When All Else Fails Quote a Bible Verse.
I play video games. Not as much now as I did a few years ago, but I still like to play with my son occasionally. I played a lot of Halo. I mean a lot. Every Friday night for 2 years, some friends and I had a LAN party. That was until I got so good no one would play with me anymore. (I will hear about this) Now Halo is a first person shooter designed for a super human to destroy an attacking alien race. It has an M rating. It could be considered violent to those who have grown up in a wimpy environment. I caught some flack over the rating from a few people who said it was too violent. I said, ”Don’t worry I have watched Road Runner drop an anvil on Wile E Coyote’s head for 30 years and I haven’t wanted to do that so I think I will be ok.”
Other antagonist would give me a lesson on “redeeming the time.” To be honest I did it for the fellowship and competition. I was hanging out with my friends, enjoying their company, and enjoying the spanking I gave them every Friday night. Once the LAN parties ended, so did my Halo playing. It was a hobby just like any other hobby the “time conscious” use to relax.
When those against my video gaming realized they were getting nowhere with me they would ultimately reach into their bag of arguments and pull out the big dog. The argument to use when all others have failed. I could always see it coming. I would try to duck, but to no avail it would hit me like a poop from an overhead bird. You know the kind where it drops on your shoulder and you want to wipe it off, but you don’t have anything but your hand to wipe it with. This is what I would hear. “Well, you know not everyone can handle it like you can. You should consider the weaker brother.”
Oh man there it is. You had to have seen it coming. You have heard it all your life. You can’t do that, because of the weaker brother. Beware of the weaker brother. Don’t offend the weaker brother. WTCTWBTS-will this cause the weaker brother to stumble? The one thing I have noticed over the years is very few of these people actually knew a concrete example of the weaker brother. I mean they couldn’t be the weaker brother, because they had spiritual insight to see my flaw, right? They were pointing out to me that what I was doing was offending them.
Of course to them I say, “You are right. We do need to keep the weaker brother in mind.” I suggest we take a good hard look at the “weaker” brother, and the “stronger” brother. The “stronger” brother is the one whose knowledge of scriptures gives him freedom. He is the one who has studied the scripture and understands his Christian liberties. He is the one who understands who he is in Christ. I concede if a “stronger” brother is to be “stronger” then he must be willing to set aside some of those liberties for the sake of those who are weaker. 
So how are we going to define the “weaker” brother? Well, I would say he is the one who doesn’t understand his Christian liberty. While drunkenness is wrong, drinking in moderation is not forbidden. When a legalistic saint asserts that a Christian should not even drink a glass of wine, he should also be ready to wear the label of “WEAKER” brother. When a person declares smoking to be a sin, he is proclaiming one of two things. One, he finds smoking offensive, which may be the case, but that does not make him the weaker brother it just makes him mad or two, he is tempted by my smoking to smoke himself even though it may violate his conscience. The later is a fixable issue, because the weaker brother can be strengthened through proper discipleship.
Someone full of legalism getting offended at me playing video games does not make them the weaker brother. I may make them angry, or it may hurt their feelings. If that is the case then I recommend them asking for forgiveness.



39 Spoke Up:
Scott,
Thanks for this post. A couple of thoughts...
You said "I suggest we take a good hard look at the “weaker” brother, and the “stronger” brother. The “stronger” brother is the one whose knowledge of scriptures gives him freedom. He is the one who has studied the scripture and understands his Christian liberties. He is the one who understands who he is in Christ."
It is not wrong for a person to hold the view that playing video games is not right, as long as they apply it only to themselves. Romans tells us the weaker brother should not pass judgement on the one who plays videogames, Likewise the who who plays should not despise the one who does not play. NOW, here is where your statement about being in Christ and knowing more scripture has problems (or should I say I have a problem with it, maybe I'm wrong) Its not neccesarily that one person knows the bible better or is in Christ more, In God's view both glorify Him (Rm 14:5-6). God has created each of us uniquely and with individual consciences to glorify himself.
In fact the idea of weaker and stronger can swap back and forth on different issues with the same 2 people. I may be "weaker: in one area, like video games, but maybe I'm the stronger" on some other issue where your conscience restricts your Christian liberty.
