Mark 7:19 (all foods clean)
Acts 10:14 (do not call unclean what God has made clean)
Romans 14:14 (no unclean food)
Romans 14:20 (no unclean food)

You’re right that God is more concerned with our heart attitudes than our actions and I certainly didn’t intend to write anti-laws for the sake of Christian liberty. Really what I was trying to speak of was not whether a person should wear this or not wear that or whether a person should eat this or not eat that. My point was that what is ok to eat and what is not ok to eat or wear is NOT the point at all.

I don’t mean to imply that we should go around ‘liberating’ people from their ‘oppressive’ clothes. But certainly if the Word of God tells us “Jesus declared all foods ‘clean.’” then it is a pretty clear matter that all foods are clean. So why, if I speak what is recorded in the Word, should I be rebuked for it? Or if I testify about my freedom, or encourage my brothers and sisters out from the yoke of the law?

I only seek to help those who are held back from the Gospel by legalism. I do not seek to rebuke those who by the overflow of love for God in their hearts abstain from foods or clothes or musics to His glory. So it is not the meek brother who refuses wine that I rebuke, it is the one who preaches abstainance from wine as a command from God. There is no such command afterall.

Definately though, the Word teaches us that it is not better to exhibit freedom, but it is better to lay down our freedoms for the spiritual edification of others.

If this is the case the don’t you think that Peter would have stated that you should work with your weaker brother so he can learn that he can in fact eat meat sacrificed to idols and it will not cause him to stumble? It is clearly stated that not eating meat is something that a “weaker Christian” does. Shouldn’t this suggest that being able to eat meat sacrificed by idols is “better”?

The reality is that the way God sees things is different than the way we see things. While this world might view it as “better” to be able to exhibit more liberties I don’t think God sees it this way. If He did I think we would find that Peter’s directions would be filled with encouragement for the weaker Christian so they can move to the place of being able to eat sacrificed meat and not stumbling instead of telling believers to accommodate one another so that no one has to stumble. I think from this we can surmise that God is much more concerned that we are trying to serve Him and not stumbling in those actions then He is that we are aware of every last liberty we can exercise through Him.

Truly, there are many liberties in Christ I will never exercise. God is not going to see me at the end of days and say “You fool, did you not know you did not have had half-a-glass of wine at every meal”. He is going to look at me and see how I served Him, and hopefully I will hear “Well done, my good and faithful servant”. I do not think there will be any discussion about what I could have gotten away with.

With that said we must be very careful we do not add any additional rules in regards to what is needed for salvation. To do so discredits the price Christ paid. I would go so far as to say I would not fellowship with someone who thought there were extra requirements for salvation, as if salvation was somehow earned. At the same time I think God will honor the sacrifices we make in trying to serve Him (different from trying to earn salvation), even in those things he might or might not have asked us to do, and I would have no problem fellowshipping with someone who chose this. (E.g. MinTheGap won’t listen to even Christian Rock & Roll)

As a father I have gotten to see my son sometimes do several things in an attempt to honor me and follow my wishes which I probably would not have asked him to do. Not once was my reaction “You silly boy, I never wanted you to organize the lint, what were you thinking!”. Instead my reaction has always been “That’s great Peter! Thank-you. You know you don’t need to organize the lint in the future, but thank-you for thinking of me!”. I think highly of his heart attitude which I’m much more concerned with than his actions. I like Christ looks at us in a similar light. This is why it does not mater to Him if we eat meat or we don’t eat meat. It matters to Him that we’re trying to serve Him.

But that does not mean that if the scripture has shown me a better way that I should not share it with my brothers and sisters. Neither does it mean that true doctrine should be kept to one’s self or that false doctrine should go unchallenged. I have nothing but sympathy for my brothers and sisters in bondage to legalistic religion.

I see the drug addicts on the street who won’t come to Church with me because they got high and I know why they got high. They got high because they listened to the enemy who told them they were worthless, not fit for the kingdom of God, that they had ruined the name of Christ and destroyed their witness. They listen to the enemy who tells them they are not good enough, that all this Jesus stuff they’ve been believing is just a joke, something they can never live up to. They listen to the enemy when he throws their sin in their face and dares to suggest that they have never been redeemed.

So I will pay homage to peacemaking, but I will not pay homage to the yeast which grasps for righteousness in works of the flesh. Neither will I pay homage to the yoke of the law that no man is fit to fulfill but Christ alone. But I will pay homage to my Maker, the Almighty God of Abraham who has made me a new creation in Christ that I may be counted as blameless in His sight.

I know that in writing these sorts of things many people will take offense. I plead with you not to indulge the enemy in this, but to take my words at face value. I’m not trying to offend anyone here and I certainly do not look down on anyone. Who am I to be proud for I was created from dust. And that is to say, how would I hold myself any higher than another man since I am the worst sinner I know? Believe me when I say that as man judges I have committed more heinous sins than most of humanity. But my spirit is redeemed though my flesh will not be made perfect until the day of Christ. I love you all and I hope you can find the Truth that you are made spirituall whole in Christ alone and no work either good or bad can augment that.

Love.

Women can dress modestly and still be a stumbling block, and just like if I were to go to the extreme to try not to offend anyone I would go mad, there is some burden on the offended to not judge the one with more liberty. There is a burden on a man to make sure that he’s not looking to lust, just as there is a burden on the woman not to attract attention to herself.

As far as your understanding of Romans 14, I would have to differ with you. How can you say authoritatively what the will of God is for someone else? That’s the whole point of Romans 14– if he’s not eating meat to the glory of God and giving God thanks– that is God’s will for him and you should not be trying to convince him otherwise. Same for people who have a conviction about wearing head coverings, or anything else that we don’t feel is clearly dictated by Scripture but they do, or they believe that they are doing it to God’s glory. We should be encouraging them, not discouraging.

Sorry I can’t let this go.

You call it a ‘higher standard’ … OH? Is there a higher standard than God’s Holy Word? Can we people take His Word and add to it particulars that He did not add?

Is it a higher standard that asks women to wear long dresses than a standard that asks women to be submissive and with a gentle and quiet spirit?

Can we say it is a greater sacrifice to wear a certain article of clothing that it is to have a meek spirit?

Many may find my words harsh, but I’d argue that it’s the very culture that you seek to seperate yourselves from and transcend beyond that has implanted this idea that I’m being harsh to call legalism what it is. And legalism is nothing more than the twisting of the Good News of God into a worthless code of rules.

QUOTE:
If they are the weaker brother (i.e. they are ones that see more Biblical regulation) then they should not be looked down on, especially if they are doing it to the glory of God.

Furthermore, to bring this scripture up, one would have to first analyze it’s meaning with careful discernment. After all, I’ve never met a Christian who thought they were the weaker brother. However I would tell you this: If I were in a Church that preached the Truth and some came who would not eat meat, I would not look down on them, neither do I look down on a man who preaches abstinence from meat, but that does not mean that I accept it as good and right and the Will of God! What is bound in Heaven may it be bound on earth! What is loosed in Heaven let it be loosed on earth!

I don’t look down on those who have believed a falsehood in the name of Christ, but I DO seek to enlighten them. But I shall not lend credence to deceptive teachings nor eat of leavened bread! (figuratively speaking… )

That being said, let it be known that I once believed, as I was taught that Peter was talking about women covering themselves for the sake of men’s lusts. But the Holy Spirit guides us into all Truth. Furthermore, though I speak passionately about this particular issue at the moment, I am still being drawn into greater understanding and one day even this will seem as an elementary teaching.

(In other words, when I was a more legalistic Christian, I thought I knew it all then too!)

I know my tone is strong, but if I speak meekly about the Passion of Christ then I do so only to please man for the Lord has not commanded nor has the Spirit prompted me to speak of His Word as a soft, bendable thing, but instead as a sharp two edged sword!

My sister told me just the other day that she realized that what she was wearing had caused someone in her church to stumble. Well, my sister dresses overtly conservatively. She wears a dress to her ankles and hair down her back. She doesn’t wear makeup (that I can see) and if she braids her hair it’s a single, simple braid.

But this caused a man to stumble. Why? Because to this man a conservatively dressed woman is attractive.

