The Truth in Print Vol. 26 Issue 5, June 2020
A Publication of the Valley church of Christ,
2375 W. 8th Street, Yuma, AZ 85364 (928-782-5058)
Website
Address ~ http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com
I’m Ok, You’re Ok! Really? Truthfully? – Use of
a “Principle”
It
is obvious in James chapter two that faith and works cannot be separated; this
is James’ point:
Jas
2:14 What use
is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that
faith save him?
Jas
2:15 If a
brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,
Jas
2:16 and one of
you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you
do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that?
Jas
2:17 Even so
faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.
It appears that it would be necessary at
times to entreat others and clarify that one’s faith can be show by their works
approved of in the Word:
Jas
2:18 But
someone may well say, "You have faith and I have works; show me your faith
without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works."
The point in verse 17 is restated in Jas 2:20
“But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works
is useless?” And it is backed up with Abraham’s works and not just his faith
(vss. 21-23). This is repeated again in verse 24 and James 2:26 says “For as
the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.”
Thayer defines “foolish” [G2756 kenos]
“metaph. destitute of spiritual wealth, of one boasts of his faith as a
transcendent possession, yet is without the fruits of faith.” Is he Ok just
because he might think so? He’s gained nothing for there is no profit for that
faith cannot save him (Cf. vs. 14 above).
Faith comes by hearing the word (Rom.
10:17). The one who hears it and keeps (obeys) it is the one who is blessed
(James 1:22-25).
Besides the necessity of hearing the Word
and obeying James states that mere hearers and not doers of the Word
continuously or repeatedly “delude”
themselves (vs. 22) - “delude” [G3884 paralogizomai] Thayer: to misreckon, i.e.
delude: - beguile, deceive.
You can deceive yourself i.e. convince
yourself that something is acceptable and profitable when it is not because it
is not according to faith based upon the written Word (Rom. 10:17; 2 Tim.
3:16-17; I Cor. 14:37).
Using the so called “principle” from Rom. 14
How popular has the so called principle “that
anything a person does in violation of his own conscience is sinful” become? Is
there not a longstanding history of the misuse of Rom. 14 in the brotherhood?
Wouldn’t that of itself cause one to proceed with caution should a new teaching
of “Individual Communion” using this Rom. 14 “principle” be spreading through
the church? (Cf. I Th. 5:21). When you hear about this
“principle” wouldn’t the first thing that is necessary be to read Rom. 14 and
study its context? Shouldn’t the specifics found in the context guide your
usage?
I recall sitting at a table with a new
brother in Christ at a nursing home having lunch with him, and a denominational
church member came up and spoke with him (he was a new convert and they had
been acquainted prior to his conversion); our new member introduced him to me
and told him I was the preacher at his church. He then told our new brother in
Christ that he’d be down to pray with him after lunch was over. He said that
right in front of me. I’m sure the others at the table were listening, but I
told him that our brother now was a member of Christ’s church and that the
church he belonged to went into apostasy, had left the faith and endorsed false
worship. When I asked him for a passage in the New Testament for the use of
instruments of music in the worship of the local churches in the New Testament,
he said the “principle” is found in the use of mechanical instruments in the
Old Testament worship. I told him that I was sure he’d read what Paul said in
Col. 2:14 that the old covenant was taken out of the way and nailed to the
cross! Well, that ended our conversation. His “principle” was in the wrong
covenant and place and did not apply.
Do you just accept point blank when someone
throws out a “principle” and then proceeds to interject how helpful it is? — then on to seeking to justify what is not authorized in the
New Testament.
It just so happens that in the context of
Romans 14 whether one ate only herbs or more, or kept certain days or didn’t,
that both were accepted and neither could judge the other. But the context is
food and drink and days. It is not the work and worship of the local church as
an organization, and the specifics given for such.
The
eating and drinking, and days in Rom. 14 has nothing to do with the assembly of
the local church for the purpose of eating the Lord’s Supper and the specifics
given for such.
For some they find their “principles” in the
wrong covenant i.e. they go to the Old Testament for items of worship they
desire and like — be it candles, special clothing, a special “priesthood”
(clergy), instruments of music in worship, binding the Sabbath day, binding
food and drink regulations etc.
Considering the church history of the
unscriptural use of Rom. 14 I’d think that just about anyone would be cautious
when they hear that particular chapter introduced into matters out of context —
especially concerning the work and worship of the local church.
Isn’t the use of “principle” often just
another way of saying “I’m Ok, You’re Ok”? Or to put that another way of saying
that if one is assured in his own mind then you dare not tell him that he is
wrong and be judging him? — nor should the matter of
withdrawal come up — the denominational world gets along just fine that very
way.
I’ve been seeing that very reasoning in the
Liberal brotherhood in their apostasy into women deacons, preachers and elders.
Knowing some have enough knowledge to object, their promotions come with a
strong sentiment of let’s not judge one another because we both believe we are
right. I’m Ok, You’re Ok! Really? Truthfully?
It is the Word that determines what is right
and what is wrong (Jo.12:48; 2 Tim. 3:16-17). The conscience can be wrong (Pr.
14:12); Saul’s is a scriptural example and a good one (Acts 23:1; I Ti. 1:13).
It must be trained in righteousness (Acts 24:16; 2 Tim. 2:15). It profits
nothing to think “that anything a person does in violation of his own conscience
is sinful” if what one is doing in good conscience lacks scriptural authority!
There is a “judging” by the Word that
involves exposing false teaching, marking false teachers who will not repent,
practicing church discipline, and applying withdrawal on an individual basis as
well (I Tim. 1:18-20, 2 Tim. 2:17-18, 21; Rom. 16:17-18; I Cor. 5:1-5,13, 11; I
Jo. 1:7).
Look at who recommends whom at times like
this. How comfortable has it become to use some “principle” to secure one’s
place, continue in friendships, or when wanting to move and realizing that old
errors are rooted in the church there to think — “I’m Ok, You’re Ok! Really? Truthfully?
Valley Church of Christ
2375 W. 8th Street, Yuma, AZ 85364
(928) 782-5058 ~
http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com
Sunday Services – Classes ~10:00;
Assembly 10:50 am; Evening: 6:00 pm.
Wednesday evening – 7:00 pm
To learn more call, visit or visit our website at:
http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com