him any less one of His.

The "offended" could be pursuing God's desire yet maybe not at the same level that the stronger brothers are at thus the fact that he can fall because of offense. Remember they are the weaker brother that you forgot to treat as the weaker brother and by your eating you offend them causing them to stumble.

If God's desires became your desires when you were converted you would desire that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. The obligation to your fallen brother would be God's desire of salvation/restoration to him instead of a perceived doctrinal belief that you hold in place that condemns him.

[Hill Top]

How can a church be of one mind if one person is offended by anything the rest of the church sees as OK?
"His desire" is the key above.
Shouldn't the "offended" be pursuing God's desire?
God's word says it is OK to eat men, so one who is offended by eating mean is actually offended by God's word on the matter.
Would that be tolerated in your church?
When I converted, God's desires became my desires.

What does each have to be in one mind about?

Everything related to God and to His word.

You are I are not of one mind about many things, so what does that mean toward this context?

It means we have different spirits.

Is a weaker brother still a brother in Christ before he has fallen?

Brothers in Christ don't fall into sin.
If differences arise, the teacher will get the differing folks/ideas on the same page.

Because he is weaker does not make him any less one of His.

It doesn't, until the weaker refuses to learn and grow stronger.

The "offended" could be pursuing God's desire yet maybe not at the same level that the stronger brothers are at thus the fact that he can fall because of offense. Remember they are the weaker brother that you forgot to treat as the weaker brother and by your eating you offend them causing them to stumble.

If they are listening to a spirit that refuses to agree with God, and with God's teachers, he is no brother.
He is a divider of brethren and a servant of darkness.

If God's desires became your desires when you were converted you would desire that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. The obligation to your fallen brother would be God's desire of salvation/restoration to him instead of a perceived doctrinal belief that you hold in place that condemns him.

My obligation is to bring him up to speed, not allow differences in a church.
Those you call fallen have the same chance to turn from darkness now as they did a year ago.
They have the same chance to permanently turn from sin tomorrow too.
Until they do, they are on the outside looking in.

If a man turns from sin and is baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, he is promised the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38)
How can two men with the Holy Spirit have different thoughts on something more important than whose football team is better?

Nobody has yet selected an example that we could discuss from experience.
I had one guy be offended, and leave, because he said my attitude towards false "churches" was too harsh.
Could that person ever have fellowship with the rest of the church?
I trow not, as his reverence for ungodly "churches" would always prove to be a barrier to his melding with the rest of body of Christ/church.

[luchnia]

How can two men with the Holy Spirit have different thoughts on something more important than whose football team is better?

Here is an example of two saved men having very different thoughts that the Holy Spirit had called to a work:
Acts 13:2-3 (KJV)
2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.

Acts 15:36-41 (KJV)
36 And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.
37 And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
38 But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
40 And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God.
41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.

[Hill Top]

How can two men with the Holy Spirit have different thoughts on something more important than whose football team is better?

Here is an example of two saved men having very different thoughts that the Holy Spirit had called to a work:
Acts 13:2-3 (KJV)
2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.

Acts 15:36-41 (KJV)
36 And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.
37 And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
38 But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
40 And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God.
41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.

I wonder if either one of them was "offended"?

[luchnia]

Brothers in Christ don't fall into sin.

Apparently those in Christ do fall on the strong and weak side as well. The stronger with liberty becomes a sin against Christ. No doubt a greater sin than a sin against a brother, but a sin (a fall into sin) nonetheless. Falling from a weak conscience is a much lesser than the sin of the offender. Granted idols rarely come into play but the principle is obvious:

1 Corinthians 8:9-13 (KJV)
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;
11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

[luchnia]

I had one guy be offended, and leave, because he said my attitude towards false "churches" was too harsh.
Could that person ever have fellowship with the rest of the church?

Was your offense worth the risk? Were they "false" churches in his spirit or by your perception - missing details on this part? Did he have a weaker conscience or less understanding about it than you do? It could have simply been a matter of ignorance on his part.

Maybe he was a lesser member in the Body of Christ but just as important to support the Body as you are. Your sin against him could fall under the category of a sin against Christ if he was a weaker brother and you caused him to stumble. Hope that wasn't the case.

[Hill Top]

Brothers in Christ don't fall into sin.

Apparently those in Christ do fall on the strong and weak side as well.

Doubtless.
Everyman's faith differs to some degree from another.
By praying to grow in grace and knowledge we can come to a unity unseen in the world.

The stronger, with liberty, becomes a sin against Christ. No doubt a greater sin than a sin against a brother, but a sin (a fall into sin) nonetheless. Falling from a weak conscience is a much lesser than the sin of the offender. Granted idols rarely come into play but the principle is obvious:

1 Corinthians 8:9-13 (KJV)
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;
11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

If a man is questioning what is right and wrong, the Holy Spirit will compel him to ask the bishop, or his brothers in Christ, about the subject at hand.
No man need offend his own conscience.
If he decides the bishop and brethren are not teaching the truth...he is free to leave.
There is no need to have a bad conscience about a matter after receiving the bishop's teaching on it.
To refuse that teaching indicates a failure to accept Christ.

[Hill Top]

I had one guy be offended, and leave, because he said my attitude towards false "churches" was too harsh.
Could that person ever have fellowship with the rest of the church?

Was your offense worth the risk?

My offense?
What offense?
Speaking the truth is only offensive to the devilish.

Were they "false" churches in his spirit or by your perception - missing details on this part?

Has we had the same Spirit, our perceptions should have been the same.
At the point he left, he had not yet received the gift of the Holy Ghost, indicating his lack of repentance from sin.

Did he have a weaker conscience or less understanding about it than you do? It could have simply been a matter of ignorance on his part.

He decided to accept the world's view on false "churches" instead of the church by Christ Jesus (Eph 3:21)'s POV.

Maybe he was a lesser member in the Body of Christ but just as important to support the Body as you are. Your sin against him could fall under the category of a sin against Christ if he was a weaker brother and you caused him to stumble. Hope that wasn't the case.

Until repenting and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, he was NOT a member of the body of Christ.
His departure was the clearest indicator that he was not a brother.