The idea of stumbling, only means you cause a person to go against their conscience in a particular matter, therby causing them to sin.
It is not neccesarily a matter of maturity. The problem happens when weaker and stronger sin against eachother. The sin of the weaker brother is the judging which you have characterized well in your example of the angry finger pointer. The other sin might be, despising the restrictiveness of the weaker position and trying to convince that person that there is nothing in scripture to say one can't play and say "so why don't you avail yourself of your liberty and play wth me". Both, turn from God glorifying freedom and God glorifying restriction into plain old sin.
Blessings,
Marc
Scott,
Don't worry, I don't think gaming makes you a sinner; it just makes you a geek. It makes you a double geek if you are that loser who beats me in Halo every time because you know where all the weapons and "power ups" are stashed and where every sniper position is located.
Here's lobbing a sticky grenade at you...
My advise is not to invite any weaker brothers.
Has anyone established that playing a game like Halo is considered a sin by God? Quote me that verse.
If it is not a sin, then a "weaker brother" has no sin to commit.
I agree with Scott that some people misuse this verse to try to act spiritual (roll the "r") by actually claiming to be sinning.
Now that is just hypocrisy, confusion, and immaturity.
Fantastic post! I remember well trying (in vain) to make this very point with some folks who thought that drinking any amount of alcohol (including the thimble full of real wine at communion) was sin. We went through the Bible showing how the Bible always condemned drunkeness, but never the moderate use of alcohol. We went through the verses where God actually commends and commands the moderate use of alcohol (It is God's gift to men...thus commended...like Psalm 104:14 He makes grass grow for the cattle, and plants for man to cultivate-- bringing forth food from the earth: 15 wine that gladdens the heart of man... It is also part of the commanded worship of God in the OT... Deuteronomy 14:26 "You may spend the money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household.)
But then the "trump" card was played...what about the weaker brother! Well, I told them, that their abstinence, while allowable, made them the weaker brother. They didn't like that at all. They thought their non use made them more spiritual. I pointed out that it was not their use or non use of alcohol that was the point, but that they thought all use of alcohol was sinful. The point was that they were forbidding something to everyone (not just themselves) that God had not forbidden. Therefore, they were weak. They didn't like that one bit. So I quoted RC Sproul to them..." there is a big difference between GIVING offence and TAKING offence". If I invite you to my home knowing that you abstain from all alcohol and all I give you drink with the meal is a glass of wine (hoping to force you to drink) then I am GIVING offense. But if I go to a restaurant with my wife and on my own decide to have a glass of wine with my meal and you see it and don't like it...but don't actually drink...then you have TAKEN offense and that is your problem, not mine. Paul seems to be saying that it is not so much that people might get upset, but that people with a weak conscience might be made bold to actually DO something that they thought was a sin. I think we need more clarity within the Church on these issues and your post does a great job! Keep it up guys...you all are a regular stop for me everyday!! BTW, I love playing Halo and Halo 2 on xbox live, but I stink...I am usually the guy helping everybody else win with my name down at the bottom of the list for number of kills. We should exchange online names and pick a time to meet and play! I'm game!
grace and peace,
TEXpresby
wackybilbofett
Jason,
I play DOA HALO etc... not as much anymore due to time constraints etc. (Just so you now I'm not agin 'em). BUT, There are matters that are "sins" for some but not for others. Playing HALO is not the sin issue, going against your conscience is the sin. For example, someone may determine that the game is too violent or a poor use of time (stewardship issue) and therfore decides they shouldn't play it. For that person to then go against their conscience in this matter is sin.
It is also sin for that person to hold you to their conscience. I think that is the rub and issue of Rom 14. Weaker doesn't neccesarily equate to worse... see my post above.
The danger I see is this idea of absolutism in regards to what is sin... your statement "Has anyone established that playing a game like Halo is considered a sin by God? Quote me that verse." if you were joking I apologize, in which case I'm a moron, but if you were not, I think there are plenty of examples of grey areas you can think of that you limit yourself in due to your conscience that aren't spelled out as sins explicitly in scripture.
