Upholding Both Law & LIBERTY - Three Guiding Principles

I can't tell you how many discussions (COUGH...arguments...COUGH) I've had over the years with fellow believers about moral issues, and specifically, whether certain acts are sinful or not.

Is it sinful to wear shorts or skirts that don't reach your knees? Is it sinful to go to public pools or beaches where there is rampant immodesty? Is it sinful to have one drink...or two? Is it sinful to buy a lottery ticket or gamble? Is it sinful to smoke? If recreational marijuana is legalized, would it be wrong to indulge on occasion? In 'dating' relationships, where is the line delineating appropriate and inappropriate behavior? Is it sinful to go to the prom? Is it sinful to cuss?

And the list goes on...

If you've been active in the faith for any real length of time, I'm sure you've seen brethren discuss these questions, and many others. If you have observed such exchanges, I'm sure you've seen brethren get heated, perhaps even animated or angry. Perhaps you've studied these issues and have your own convictions. Perhaps you've been involved in these arguments yourself and have accused others of either being "liberal" or "Pharisaical."

I'm not here today to answer all of the above moral questions. I am here, however, to share with you three successive scriptural points that might help you to better approach these questions. This might come across as revolutionary or "liberal" - I don't know - but in my mind right now, these points really seem very simple and absolutely undeniable.

First of all, if it is our desire to uphold God's word alone - to neither add nor take away from it and to "speak where the Bible speaks and remain silent where it is silent" - then we cannot condemn what God has not condemned. And I'm speaking here, not of our worship and service to God, but of daily choices that fall into the realm of "Christian liberty."

Isn't this the point of Romans 14? Paul says, "Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things" (vs. 1). There are certainly matters of faith and law where God has spoken and we must obey. In these cases, we should make efforts to help our brethren recognize and overcome their sin (1 Cor. 5; Gal. 6:1; Jude 22-23). But if God has not condemned something, neither can we condemn it.

The second point is this: we cannot condemn something on the basis of principle(s) alone. Now, what do I mean by "principle(s)," as this word may mean different things to different people. What I am referring to are guidelines or rules that are general, rather than specific.

The command to avoid fornication, outbursts of wrath and drunkenness in Galatians 5:19-21 is quite specific, and therefore quite plain. On the other hand, the command to "make no provision for the flesh" (Romans 13:14) is general and may manifest itself differently in the lives of believers who have their own unique circumstances, personalities, strengths and weaknesses. 

It is also a matter of general principle that we must be shining lights and thus examples of godly conduct in a sinful world (Matt. 5:13-16; 1 Cor. 10:31; Phil. 2:15). One person may believe that going to the theater to watch a certain PG13 movie will set a bad example for others, while another person believes that it is perfectly acceptable to see that same movie. Do you see the point?

Principles are not specific; they are, by definition, general. We can bind the principle and encourage people to make wise choices, but in the end, we cannot apply the principle to a specific situation or choice, condemn the specific situation or choice and then judge (criticize) others for violating the principle. Maybe the principle was violated. Maybe it wasn't. Can we say what was in their heart at the time? Or can we necessarily judge the effects of their decision on others?

Finally, if it isn't already clear from what I have said, we cannot erect barriers for our brethren that God Himself has not erected. To put it another way, we have no right to add to God's definition of righteousness or to have higher expectations than does God! Again, this is the whole point of Romans 14! If it truly is a matter of liberty (not law), we must leave it to the realm of personal judgment. Consider this lengthy excerpt from Romans 14...

"Who are you to judge another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it...For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ" (vs. 4-10).

It's easier when everything is black and white. It makes things clearer for us and gives us the control that we so desperately want (over ourselves and others). But not everything is black and white. 

And sure, I understand that such open conversation about liberty may give weaker Christians the excuse they've been looking for to indulge the flesh. The proper reaction, however, shouldn't be to create our own system of bylaws to further restrict moral behavior (to ensure compliance), but rather to encourage these weaker brethren to grow in wisdom. This is why Paul writes, "For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another" (Galatians 5:13).

I also agree that unity among God's people is critical! But true unity is achieved, not when we supplement God's law to forcibly fit others into our mold, but when we respect all of God's word - both what it does say and what it doesn't say.

In the end, we ought to teach the principles of Scripture and encourage our brethren to honestly apply these principles to their lives. But the second we begin micromanaging for all others how each of these principles relate to specific situations and condemn them where God has not...that's the very second we become guilty of usurping Christ's role as Judge...

"Do not speak evil of one another, brethren. He who speaks evil of a brother and judges his brother, speaks evil of the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy. Who are you to judge another?" (James 4:11-12)

I can tell you that I've been guilty of this more than I want to admit. It grieves me in my heart to think of the numerous ways I have judged and condemned brethren in my heart. I am in anguish over the very notion that my judgmental attitude may have been a stumbling-block to others in the past. Have I turned truth-seekers away from the Lord or burdened babes in Christ beyond what they were capable of at the time? If I have, I pray for God's mercy and forgiveness.

But I cannot dwell on the past. All I can do is be committed today and in the future to upholding both God's standard of law as well as His standard of liberty.

Will you join me in this commitment?

NOTE: If you disagree with this article, you are burdened with proving from the Scriptures that we can unilaterally condemn something on the basis of principle(s) alone. PLEASE let me know if this is something that you believe can be defended from God's word.