Weak and beggarly elements

[trustitl]

Romans 14 and Galatians 4 have nothing in common! The thread is about Galatians 4 only; it cannot concern Romans 14 at all. BobRyan is right! The opposing idea is fallacious.

Romans 14 and Galations do have something in common:
the word WEAK.

Rom. 14:1 "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye"


Rom. 14:2 "another, who is weak, eateth herbs."

Gal. 4:9 "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?"

Paul was saying the Romans who were concerned with the elements, food and days, were weak in faith. With the Galations he was addressing the worthlessness of the elements themselves.

If one wants to argue that Paul was addressing pagan elements he can, but Paul had just pointed out that the Jews were in bondage to elements in the old covenant -
Gal.4 "3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: 4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law".

Elements are elements and turning to pagan elements or "Jewish" ones are equally of no value.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Paul says accept the weak in Romans 14; he says don't accept again the weak in Galatians; Paul associates the weak with being in Christ in Romans 14; in Galatians he associates the weak with the begaarly no-gods of the heathen. But you say it's something common . Vergebens!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Trustitl
"Elements are elements and turning to pagan elements or "Jewish" ones are equally of no value."

Paul speaks of the elements of the reign of Christ; over against it he poses the beggarly principles of the world. But for you, 'Elements are elements".

Ja, turning to pagan elements or "Jewish" ones are equally of no value especially if those 'Jewish' ones aren't really Jewish or Jewish in the first place, but pagan and strange to the true Jewdism of the New Testament, which is the Church of Christ. You cannot even distinguish between Jewish and Judaistic, but think yourself an authority to distinguish between Jewish and pagan principles of salvation. The Bible teaches me "salvation is of the Jews" however much you may despise 'Jewish' first principles of salvation. The Prince of Jewish principles of salvation is Jesus Christ, and not unnecessarily was He a Jew, that everyone should take offence at Him.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Trustitl'
"If one wants to argue that Paul was addressing pagan elements he can, but Paul had just pointed out that the Jews were in bondage to elements in the old covenant -
Gal.4 "3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: 4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law"."

GE
No, Paul addresses pagan elements where he does, and he points out that the Jews were in bondage "under the elements of the world" while under the old covenant -
Gal.4 "3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: 4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law" ... as them in bondage under the principles or gods of the world -- there is no difference in the people or their state; only whether they are in Christ or not; it's Paul's only point!

 

[trustitl]

Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

"Salvation is from the Jews" does not mean we need to become Jews. Their are no Jews in the Kingdom of God.

 

[BobRyan]

Paul says accept the weak in Romans 14; he says don't accept again the weak in Galatians; Paul associates the weak with being in Christ in Romans 14; in Galatians he associates the weak with the begaarly no-gods of the heathen. But you say it's something common . Vergebens!

Indeed what Paul defends in Romans 14 - Trustit appears to try to get Paul to condemn in Gal 4.

 

[trustitl]

Gerhard Ebersoehn
Paul says accept the weak in Romans 14; he says don't accept again the weak in Galatians; Paul associates the weak with being in Christ in Romans 14; in Galatians he associates the weak with the begaarly no-gods of the heathen.

Of course we are to accept those in Romans 14 because they are brothers in Christ. They are the weak brothers, but brothers nonetheless. Romans 14 makes it clear that these brothers are weak in faith, but still in the faith.

Rom. 14:18 "For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men." This is the theme of Romans 14: walking charitably. Paul is not defending the practices as ordinances instituted by God. This theme is continued in chapter 15. Having started this theme back in chapter 12 using the body as an illustration, he is giving practical instruction on how to carry this out.

So I am called to accept the brothers that esteem one day above another even though I believe all days are alike. Those that esteem one day above another need to accept me. Paul is not saying that the practices need to be accepted or taken into ones life as an ordinance.

In Galations, Paul is addressing false teachers "bewitching" others with their commands. Here is the difference. These wolves were trying to bring believers into bondage to the weak elements of the world. Of course this would not be acceptable because these people were not going to be doing these practices by faith, but rather by commands from men.

So to practice this, I am not going to tell you that you are sinning by not working on Saturday or Sunday. Are you able to do the same to us who see all days alike. If you can you are living out Romans 14. If you cannot, and are compelled to teach others what to do on certain days you are guilty of what Paul is condemning in Galations.

