Regarding non-essential issues (i.e. eschatology, method of baptism, etc), if a weaker brother or sister is offended by something that wouldn't offend a stronger Christian, is that solely a problem to be dealt with by the offended?
Or does it also fall to the stronger brother or sister in Christ to avoid statements that they consider harmless?
Does Romans 14 and 15 apply here?
Offending fellow Christians
Offending fellow Christians
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_Christopher
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 5:35 pm
- Location: Gladstone, Oregon
Hi Dave,
I think I know where you're coming from on this. I think we shouldn't seek to cause trouble in our fellowship circles and often times that means keeping our mouth shut if the situation doesn't warrant a challenge to what someone believes. This can be very difficult to do sometimes and much discernment is required. I'm frequently in this situation because of my ministry and the church I currently attend. Most often, I feel led to just keep my mouth shut because the a deeper discussion or debate would be an awkward thing in that particular situation. There's a time and place for everything.
On the other hand, I think when a person is challenged appropriately, and in love, about something they believe, it can be very helpful for that person because it tends to make people dig deeper into the Word. And that's always a good thing. I've changed many of my views by hearing another's opinion and sometimes even being offended by it initially(although, I no longer get personally offended by other viewpoints). I think that is a part of our maturing process, coming to the point that we can peacefully disagree about non-essentials and still love one another. Call it growing pains if you want.
Anyway, that's just my approach...for now.
I think I know where you're coming from on this. I think we shouldn't seek to cause trouble in our fellowship circles and often times that means keeping our mouth shut if the situation doesn't warrant a challenge to what someone believes. This can be very difficult to do sometimes and much discernment is required. I'm frequently in this situation because of my ministry and the church I currently attend. Most often, I feel led to just keep my mouth shut because the a deeper discussion or debate would be an awkward thing in that particular situation. There's a time and place for everything.
On the other hand, I think when a person is challenged appropriately, and in love, about something they believe, it can be very helpful for that person because it tends to make people dig deeper into the Word. And that's always a good thing. I've changed many of my views by hearing another's opinion and sometimes even being offended by it initially(although, I no longer get personally offended by other viewpoints). I think that is a part of our maturing process, coming to the point that we can peacefully disagree about non-essentials and still love one another. Call it growing pains if you want.
Anyway, that's just my approach...for now.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
"If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:31-32
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:31-32
Schoel,
The whole concept of "non-essentials" is a troublesome one, first of all regarding baptism or any other foundational doctrine of the church (example Hebrews 6:1-2). Regarding dispensationalism we have no command of our Lord, but in regard to faith, repentance, baptism, loving one another, &c. we are told unambiguously what we must do. Why Jesus commanded baptism may be a matter of opinion and not essential to understand.
I can understand when Christians are not in fellowship when there are disagreements over basic doctrine but to refuse fellowship regarding eschatology seems almost absurd, that is unless someone insists that Jesus isn't coming back, nor will there be any judgement.
The whole concept of "non-essentials" is a troublesome one, first of all regarding baptism or any other foundational doctrine of the church (example Hebrews 6:1-2). Regarding dispensationalism we have no command of our Lord, but in regard to faith, repentance, baptism, loving one another, &c. we are told unambiguously what we must do. Why Jesus commanded baptism may be a matter of opinion and not essential to understand.
I can understand when Christians are not in fellowship when there are disagreements over basic doctrine but to refuse fellowship regarding eschatology seems almost absurd, that is unless someone insists that Jesus isn't coming back, nor will there be any judgement.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean