Weak Brothers XXV

In this chapter we will continue to comment upon the following verses. 

"14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense."  (Rom. 14: 14-20 nkjv)

There is a lot to unpack in these verses, hence we had to cut our commentary short in the preceding chapter. In this chapter let us begin by understanding what is at stake in properly interpreting it.

Salvation of the Weak is at Stake

What is the chief concern of Paul in his exhortations to the strong ones (who I have identified as being those who are saved Christians) on how to behave towards the weak (who I have identified as being those who are not Christians but religious people who are open to giving Christians a chance to teach them)? The following verses tell us that it is the salvation of the weak.

"And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?" (I Cor. 8: 11 nkjv)

"Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble." (I Cor. 8: 13 nkjv)

"to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." (I Cor. 9: 22 nkjv)

"Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died." (Rom. 14: 15)

"Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food." (Rom. 14: 20)

"It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God." (Rom. 14: 21-22 nkjv)

Some translations give for "is offended" the words "is led into sin." Also, "is made weak" is "asthenie" and means, as we have said, "sick" or "impotent."

When we say that Paul is concerned about the salvation of the religiously sick and weak, we do not deny that he is also concerned with the salvation of the strong ones. Likewise, just as Paul was concerned about the weak ones being "led into sin" so also he is concerned about the strong ones sinning by the way they treat the weak brothers. So Paul said to the strong ones: "But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ." (I Cor. 8: 12 nkjv) When Paul warns the strong ones about offending the sick ones he not only warns them about sinning in so doing but also about how they will have to stand before the judgment seat of Christ to be judged for such actions.

This situation brings us therefore to the debate over whether born again believers may lose their salvation. For those who believe that both the weak and the strong are born again believers, and who believe that it is impossible for such believers to be lost, the above texts will prove difficult, especially in the case of those who are styled "weak or sick brothers." Those who believe that both classes are saved spiritual brothers, and who believe that believers can lose their salvation, will see these texts as proof that their position is correct. Since my position views only the strong ones as truly saved believers, I have less difficulty in debating with those who believe that saints can lose their salvation. I believe that the eternal salvation of the weak ones is at stake, not in losing salvation however, but in obtaining initial salvation itself. In the case of the strong ones, the danger is that they will lose rewards and their Lord's commendations, not loss of salvation. That seems to be what Paul taught when he said - "If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (I Cor. 3: 15 nkjv)

Also, sinning against the weak brothers may reveal that the strong ones were not really what they profess to be, i.e. true born again believers. After all, perseverance in faith and holiness are essentials for being saved in the end. But, perseverance does not mean living a sinless life.

Paul does not use the same language when speaking of the results of the sin of the weak ones, in the above texts in Romans and First Corinthians, as he does for the sin of the strong ones. The weak ones may perish, or have the work of God upon them destroyed by their remaining unconverted. Any stumbling blocks that we as believers put in the way of sinners for coming to Christ for salvation makes us guilty of having been a contributing cause in their damnation, or failure to be saved. When speaking of the damnation of weak brothers Paul says they perish, or are destroyed. I don't think that is a temporal perishing or destruction as some of my Calvinist brothers aver. They take that view because 1) they believe that the weak ones are born again believers (mainly because they are called brothers) and 2) it is said that Christ died for them. But, before delving further into those difficulties, let me return to my assertion that Paul does not say of the strong ones that their sinning against the weak brothers results in the work of God being destroyed in them as it does in the weak brothers. That is because it is impossible to destroy God's work in preserving the believers and insuring their perseverance. It is possible however to destroy the pre-regeneration or pre-salvation work of God in the weak brothers, as in all lost sinners. That is what Paul meant when he said that he did not preach the gospel "with wisdom of words," because in that case he would be making "the cross of Christ of no effect" (I Cor. 1: 17).  

As far as how a Calvinist who believes that Christ only died for the elect or for believers only deals with Paul's speaking of the weak brothers perishing "for whom Christ died" there are several solutions. Those Calvinists who believe the weak brothers are born again believers are forced to say that the perishing is not eternal, but denotes a mere loss of temporal spiritual blessings. I find that untenable and unlikely. First, that is not how the term "perishing" or "destroyed" is generally used in scripture. Others, like Dr. John Gill in his commentary on the text, says that Paul does not affirm that the weak brothers will perish but only asks the question rhetorically ("and through your knowledge shall the weak brother perish for whom Christ died") and says that such a question does not imply that such will occur. I find that explanation also untenable. In my posting in this series title "Throgmorton on the Weak" (See here) I wrote, citing Dr. W.P. Throgmorton from his debate with Elder J. R. Daily of the "Primitive Baptist" church. Throgmorton said: 

 

"We read of one weak brother for whom Christ died that perished. I Corinthians 8:10-11 “For if any man see thee which hast knowledge, sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols? And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?” In the Revised Version, American, it reads: For through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whom Christ died.” It doesn’t mean a brother in Christ, because we have seen that those in Christ will never perish, but here is a brother in Adam for whom Christ died, who perishes. The Greek word apoleitai (apoleitai) is the same as in John 3:16, where the word perish occurs."

Throgmorton saw the problem with saying that the weak brothers were born again children of God in light of his belief in the impossibility of believers losing their salvation. So, he believed as I do that the weak ones are not saved. However, he believed that Christ died for all men and so he had no problem believing that many for whom Christ died will perish. Calvinists who believe that the weak brothers are born again Christians cannot avoid either problem. They have to explain how to reconcile the fact that born again believers for whom Christ died may perish or be destroyed. Since I do not believe the weak brothers are saved Christians, I as a Calvinist only have to deal with how I can believe that someone for whom Christ died may perish. As a Calvinist I have two possible answers to this problem. 

First, there is a sense in which Christ died "for" all men and a sense in which he died only for the elect (or only for believers). The death of Christ had some benefits for all men. Spurgeon said this very thing, saying that God purchased some good things for all men and all good things for some men (the elect). So, Paul may mean that Christ died "for" the temporal good of even those who are never saved, what theologians call "common grace."  

Second, Paul could simply be saying that Christ died for weak brothers in the same way he says that Christ died for sinners, without intending that he died as a sacrificial substitute and bore the penalty for every single sinner, or for those who do not believe. Every believer was once a religiously weak, sick, or impotent sinner brother and so we may say Christ died for them. The question is this: did Paul say that Christ died for every weak brother, i.e. every sinner? I think not. We may then rephrase Paul's question like this: "and through your knowledge shall the lost sinner perish?" Those who believe that the weak brothers are saved Christians has Paul asking - "and through your knowledge shall born again believers perish?" The weak brother (lost religiously sick person) will indeed perish if he falls short of accepting Christ as Lord and Savior. 

In the next chapter we will continue our examination of this section of Romans chapter fourteen.