Living in a World of Gray

In the time that I have been a Christian, there have been a lot of "gray areas" that have been debated in the church.  Should Christians go to movies?  Should Christians attend a baseball game on Sunday?  Should Christians listen to "rock music?"  Should Christians drink?  Not all of these questions are as hotly debated as they used to be.  But they are all illustrations of questions that Christians have had some very nasty arguments over.  These questions are not explicitly addressed in Scripture, or if they are addressed, Christians don't agree on what the Scripture says.  And so Christians have judged each other's behaviors in these areas.  Christians who listen to certain types of music or drink alcohol have been labeled "worldly."  Those who choose not to do these things are accused of being "legalistic."  The church becomes divided over Bambi or a beer.

How should Christians handle these disagreements?  That is what Paul addresses in Romans 14 and on in to Romans 15.  Paul's biggest point here is that Christians should handle these disputes without judging.  I am not the master of my brother or sister in Christ.  Only the Lord has the right to judge, especially on those issues that the Scripture is not explicit about.  If I abstain, I should not think less of my brother if he has a beer.  If I have a beer, I shouldn't think that my sister is too conservative because she doesn't join me.  While Paul does call those who enjoy their freedom strong and labels those more inclined to stick to extra- biblical rules weak, I don't think that we should see those labels as pejorative.  Paul wants us to avoid gauging spirituality and righteousness on issues where the Scriptures remain silent or vague.

This leads to an important point that Paul makes in this chapter.  Not everyone's faith will look exactly the same.  On some issues, we should be in total conformity.  All of us should abstain from sexual immorality.  We should speak the truth.  We should be humble and loving.  But in other areas, what is right for me may not be right for you.  And what is wrong for me may not be wrong for you.  If I am not sure that it is okay for me to drink beer, then I should not drink beer.  Paul says not to do anything that you are unsure about because acting out of doubt is a sin.  But if you are perfectly comfortable with drinking beer, then have a beer (just not to the point of drunkenness because that the Bible does say is wrong!)  For some Christians beer may be a sin.  For other Christians, beer may be okay.  While there are certain things that are always right or are always wrong for every Christian, there are some things that may be right for one Christian but not for another.

Because this is true, Paul tells us that we have to be careful about how we live and how we exercise our freedoms.  We need to be careful not to convince people something is right for them just because we can do it.  We must use our freedom in such a way that we don't cause others to stumble into something that is wrong for them.  Let me give an example.  Several years ago, when I was pastor at my former church, I attended a soccer game on a Sunday night.  We normally had services on Sunday nights, but this Sunday we did not because of a holiday weekend.  I had an extra ticket, so I invited one of the men from our church to attend with me.  As we were sitting at the game, he said to me: "You know, I really don't think it's okay to attend a soccer game on a Sunday.  That's supposed to be our Sabbath.  But since you're the pastor, I came.  I figured if it is alright for you, it must be alright for me.  But I feel really guilty about being here!"  Oops.  I had made a big mistake.  I had allowed my freedom to lead someone else to violate their conscience.  It never dawned on me that someone might have reservations about a sporting event on a Sunday, but this man did.  My exercise of freedom had led him to stumble.

That is why Paul's words in verse 22 are the best advice on this matter: "So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God" (verse 22).  In the gray areas, we should be very circumspect.  We should enjoy our freedoms in as inauspicious away as possible so that we might not harm other Christians or break the fellowship of the church.           

Radical Submission

Romans 13 is a fascinating passage.  In the opening verses, Paul reminds us that we should submit ourselves to the governing authorities, especially in the realm of paying taxes.  Now, clearly Paul is not giving the government blanket authority here.  I think other passages of Scripture make it clear that we have to obey God rather than men.  So if the government asks us to sin, we must refuse and make our allegiance to God come first.  But aside from that, we as Christians are to respect, honor, and obey our leaders.

It is fascinating to think about Paul's instructions in their original context.  Remember he is writing to people living in Rome.  Rome is the capital of the world at that point, capital city of an empire that stretches around the known globe.  At the head of that empire, sits an emperor who blasphemously identifies himself as a god.  He is a patron of pagan religion, using government authority to support the worship of multiple false deities.  His city is a cesspool of sin and wickedness, and he is a man of violence, using his legions to ruthlessly and mercilessly conquer, kill, and subdue.  The emperor is certainly no friend of Christianity.  Most likely, he despises Christians and would be quick to persecute them and even kill them.  Yet, Paul tells the Romans that they they must submit to this man's authority.  Why?  Because this ruthless pagan rules by the authority of God and is His agent for punishing evildoers. 

Taken in its original context, we see how radical Paul's instruction is.  It tells us how comprehensive and absolute the instruction is.  As Christians, we should submit to leaders good or evil so long as they do not ask us to violate God's commands.

Romans 12 is a chapter chock full of practical living advice for followers of Jesus.  Unlike the previous chapters in Romans, the point here is pretty simple and straightforward.  As those who have received God's mercy in Jesus, we should be living sacrifices.  We should present ourselves as thank offerings to God, giving all of our lives to His service.  Chapter 12 details how that happens.  It lists the virtues and behaviors that show a thankful attitude and obedience toward God.

In the midst of all that is an interesting piece of instruction.  In the second half of verse 17, Paul writes: "Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody."  I remember the first time that verse jumped off the page at me.  I thought it had to be a mistake.  This seemed the exact opposite of what I learned about living the Christian life.  I had been taught that the Christian life was typically about avoiding the way that most people thought was right.  Most people think it okay to get drunk.  Most people think it is okay to have sex outside of marriage.  Most people think it is okay to cheat on your taxes.  As Christians, others may think those things are right.  But we are not to do those things.  How can Paul say be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody?  My father- wise man that he was- told me not to worry about what others think.  Paul seems to suggest the very opposite.

What does Paul really mean here?  I think Paul is teaching us that we need to observe all the courtesies and common decencies of our culture so that we might be at peace with others and be good representatives of Christ.  He certainly is not saying that the majority should set our morality.  But he is saying that common politeness should be a component of our Christian living.  Let me give an example.  As Christians, I think we should do our best to be on time people.  We should try to avoid being late.  In our culture (for now at least), being on time is considered a social grace.  It is a behavior that most in our culture would consider valuable and good.  And so, to "live at peace with everyone," we should try to be on time.  The admonition to "do what is right in the eyes of everybody" calls us to be people of manners and social grace for the sake of peace and Christ's reputation.

What examples can others think of when it comes to doing "what is right in the eyes of everybody?"

Clarity in the Confusion (Romans 11)

Romans 11 is a notoriously difficult chapter, one that provokes as many questions as it provides answers.  It is easy to get caught up on what we don't understand rather than what we do understand.  But we should not let the clear lessons of the chapter get lost in what confuses us.

Romans 11 is part of a three chapter set (9-11) where Paul answers the question what does the Gospel mean for God's relationship with Israel?  Does the rejection of the Law as a source of righteousness mean that Israel is no longer a "chosen people?"  Does it mean that the Jews have no special place in God's plan?  Reading through these chapters, Paul's answer is a clear no.  Paul still believes that there is great advantage in being a Jew and that God's calling of Israel has not been revoked.  We need to be careful not to assume that we instantly understand all that Israel's continued call means.  Lessons from this chapter need to be carefully drawn when one is going to apply them to contemporary Middle East politics. Still, Paul is clear that Israel still has a special place in God's heart.

I see several clear lessons here in Romans 11:

1. God has not rejected Israel.  The Jewish people still have a place in God's heart.  God continues to offer the Jewish people righteousness, only this righteousness is not found in the stipulations of the covenant but through faith in Jesus and the work that He has done. 

2. Gentile Christians should never harbor anti-Semitic sentiments.  God has not rejected the Jewish people.  His gifts and call are irrevocable.  Instead, we should have humility, knowing that we too are rejected without faith. We should have a heart for Jews to have faith in Jesus just like we have a heart for all peoples to know Christ.

3. Israel remains the root of Gentile salvation.  Jesus was a Jew.  His story unfolds out of Judaism.  Gentile Christians are grafted into God's work that began with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  Gentile Christians should be thankful for Israel because without Israel there would be no salvation for us.

