Why can't we all just get along?" comes to mind. At United Seminary we
discussed this in Theology...you have creed-Doctrine-Dogma- and opinions! This
is a apples and beef scripture... but one can look deeper... Mainline
Denominations Oh I don't do word of knowledge, tongues etc...not need that...God don't do that anymore... Some, are go ahead God Pour it on me! Whew! Holy Ghost FIRE!
Stop yer arguing and get with the program! SALVATION ATONEMENT MESSAGE! Who
cares if you have a contemporary praise service of tradition...Let's work
together... Like the Rock tune Let's work together and get the job done!
Pastor Mary
I am not a big fan of Paul (gasp); or perhaps more accurately, I am not a big fan of how Paul's writings have been used much of the time. But every now and then I cannot help but appreciate how his observations of human behavior reach across time and culture. This section of Romans has that quality.
Almost all my arguments--OPINIONS--are mostly over the small stuff. I have been known to get hold of some issue, becoming like a growling little dog clenched on a pants leg--arguing out of sheer stubborness or pride or just to vent other frustrations.
But Paul seems to be addressing the desire for conformity! Is it for the sake of order? or is it comfort? With group identity such a strong cultural factor in Ancient Near East, lack of conformity or the lack of clear new rules of belonging may have been terribly disorienting. Is Paul attempting to comfort people who are troubled with diversity in practice of faith?
Sometimes when discussing council concerns, altar guild questions, & other kinds of "concern", I have used the phrase "is this a salvation issue?" Light hearted in tone, it has helped us all keep our perspective... most of the time.
MDWElpis in Washington State: so, are you saying you've experienced quarreling over opinions?? :)
I am always surprised to read the 'whether we live or whether we die we are the Lord's' text in the midst of this passage.
Aslanclan
How do we go from "If one among you sins, go to him...." to "don't judge"? Is this scripture simply referring to judging the worship traditions of others or the way we individually worship?
The Whisper that came to me in this reading focused on this sentence "Who are you to pass judgment on servants of another?" And yet, I am hesitant to drop it at that, because it sounds as though anyone who serves God is okay. Can someone help me out on this one? Perhaps the Greek wording clarifies.
Pastor Janel in ND
The words for judging in this passage seem to have the same vagueness as in English. In English, we judge which is the best kind of milk to use in a recipe. We just what kind of meat is best for the table, according to price, appearance, and taste. We judge all kinds of things without attaching negative connotations.
We even judge people. We decide whether we should associate with people based on behavior, dress, appearance, language, etc. This is not always a bad thing.
I think Paul is meaning that we are not to judge in the harsher sense of the word, that we condemn others for these adiaphora. Don't condemn them because they eat meat, or because they don't. Don't condemn them because of the clothes they wear, or whether they braid their hair. It's just different. These things are not sin.
Those things which are sin, we should declare as sin, but it is not our responsibility to condemn. Let's keep the conversation going. I want more on this passage.
Michelle
Here's my sermon outline:
Theme: The key to Christian unity is tolerance.
1. Christians are tolerant of other Christians who have different practices.
2. Christians are tolerant without giving up their own convictions.
3. Christians are tolerant of other Christians because they share Jesus Christ as Lord.
This week I am a truly desperate preacher with four funerals (and counting)and a wedding. I'm finding it difficult to keep my head above water. I'm afraid I'm dusting off an old sermon and very much appreciating the infusion of your reflections. Stories and illustrations would be very helpful.
A Canadian in Scotland.
Pastor Janel and others, CH Dodd in his commentary on chapter 14, states that if we want to apply this principle Paul is used, we have to bear in mind that he was "dealing exclusively with opinions and prejudices which - though sincerely held, have no rational ground, but are of the nature of taboo.... (in contrast) He would certainly have said that moral principles are objectively valid; some things are wrong whether you think so or not...he would not have urged mutual tolerance and give and take in regard to such matters..." So these things in this section have to do with irrational taboos-- they are truly petty. But what is petty? I might think of apostolic succession as a "petty issue" and throw it in the same category as meat eating. I'm not sure everyone could agree, as the issue sparked near division in the Evangelical Lutheran Church. To me, the message of restraint that comes with this passage is a far more approachable subject than deciding of what to be tolerant. I guess restraint (for the weak and the strong) seems to be a countercultural message in the land of "give me liberty or give me death." Perhaps we need to pay more attention to the feelings of the people in the pew next to us. - AEA
Be careful of your use of the word "tolerant." I live in Iowa. We have a text study in which we talked of the toleration. The problem is that "tolerate" can have extremely negative connotations. We "tolerate" the smell of the pigs. We "tolerate" the mosquitos. We "tolerate" bad weather because we have no choice other than to move.
Is that the best we can do with our Christian brothers and sisters, to "tolerate" their differences?
Michelle
How about instead of tolerate we celebrate? You like to eat only veggies. Praise God! I don’t like veggies, but I am so happy that you are the kind of Christian that eats only veggies.
Your servant has cooperate worship on Saturday instead of Sunday? Praise God. I am so happy there are Christians who have cooperate worship on another day besides the day I do.
You think abortion is a woman’s right? Hum…..
You think any sex other than sex between a married man and a woman is ok? Hum....
BT Ind
Michelle;
Thanks for the insightful comment. I use the word tolerate in its broadest sense. . .to allow for the validity of other opinions and positions whilst still holding to my own. Even if we think of tolerance in the negative sense that you have highlighted (ie - putting up with something because we feel duty bound), in many corners of the Christian church this would be progress. Thanks for your thoughts and I will keep them in my mind as I prepare to preach.
A Canandian in Scotland.
I took a class on early Christianity and was surprised at how diverse the church was pre constantine. Even in Judaism, there was really Judaisms: Essene, Zealot, Pharisee, Sadducee. In Christianity, there were all kinds of Christianities: Jewish Christians, Judaizers, Gentile Christians, Gnostics of all stripes, Marcionites, etc. I think Paul was casting a broad net here, preaching tolerance of diversity.
Our own situation is not too much different. In our churches, we have liberals and fundies, vegetarians and meat eaters, prolife and prochoice, gay and straight, materialists and those devoted to a simple lifestyle.
Of course we make judgements. We have to make decisions every day about people. But passing judgement is different. Within the household of faith, we should not tear each other apart. I love a good discussion, but quarreling over opinions?--who needs it? It's before the Lord that we stand or fall.
Larry cny
