tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post8547546622336159716..comments2023-11-05T02:55:10.230-06:00Comments on Gottesdienst Online: On Offending the WeakPr. H. R.http://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-65503152541323096422009-06-01T12:26:32.813-05:002009-06-01T12:26:32.813-05:00Actually, "Carol" was me, signed in under my wife'...Actually, "Carol" was me, signed in under my wife's name.Fr BFEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14554699361739289492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-4390461637659795252009-06-01T09:49:01.535-05:002009-06-01T09:49:01.535-05:00Ryan,
You're right, Romans 14 is another sedes re...Ryan,<br /><br />You're right, Romans 14 is another sedes regarding the weaker brother: "If thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with meat, for whom Christ died" (v15).<br /><br />As you are probably aware, this passage is also often abused, as it happens. As I understand it, the meat referred to here is meat sacrificed to idols, a point often missed when the passage is generally used in support of refraining from practices anyone might consider offensive for any reason.Carol Eckardthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04739782570435377195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-54537209234428696642009-06-01T09:00:47.574-05:002009-06-01T09:00:47.574-05:00Good points, but I thought the "weaker brother" is...Good points, but I thought the "weaker brother" issue was from Romans 14. I see 1 Cor. 9:22 used more as a do whatever you want for the sake of evangelism excuse.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-81787676844861238802009-05-31T13:07:35.160-05:002009-05-31T13:07:35.160-05:00Pastor Cwirla,
I have wondered about this possi...Pastor Cwirla, <br /><br />I have wondered about this possibility as well, and I think your interpretation has merit, especially due to the fact that the Jews in the area were aware that Timothy's father was a Greek. <br /><br />On the other hand this is a land of Gentiles, and Timothy was already well spoken of among "the brethren" there, so it seems unlikely that Paul would have needed to circumcise him out of love for them. <br /><br />More likely, it seems to me, is the necessity that Paul affirm that the Torah is the Word of God, among the Gentiles who were not given to accepting any of it.<br /><br />But admittedly the passage itself is a bit of a mystery.Fr BFEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14554699361739289492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-90654364612992889262009-05-30T22:38:18.594-05:002009-05-30T22:38:18.594-05:00"Thus we find that in both cases, Paul did the 'of...<I>"Thus we find that in both cases, Paul did the 'offensive' things. The uncircumcised Titus was an offense to the Jews who insisted upon circumcision, while the circumcised Timothy was an offense to the Greeks who were inclined to reject Moses altogether."</I>I don't see how the conclusion follows from the evidence of the text. Luke explicitly tells us that Paul circumcised Timothy "because of the Jews who lived in that area" (Acts 16:3) not because of the Gentiles in the area to which they were heading.<br /><br />Another explanation would be that circumcision would grant Timothy access to the synagogues. In Galatians 2, Paul is making an argument from precedent that the Jerusalem church did not compel Titus to be circumcised in spite of clamorings by the "false brethren."<br /><br />So it would seem that in the case of Timothy, Paul was going out of his way not to offend the Jews on the principle of love, but in the case of Titus, he would not relent under pressure from the legalists on the principle of the Gospel (Gal 2:5).WM Cwirlahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12317197804776939257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-58887314976164646342009-05-30T22:34:11.774-05:002009-05-30T22:34:11.774-05:00It would seem to rule out what some have called, a...It would seem to rule out what some have called, admittedly in jest, the "Weaker Brother Gambit"...Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09360602965070109675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-64186077163644524022009-05-30T21:32:53.265-05:002009-05-30T21:32:53.265-05:00Interesting observation, Pastor Eckardt. Good poi...Interesting observation, Pastor Eckardt. Good point and nicely stated.Rev. Rick Stuckwischhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664716292792101540noreply@blogger.com