Tolerance or Compromise

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84

oh yeah? how does that not contradict this if you apply it how you propose:

. . .

Paul CANNOT possibly have been telling them to never eat meat offered to idols, because if he did he would be contradicting what he fought for in Jerusalem and what he preached in pretty much the rest of his epistles...

I was thinking also of Galatians 2:11-14. Paul rebukes Peter because of Peter's "holier than thou" attitude. In the case of Galatians 2 (Peter not eating with the Gentiles in Antioch because some Jewish brethren were present) is Paul actually saying - "wave the meat under their noses."

Eat with the Gentiles even though your Jewish brothers are offended by it.

Can't we then say,

Preach on TV even if some of your brethren are offended by it?
Wear modest and comfortable clothing even though your brothers are offended by your shins?

[ChTatum]

Originally Posted by redeemedcynic84

I think you can have your own personal convictions against things and still be "law-free"... its when you hand down things to others that everyone needs to follow...

Partial agreement.
There are things that I believe scripture is emphatic on.

IMO, there is a certain mindset that implies some in liberty have no convictions.
Not true.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I did not say he said forever. My point was that some of you folks want to come here and tell us how much sinners we are, when according to your interpretation of Paul, when you get around us, you should be speaking as to not offend us poor "weak" Christians.

You can't have it both way. Quit using your liberty as a cloak of maliciousness.

You did appear to say "forever" when you made the statement about "seasonal."

And I think I'm getting to know you a little better, STMatt. I have never known you to be malicious. And you take some offense when others angrily put down "legalists?"

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I was thinking also of Galatians 2:11-14. Paul rebukes Peter because of Peter's "holier than thou" attitude. In the case of Galatians 2 (Peter not eating with the Gentiles in Antioch because some Jewish brethren were present) is Paul actually saying - "wave the meat under their noses."

Eat with the Gentiles even though your Jewish brothers are offended by it.

Can't we then say,

Preach on TV even if some of your brethren are offended by it?
Wear modest and comfortable clothing even though your brothers are offended by your shins?

If the weaker brothers are the meat eaters, how do we reconcile everything with 1 Cor 8??

And if we are saying that it is the Old Testament Law that Paul is dealing with that causes one to be weaker, how can we apply that to standards, and not apply the principle of not offending the weaker brother?

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I did not say he said forever. My point was that some of you folks want to come here and tell us how much sinners we are, when according to your interpretation of Paul, when you get around us, you should be speaking as to not offend us poor "weak" Christians.

You can't have it both way. Quit using your liberty as a cloak of maliciousness.

where did I say you were a sinner?

at worst I said those who follow standards fall under what Paul called "weaker brothers" and those who don't are "stronger brothers"... that is the worst thing I said, and I don't even think that's that bad, really, considering I would say post 1 is saying the same thing in the opposite way...

and you are probably right, I shouldn't speak of these things around you so as not to hinder your spiritually weak walk with God, but you asked, so I answered.

Nothing I said in this thread was malicious... However, if you think what I said is malicious, how is you posting the same exact thing in post 1 towards me any less malicious??

can you say "the pot calling the kettle black"???

Originally Posted by ChTatum

Partial agreement.
There are things that I believe scripture is emphatic on.

IMO, there is a certain mindset that implies some in liberty have no convictions.
Not true.

oh, absolutely... Things the Bible explicitly speaks against are not what is being referred to in this thread (or in Paul's writings being discussed here)...

Those in liberty have convictions, and if they have none they probably do not have the right attitude about thier liberty...

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by pelathais

You did appear to say "forever" when you made the statement about "seasonal."

And I think I'm getting to know you a little better, STMatt. I have never known you to be malicious. And you take some offense when others angrily put down "legalists?"

I am trying to show the other side of this coin here. If the meat eaters are weaker, then the non eaters must stop offending their weaker brothers. This would mean that those that would come here and post all these post about their liberties in Christ around these weaker folks are doing wrong.





(i guess I am not a very good devils advocate, am I?? )

Originally Posted by stmatthew

If the weaker brothers are the meat eaters, how do we reconcile everything with 1 Cor 8??

And if we are saying that it is the Old Testament Law that Paul is dealing with that causes one to be weaker, how can we apply that to standards, and not apply the principle of not offending the weaker brother?

yes, so don't do it in front of them...

Again, either Paul is directly contradicting himself in these verses or you are applying them wrong...

You cannot possibly read all of Paul's writings and take them on the whole and get to the conclusion that you should never eat the meat offered to idols not to offend the weaker brethren... Its a matter of not flaunting it...

[Neck]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Excellent -

Tolerance comes from those that are strong in faith and compromise comes those weak in faith.

Sometimes blind faith. Right!

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I am trying to show the other side of this coin here. If the meat eaters are weaker, then the non eaters must stop offending their weaker brothers. This would mean that those that would come here and post all these post about their liberties in Christ around these weaker folks are doing wrong.





(i guess I am not a very good devils advocate, am I?? )

no, they probably shouldn't post that they are doing those things in front of those offended by it...

I guess the real question is are they offended by it?

Also, where do you draw the line? Do you make a community where those who don't eat idol meat are not allowed so that they can talk openly about how best to prepare the meat???

There is a balance here that you, in your devil's advocacy (and those who really mean it), are missing