OK, now here’s where I release some TRUTH and stop pretending like I don’t know what’s really going on here. My sister’s dress did in no way CAUSE this man to stumble! It is his own sin nature that caused him to stumble, probably with a little help from the enemy. Goodness sakes, Eve was NAKED and it never caused Adam to stumble… it was only after the fall that anyone decided to start wearing clothes in the first place. It is not one’s clothing that causes a person to stumble, it’s that person’s sin nature, their flesh, and it’s entirely their issue.

Sure enough, it’s polite for a woman to stay covered and plain to help a man with his struggles against the flesh, but this is clearly not the issue Peter was addressing. Peter does not say nor even suggest that women should concern themselves with men’s lust problems.

I QUOTE:

Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.

What is the context of this passage? The strict context obviously lies within the framework of witnessing to unbelieving husbands. And how? Not by adorning oneself with materialistic forms of beauty but by the beauty within that the Holy Spirit grows and builds during the spiritual regeneration of a Chirstian. Peter is saying that the BEST witness you can have is NOT in the clothes you wear but in your inner spirit being renewed and made pure by God alone!

A wider context could easily forgo the unbelieving husband and apply this scripture to wives of believing husbands as well.

Still a wider context forgoes the husband altogether and is a directive for believers everywhere to live their lives as sacraments unto God. It is calling believers not to base their worth in the clothes they wear or in their worldly appearances or otherwise how they appear toward men, but in how they appear toward God.

Who’s sight does Peter call us to take into account here? Men? Nay! It is God!

Where does true beauty come from? Is it long skirts? NAY! it is ‘the beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit’ Got a problem with that? It’s not ‘my interpretation’ it’s the Word of God verbatim!

Woe to him who contradicts the Holy Word of God. My God is an awesome God and He shall reign! His words are like honey to my soul! Let all men rejoice and sing praises to Him who has freed us from the yoke of the flesh which cannot fulfill the law of righteousness! Praise Christ Jesus! You are free if you know the Truth!

I guess the thing that we have to wonder is: this church that this person and his wife attend, do they do so by choice? If they did, perhaps they truly believe what the church is “making them do.” I wen tot a college that had such standards. Even off campus the women were supposed to wear a dress outside of the house unless they were engaged in a sport or doing something in the lawn. I always chuckled at it, though, because I didn’t see how anyone could ever enforce it.

The point I’m trying to make is that people have a choice to go to the college, and they (no doubt) have a choice of whether to join or attend this church. I’m certain it’s not the only one around, so it may be a tad harsh to say that this church is extra-Biblical just because they have a higher standard or a different conviction regarding passages of Scripture than you do. If they are the weaker brother (i.e. they are ones that see more Biblical regulation) then they should not be looked down on, especially if they are doing it to the glory of God. If they, however, are doing it to exercise control, gain power, or force people in subservience outside of a desire to glorify God, then people should be encouraged to get out.

And yes, I totally agree that humility and modesty have to come from the heart first and foremost. However, what we think and do effects our attitude, and to some degree the actions that we performed, though forced at first, can become a part of us. If what they were requiring were anti-Biblical or bad (i.e. forcing their women to be slaves) then they should be confronted.

I was at my discipler’s house yesturday and his wife mentioned that the man who delivered his hay was a ‘real old fashioned, conservative Baptist.’ … as it turns out, she was talking about a church that holds women to a high standard of ‘modesty’. Wives are not to wear pants in public, and their every decision is to be made by their husbands without a word of objection.

While I have no problem with, and might actually be very impressed with and attacted to, a woman who yields to her husband and wears skirts and dresses by choice and exercises other displays of humility and servitude, it defeats the whole purpose when we impose these standards upon an unwilling or reluctant person.

The whole point is that a woman BE humble before God, not that she ACT humble before God. For that matter, this applies to men as well. Remember, however, that Peter (not Paul) was addressing women in the Church, not men in the Church. He never asked men to enforce these guidelines and he never got into the particulars of a women’s dress (any further than he actually did, speaking of elaborate braids etc… refer to the scriptures for clarification.)

The Bible does not make mention of how long a woman’s dress should be, neither is it up to the Church to decide this either by ‘prophecy’, authoritative dictation, popular vote or consensus. The Bible does not in the least recommend these sort of actions, yet they are so often practiced in today’s Church.

For a bit more on this, visit my blog.