   
 

Not By Might, Nor By Power, But By My Spirit

In Romans 8, Paul highlights a fundamental truth about Christianity and the Gospel that even many Christians miss to their own harm and detriment.  The point is simply stated: the Christian life is lived by God's power not by our own strength or determination.  In the chapters prior, Paul has made the point that the Old Testament Law was not able to make us righteous.  This is not because of a fault in the Law.  It is because of a fault in us.  Our sinful nature prevented us from responding to the Law as we should.  That is why Christ came.  He came so that through His work we might receive the Holy Spirit and have the power to live righteously.  Now, this side of heaven we do not obtain perfection.  Our sinful nature lives on.  But, we now can make choices contrary to that sinful nature, choices that lead to obedience, because we have the Spirit.  Making these choices is not easy.  In verse 16, Paul likens obedience in the Spirit to the sufferings of Christ.  But through Christ, we can now battle to obedience. 

It is important to know that the Christian life is never lived in our strength.  Our willpower or determination do not lead to obedience.  Instead, we obey and stand in the power of Christ.    

A short post today to clarify what might be a point of confusion in Romans 5.  In verse 18, Paul writes: "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men" (ESV).  The words "all men" might be a little confusing.  The first bit of of confusion might be found in the term "men." Reading that word, some might wonder aren't women included in salvation?  Why only men?  The answer is found in first century usage of the word man. In Paul's time, the word man was used as a shorthand to include both men and women.  As Paul says in Galatians 3, God does not discriminate between men and women when offering salvation though Jesus.  

It is not just the word "men" that can be confusing though.  The word "all" also might generate some questions.  Is Paul preaching universal salvation here?  Is he saying that every individual who ever lived will be made righteous through Jesus?  All will find eternal life; none will find hell?  At first glance it seems that way.  After all, all means all.  But it seems clear from the rest of Scripture that not everyone will be saved.  Jesus spoke of separating the sheep from the goats and of people being sent to the place of weeping and gnashing of teeth.  He also said that the road to destruction was wide, suggesting that more are headed to destruction than not.  So how can Paul say all are saved?  The mystery is solved if we understand that Paul is not using the word all to refer to every individual but to instead to every nationality.  Paul means all types of people will be saved.  Individuals from every nationality will come to Jesus.  This was a radical thought for a Pharisaical Jew like Paul.  He grew up believing that very few if any Gentiles would receive God's approval.  And the only way for a Gentile to get that approval was to convert to Judaism and submit to the Old Testament Law.  Paul never imagined that God would open the door to salvation to the Gentiles.  But through Jesus, He did.   And so Paul preached that "all" (Gentiles not just Jews) would be saved.
 

Circumcision and Baptism

I have often heard those who defend infant baptism say that baptism under the New Covenant is what circumcision was under the Old Covenant.  I understand the logic in that.  Circumcision was a sign that marked baby males as being a part of Israel's community.  It did not guarantee their salvation per se (whatever that might have meant to an ancient Israelite), but it did give them the advantage of being part of the community where God dwelled (in the Temple), revealed Himself, and poured out His blessing.  Proponents of infant baptism say such baptism does the same for our children.  It marks them as part of the church family making them part of the people among whom God dwells to reveal Himself and bless. Like circumcision, baptism is not a guarantor of future salvation, but it does provide advantage to knowing and experiencing God.

In Romans 4, Paul finds a different approach to circumcision under the Old Covenant.  Looking at Abraham, he finds that circumcision came after Abraham was made righteous not before.  Paul is trying to show that salvation has nothing to do with our works.  We do not gain God's approval by obeying the Law.  Paul says Abraham is proof of this.  In Genesis, Abraham is circumcised after he is declared righteous.  Thus, it is clear that it is not works that save Abraham but faith.  "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to Him as righteousness" came long before Abraham's circumcision.  In the Old Testament, circumcision did not always come before faith.  In Abraham's case, it followed salvation as a sign of God's approval and blessing.

This understanding of circumcision fits well with baptistic principles.  We at FBC say that the Bible teaches that baptism is reserved for those old enough to have already made a choice to follow Christ.  Baptism is not a saving act but it is a sign of the regeneration that has already happened through faith.  In this way, baptism by immersion is also consistent with the understanding of Old Testament circumcision found in Abraham.  Baptism of adults follows their being made righteous by faith just as circumcision did for Abraham.

Certainly Abraham's experience is not the thing that demonstrates baptism of adults trumps baptism of infants.  I am not making that argument here.  I am just suggesting that Romans 4 shows us that there are different understandings of circumcision contained within the Old Covenant and thus the Old Testament practice of circumcision does not establish the practice of infant baptism.  Both approaches to baptism have some corollary in the rite of circumcision.  The argument needs to be settled on other ground (if indeed it needs to be settled at all).