Weaker Brother?

[Luke2427]

The Bible teaches that a weaker brother is one who lacks "knowledge" in a particular area.

Aaron and I began to discuss that in a previous thread. Here is where we left off:

Looks like this thread is on its way to being closed. So, moving on.

So, Romans 14:1-4 establishes that what is weak or strong when speaking of weaker brethren is not their education or will power, as is commonly asserted, but their faith.

No, the text along with the parallel text, I Corinthians 8, makes it clear that the REASON the weaker brother's faith is weak is because of his deficiency of knowledge as I pointed out earlier.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
​

Again, these are all matters of faith and practice.

No, the problem is their THINKING.

That's what the words "esteemeth" and "persuaded" and "regardeth" mean.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

How do you connect pursuading to knowledge...one is pure salesmanship while the other is derived from truth & study.

 

[Luke2427]

How do you connect pursuading to knowledge...one is pure salesmanship while the other is derived from truth & study.

You are persuading someone to THINK something.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You are persuading someone to THINK something.

Like brainwashing perhaps?

 

[Luke2427]

Like brainwashing perhaps?

Like Marry Poppins, ice cream, and whatever other unrelated subjects you want to throw in the thread too I suppose.

 

[webdog]

Like brainwashing perhaps?

No. Persuasion entails having a firm grasp on a subject and an even stronger desire and methodology to bring others to this same knowledge of truth.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Like Marry Poppins, ice cream, and whatever other unrelated subjects you want to throw in the thread too I suppose.

Thinking isn't knowing is it?

 

[Luke2427]

Thinking isn't knowing is it?

No, just like walking is not arriving. But one leads to the other.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

No. Persuasion entails having a firm grasp on a subject and an even stronger desire and methodology to bring others to this same knowledge of truth.

So lets play this thing out...if someone like Iconoclastic feel they have a strong on a subject...say "Calvinism" (& lets not turn this into a c&a food fight...just using 'C's for the sake of analagy, ...you do understand my point right!

My suggestion though is, isn't it far better to allow the person the liberty of self study & discovery? Yes coup could be there to help out....to answer questions & even offer up your opinion...at least that's my stance on all this.

 

[webdog]

So lets play this thing out...if someone like Iconoclastic feel they have a strong on a subject...say "Calvinism" (& lets not turn this into a c&a food fight...just using 'C's for the sake of analagy, ...you do understand my point right!

My suggestion though is, isn't it far better to allow the person the liberty of self study & discovery? Yes coup could be there to help out....to answer questions & even offer up your opinion...at least that's my stance on all this.

You could stand out of the way and let them find things out on their own. That would be the opposite of persuasion. Using your analogy debate happens when two people try persuading each other to what they believe is truth. Each person is different. Some like to do self discovery, some would rather have a number of viewpoints presented to choose from.

 

[Luke2427]

So lets play this thing out...if someone like Iconoclastic feel they have a strong on a subject...say "Calvinism" (& lets not turn this into a c&a food fight...just using 'C's for the sake of analagy, ...you do understand my point right!

My suggestion though is, isn't it far better to allow the person the liberty of self study & discovery? Yes coup could be there to help out....to answer questions & even offer up your opinion...at least that's my stance on all this.

This is a debate site. It kinda defeats the purpose of the site to let someone assert what they believe and not DEBATE the thing.

If we are just going to let everybody say what they believe to be so and not DEBATE it....

well....

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

This is a debate site. It kinda defeats the purpose of the site to let someone assert what they believe and not DEBATE the thing.

If we are just going to let everybody say what they believe to be so and not DEBATE it....

well....

Are asking for permission?

 

[Luke2427]

Are asking for permission?

Permission to do what??

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Permission to do what??

Forgedabout it.

 

[Revmitchell]

Some folks use "debate" as an excuse to act like the south end of a mule.

 

[Luke2427]

Forgedabout it.

Are you even trying to be coherent?

 

[Luke2427]

Some folks use "debate" as an excuse to act like the south end of a mule.

You don't even debate on here and you do that.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Are you even trying to be coherent?

What's your point?:smile:

 

[Herald]

I find myself in agreement with Rick and webdog in regards to persuasion. Persuasion is not the same thing as forcing someone. I was recently accused by a very dishonest person on this board of trying to force my belief on others. Presenting one's side of an issue is not forcing someone to believe a thing. This is, after all, a debate forum. If a person is going to engage in vigorous debate they need to have thick skin.

As to the weaker brother - the admonition is to accept the one who is weak in faith (Rom. 14:1) and to not put an obstacle or stumbling block in their way (Rom. 14:13). So, we are able to extrapolate that the weaker brother is one who is weak in faith. Why are they weak in faith? There could be a number of contributing factors but the main reason is a lack of knowledge. How so? Let me use a relevant illustration.

In the two previous threads on drinking no one, absolutely no one, was able to prove that drinking is a sin. They cited social ills, health concerns, and harming the conscience of the weaker brother; but no one was able to prove it was sin. I contend that the reason why these individuals object to drinking, on other than biblical grounds, is because they lack knowledge in what the Bible says regarding the topic of Christian liberty. Their lack of knowledge leads to a lack of faith. Ergo they are weak in that area. They should not be weak in faith once they are properly instructed. Unfortunately that is not always the case. In that case it is proper for those who are strong in faith to willingly check their liberty in the presence of those who are weak in faith. It does not mean that those who are strong in faith must permanently check their liberty. Neither party is to regard with contempt the other party (Rom. 14:3), nor are are they to judge their conviction (Rom. 14:4).

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I find myself in agreement with Rick and webdog in regards to persuasion. Persuasion is not the same thing as forcing someone. I was recently accused by a very dishonest person on this board of trying to force my belief on others. Presenting one's side of an issue is not forcing someone to believe a thing. This is, after all, a debate forum. If a person is going to engage in vigorous debate they need to have thick skin.

As to the weaker brother - the admonition is to accept the one who is weak in faith (Rom. 14:1) and to not put an obstacle or stumbling block in their way (Rom. 14:13). So, we are able to extrapolate that the weaker brother is one who is weak in faith. Why are they weak in faith? There could be a number of contributing factors but the main reason is a lack of knowledge. How so? Let me use a relevant illustration.

In the two previous threads on drinking no one, absolutely no one, was able to prove that drinking is a sin. They cited social ills, health concerns, and harming the conscience of the weaker brother; but no one was able to prove it was sin. I contend that the reason why these individuals object to drinking, on other than biblical grounds, is because they lack knowledge in what the Bible says regarding the topic of Christian liberty. Their lack of knowledge leads to a lack of faith. Ergo they are weak in that area. They should not be weak in faith once they are properly instructed. Unfortunately that is not always the case. In that case it is proper for those who are strong in faith to willingly check their liberty in the presence of those who are weak in faith. It does not mean that those who are strong in faith must permanently check their liberty. Neither party is to regard with contempt the other party (Rom. 14:3), nor are are they to judge their conviction (Rom. 14:4).

Dishonest ....on BB, HEAVEN FORBID:laugh:

And how did you extrapolate 'forced' out of my comments? Is this a cleaver way to to manipulate me to send you Taylor Ham & Pectors? :laugh: