Of Things Not Written

[IFB No More]

Hi guys,

Many Christians say that whether to do or not to do something - some of the factors include:
- Does this glorify the Lord?
- Does this cause others to stumble?

I am having trouble with these two "factors" because they are open-ended in nature and are very vulnerable to legalistic interpretations.

Start with #1 - Glorifying the Lord. How do we know whether doing something or not glorifies the Lord? Be it something mundane such as choosing what to eat, or drink? Or be it something "bold" like getting a tattoo? Ultimately at the end of the day, what glorifies and what does not glorify the Lord becomes a matter of majority-opinion by the church. It seems to me that most things that add explicitly a Christian theme to the thing (be it CCM, Fireproof or whatever) can glorify the Lord, according to Fundyland or Evangelical-dom.

#2 is disturbing to me:
And #2 - Causing others to stumble.

What does this part really mean? Some say, if it spiritually offends another believer. But having came out of fundyland, you and I know these fundies. They hate almost everything and anything. Alcohol. Non-KJV versions. Rock music. Whatever. The problem with this factor is that you will NEVER please anyone!

Drink alcohol, and you will offend the fundies. Don't drink (incl. at communion) and you will *potentially* offend Christians who drink alcoholic wine at communion. Listen to rock music and you will offend the fundies again. Listen to classical music you won't even please some of the hardliners. Eat pork and you will *potentially* offend a Muslim, eat meat and you will *potentially* offend a devout Hindu or Buddhist and so on and so forth. And so on and so on. Some say you should not do something in-front of others if you know they are offended by it. But isn't this hypocrisy?

Doesn't this become man-centred, man-pleasing religion again? What does the scriptures really mean when it says to spare a thought for the weaker brother? Why does groupthink exist in much of the "faithful" - the organized church? Such moralism I suppose is the main reason why most people my age shun the church - especially when they identify with religious conservatism/fundamentalism.

I wrote this article after visiting a site from my ex-IFB church's homeschooling group. They were talking about dress standards. It sorrows me to see them think that only their interpretation of the Word of God is correct. ("It shames me to see sisters committing serious sin by wearing so immodestly" etc.) I remember all my ex-IFB friends who have departed from Christianity to full apostasy because of these fundies' self-righteousness. And I can say only one thing - so many of these fundies - they labor (door-knock, revival meetings) to make a convert, and make them twice the child of hell. It's always the same - obey, obey, obey, hot potato (offend a fundy)! And then depart and leave.

[JordanMaria]

My understanding of #2 is: "Don't persuede anyone to do anything against their conscience." Like if a friend thinks it's wrong to eat pork, don't take him to Big Dave's BBQ.

stumble <> offend (though fundies want you to think it does just so they can veto things they don't like)

[Historian]

#2 is a big problem, but when I realized the meaning of the phrase involved in "offense" it helped clear things up tremendously.

When I realized that the command was not against doing something that any potential other might find displeasure in, but rather not to knowingly do something that might tempt another person to sin or to violate their own conscience, life completely changed. Drinking, for example. The Bible's very clear about not setting a stumbling block against the weak of conscience. But the weak of conscience isn't someone who believes they can't do something that I feel free to do. The weak of conscience is someone who hasn't decided firmly in their own mind what they are free or not free to do. They are wavering, unsure, and by seeing me drink may be tempted to do so in violation of their conscience. When I looked at it from this view I realized that though I knew many people who might be displeased to see me drink, I actually only knew one adult who had a weak conscience in this matter. Everyone else was dead set against it, and that was the key. They had no confusion in their minds about what was right. They would no more drink because they saw me do it than they would leap off a 20 story building because they saw me do it.

The one woman who I don't drink around is little more than a girl who has just left a very strict home. She's working out what she thinks is right and wrong, and has this urge to do things just because she knows her parents wouldn't approve. In listening to her talk, I know she thinks drinking is a sinful thing for her to do. But I've seen her do other things I know she thinks are wrong because she saw other Christians doing it. This, I believe, is a person of weak conscience. (For practical purposes, I also consider all children to fall into this category. They are obligated to obey their parents. However much I might disagree with their parents' rules, I don't want to tempt their kids to despise their parents or rebel by doing/saying/wearing something in their presence that their parents don't want them doing/saying/wearing.)

This doesn't mean I go drinking in people's faces, either. I don't hide the wine bottles, but I don't push it anyone's face. To me that's a matter of obeying the command to prefer others before myself. I don't have to abstain from alcohol just because they don't like it, but I would never do something deliberately to make them feel bad.

[chris1000bc]

@IFB No More

I think there is a sense in which even from our sins God will get glory - He will do this by showing his righteousness in judging and punishing sin. Obviously, that's not how we want to bring glory to God. We want to do it on purpose.

I guess with your question you might have been thinking of what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 10:31, "Whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God." I think there are two important components to this (may be more, i am not an expert). First, do you believe what you are doing to be right? If you from the outset, believe what you are doing to be wrong, then you cannot be purposely glorifying God in doing it. Second, what are your motives for doing what you are doing? (Not that good intentions necessarily make an action right) If you do a good act for the wrong reasons, then you were not glorifying God in it (at least not in a purposeful sense). I think God is glorified even in the most mundane actions when we do what we think is right and we purposely do these things for his glory.

And I think your second question kind of helps with the first one. Can I hurt others by something as mundane as what I drink or what I eat? I think in some cases I can. So if I seek to not hurt my brother in Christ who is a recovering alcoholic by not drinking alcohol in his presence, I am glorifying God in that instance. Again, I am no expert, but I think those are two things to think about when talking about glorifying God.

I agree with JordanMarie and Historian regarding your second question. Paul said earlier in 1 Corinthians 10 that "Everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial." I think this means we have a lot of freedom in Christ but that we should not use that freedom in an instance where it is going to hurt someone else needlessly. Paul also said in Romans 14 to keep the faith that you have between yourself and God. So if you decide to get a tattoo, maybe you shouldn't tell someone who you know can't handle it.

Like you said, these things are open to interpretation. Mine may be wrong. Search the Scriptures to see if these things be so. In the end, I think that's the best way to feel confident in your position.

[steve95054]

@Historian: That is probably the most balanced approach (and likely the most accurate) I've heard to the second question so far.

(It also happens to be my approach, so maybe I'm a little biased. LOL)

[Darren]

Great comments, all!

By definition, a pastor or elder cannot count as a weaker brother. (If they really are, then you have serious problems on your hands.) The problem in so many fundy churches and organizations that I have been a part of is that the leadership takes on the role of the weaker brother. Even when they take that role in an attempt to "protect" the "real" weaker brother, all they are really doing is violating the conscience of the stronger brother, which is just as wrong.

Paul wrote, "Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves." (Romans 14:22) When people who put themselves in the place of leadership encourage their flock to pass judgment on themselves, they steal a blessing from their flock.

This is similar to what Historian wrote, and like her, when I came to this realization, it was one of the greatest revelations in my life.