Look at Galations 4:17

They zealously affect you, but not well; yea, they would exclude you, that ye might affect them. KJV

They eagerly seek you, not commendably, but they wish to shut you out so that you will seek them. NASB

Geneva Study Bible
They zealously affect you, {q} but not well; yea, they would exclude you, {r} that ye might affect them.

(q) For they are jealous over you for their own benefit.

(r) That they may transfer all your love from me to themselves.

In other words, Paul saw this as preaching another gospel, which is no gospel.

 

[BobRyan]

In Gal 4:8-11 there is "no teaching just PRACTICE" just as we see in Rom 14. It is the PRACTICE that is condemned in Gal 4 as being a return to paganism - such that ANYONE who OBSERVES that PRACTICE is condemned whether they TEACH or not according to Gal 4:8-11.

Obviously.

By CONTRAST in Rom 14 the PRACTICE is approved as done "unto GOD" and ANYONE who engages in the PRACTICE listed in Rom 14 is DEFENDED against all commers by Paul. Gal 4:8-11 is where we find the label "weak and beggerly" applied to PAGAN practices. Gal 4:17 is a good example of a place where we DO NOT find that.

Obviously the attempt to employ equivocation between these two opposites is to embrace doctrinal error.

(BTW - I do appreciate the fact that it is left to me to state the obvious as the response to some fallacy of equivocation being attempted)

in Christ,

Bob

 

[trustitl]

Paul is not attempting to show that the elements of the world are weak. He is just stating the obvious. What he is concerned with is "turn ye again". Before they were serving "gods which were no gods" and now are considering turning back to such things being pushed by the judaizers.

Paul was concerned with the practice of turning to the elements of the world that Paul speaks about in verse 3 "Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world".

So can you accept someone and their practice who says all days are alike?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

"Salvation is from the Jews" does not mean we need to become Jews. Their are no Jews in the Kingdom of God.

GE

Exactly! In fact, if we want to become Jews then we will make ourselves guilty of exactly what Paul argued about himself and the Jews in Galatians!! You said it, and I agree 100% with you. What do think do I have all these hard labour for to explain the Christian believes everything he believes because of Jesus Christ and Him alone?! I do not believe the Sabbath for the reason the Jews believe the Sabbath, that God on the Seventh Day freed them from the yoke of bondage of heathendom, but because exactly that event showed forth Christ and as it were proved Him God's ultimate Redeemer. So now I believe the Sabbath for NOTHING but Jesus Christ and He, in, and through, resurrection from the dead, as that Salvation-Event indicated and proved! We have Jesus, and with Him, and in Him, all the Promises of God, Yea and Amen! NOTHING can contradict God's ultimate once for all and final revelation of Salvation in Christ. I have no word further for the Sabbath, or against the Sunday.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Trustitl
"In Galations, Paul is addressing false teachers "bewitching" others with their commands. Here is the difference. These wolves were trying to bring believers into bondage to the weak elements of the world. Of course this would not be acceptable because these people were not going to be doing these practices by faith, but rather by commands from men.

So to practice this, I am not going to tell you that you are sinning by not working on Saturday or Sunday. Are you able to do the same to us who see all days alike. If you can you are living out Romans 14. If you cannot, and are compelled to teach others what to do on certain days you are guilty of what Paul is condemning in Galations."

GE
That's not the point in Galatians, dear brother in Christ. In Galatians it wasn't about differences like between you or me. In Galatians it is about life and death, about being saved or going lost; about being in Christ or severed from Christ totally! And Paul in Galatians speaks of thing to the effect! No small matters! The sins he condemns without reserve were deadly unrepentable sins in Galatians; they were IDOLATRY! The idolatry of the "veneration / worship", of the "gods" or "stoicheia" of time (in Greek wisdom and in the Greek world and philosophy), the Time-'gods' of "days, months, seasons and years" - thing completely UNknown in Old-Testament or New-Tetament worship. The word 'paratehreoh' was used escpecially for the purpose of "examining" - like the entrails of sacrifices to these gods - as today still going on in Roman Catholic Peru - to mention but one place I know of.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Ja, this 'paratehreoh' is also going on today in former parts of Mongolia in Russia today, and I guess even nearer home, like the Drudes this very season of the year do in England - my sister was unawares introduced into its privacy. It is true, and Christian Faith-destroying this moment!
Sunday-observance has never been not of the same sort of idolatry, except in the conscience of the simple and honest majority of ordinary Christians.