BLAH, BLAH... I'm getting tired of hearing myself pontificate...
Keep up the good work guys, I really enjoy your blog!
Marc
Okay Tex just posted and I must respond.
Hi Tex,
The fact that the people in your example tried to impose their view on you is NOT what makes them the "weaker" brother. What they did was a sin, not "weakness". The "weaker" position is always that of the one with a more restrictive view, in other words the one with less liberty in their conscience. Paul is clearly saying let each of you, whether in the weak or strong position, be convinced in your own mind. He is not saying if you hold a more restrictive view become less restrictive, he is saying "don't judge" the view with more liberty.
It is important we understand what Paul is saying here, otherwise we think that if we have more liberty in our view we are somehow more spiritual then those who, for conscience sake, choose to abstain from something.
Alright!!! Enough of me!!!
So true, the "Weaker Brother" reasoning is often busted out when the person has nothing else to say. That or the "You could be using that time to read the Bible" reasoning. Which while technically true, according to that just about everything else one could ever do could conceivalby be considered as sin.
The guys in my Bible study and I used to have Halo Nigts with all 16 players going at it. I was the guy who barely managed to get out of last place and who became extatic when I finally got a double kill. Fellowship at its finest!
Speaking of kills, c-train, your blog is a riot! I will stop by for a daily laugh. Keep it up.
BTW, of all the dogs, our Rottweiler Fide-O mascot rules the neighborhood.
I forget who it was who pointed out the difference between "the weaker brother" and "the leagalist"
"The legalist" may indeed be weaker in some ways, but not know it. We should do those things before them to show God's grace.
Just as Jesus had fellowship with the unclean, and ate & drank with sinners right before the pharisees.
He did not condone the sinners, but He didn't let legalism get in the way.
There truly are "weaker brothers" who need to be considered--but first make sure it's not legalism rearing its ugly head.
Rereading my comments, I noticed I failed to mention that I agree with the overall thrust of this post and have experienced it often; that is the playing of the "Weaker Brother" card. And to those types I raise my beer in salute to you!
Well I raise something else.
But in agreement--I don't like the taste of beer.
Pilgrim, the legalist may be weaker brothers, but they are not the ones Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8 are talking about.
They cause themselves to sin. I like what Tex said about Taking Offense. That is what the legalist does.
Although I have been known to exercise my Christian liberty, still, I wouldn't bring a sixer to the next church potluck. There's a point when it just becomes flaunting
Weaker and Stronger, huh? By this rationale some of you guys would be forced to consider John MacArthur and John Piper (and other "modern greats" I'm sure) to be weaker brothers because of their abstinence from alcohol...and I might add they are both pretty outspoken about Hollywood entertainment as well. And I doubt Piper or J-Mac play video games…unless of course it's Pac-Man. And we shouldn't feel bad about munching computerized pellets (although we should feel sorry for the poor ghosts after Pac-Man eats a power-pellet and starts terrorizing them…but hey, those ghosts had it coming to 'em, so no, we don't feel bad for them at all!) Interesting rationale, really...I gotta' meet you guys. You must be some seriously strong dudes indeed!
My take on all of this:
What's the posture of your heart? Do you honestly care about your "weaker" brother and his concern (erroneous or not) or just your own justification of a certain act? Surely we must have some common boundaries shared by all, but more importantly, expected by God. I mean, you don't believe that we can be so strong that we have the liberty to murder or commit adultery, right? Adultery...hmmm. Since we know that Jesus told us you don't actually have to commit the "act" to be quilty of this sin...how does that relate to video games or movies which contain "acts" of people being killed (hate)? Any difference? Yes, I know...I KNOW! In Halo you are killing aliens (it's okay to hate aliens!)...so it's not realistic, just make believe (although Art Bell would strongly disagree with us on that). Yes, I myself have been lame enough use that excuse on my wife so I wouldn't feel guilty about playing Two Towers. Whelp, I better get back to killing some Orcs...
I know this refers to a "brother", but I have heard the argument also made that my actions in these grey areas may "stumble" the unsaved....
The idea that we may be the only Bible they read and in thier eyes we may appear no different than the world. What do you think?
I do think there needs to be an enormous keg of grace offered to any one who may feel offended about specific areas of Christian liberty. One's personal upbringing, past addictions and length of time as a believer possibly play into the perceived sin issue for that person. Just pour them a tall cool one in Christ's name with a side of grace.
Piper on Romans 14:1-6:
the weaker brother.
and... Romans 14:1-9
Each One Should Be Fully Convinced in His Own Mind.
Nice. Someone needs to write a book called "Brothers, we are not professional weaker brothers".
Theosobes,
Jesus ate and drank with sinners but did not sin. I would say we follow him in that... of course, how that looks will depend on the circumstance, wisdom, discernment and our sensitivity to the spirit in any given context.
As to your second statement. AGREED. The point of Paul is for the body to love eachother, not to come to some agreement about contested issues of eating and drinking. Loving deference should be our primary inclination, but pacifying legalism by agreeing to its demands from those in the body is a different matter, and I think may need to be confronted before it grows. I Believe this is one point Scott is making.
Biblical Love wears many faces, does it not?
Blueraja, I thought you were just really, really smart... you are funny too!
Blueraja, I was beginning to wonder about your sense of humor, but that is really funny.
I love it when people make up book titles. We do it around the office all the time.
In fact maybe we should start a blog post and see what book titles people can come up with.
I like "40 Days to Sinless Perfection"
scott-you said-
"Pilgrim, the legalist may be weaker brothers, but they are not the ones Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8 are talking about."
That was actually my point.
Sorry if I failed to get it across, or if I'm misreading yours.
I also play my share of video games, usually of the PC variety (but I agree with the sentiments in this post anyway).
And I like long walks on the beach. Favorite color: Chartreuse.
As for the complementary comments, I'm blushing; not that you could tell, siince I'm also Indian.
Will someone kindly outline what freedoms and liberties are being considered, in respect to what the scriptures say they are?
I would not consider John MacArthur and John Piper to be weaker brothers because of their abstinence from alcohol. I too believe in abstinence from alcohol, and I am quite confident that there is no possibility of any of the three of us "stumbling" in that area.
Nor do I "take offense" at those who choose to lose their sober-mindedness. I actually think that ministers who drink have impaired their ability to be trustworthy and effective in season and out of season.
And if that offends you, then who is weaker?
Well put, Jason!
Bottom line:
If Christ were to have a glass of wine and notice that he was causing another brother to "stumble", would he put the glass down and go and talk with the poor chap or bring the glass of wine over and justify why it was okay? Insert "video game" for "glass of wine" if you'd like.
Christ could have one of two responses (or maybe there's multiple responses...)
1. Stop doing what he is doing because it's making or tempting his brother to fall into sin...
2. Continue doing what he is doing because the offended brother is in fact sinning by being judgemental or legalistic.
Either way, I have to believe that Jesus would address the issue...or at least would want us to address the issue.
So where do we stand? I believe we have some of both here. I would guess the majority of all these cases of "Weaker Brother" sucker-punches are probably a case of one guy not wanting to give up what he's doing (even if its "not okay") and the other guy not wanting to believe one of his Christian friends could partake in such a heathen act(even if it is "okay").
Okay?
Mike in your senario that person is not biblical weaker brother that those two passages are talking about. Don't confuse legalism with the same weakness of 1 Cor 8.
Unless I am missing something, isn't the context of the discussion in the scripture being referred to, about eating meat and drinking wine that was offered to idols? It is not the meat or wine that was the problem, but the fact that it was offered to idols! And the ONLY reason the brother is called weaker is due to his lack of knowledge on the freedom he has now gained through Christ.
The one that is considered stronger is so because of his understanding of this freedom. But both give God the glory do they not? This has nothing to do with casual drinking or drinking to help the stomach (a wild card played way to often that is RARELY practiced) and it certainly has nothing to do with video games or the idiot box!
Their freedom was from the law! The condemdation of the law.....but not from their responsibility as Christians. There are SOoooo many scriptures that would be more applicable as to why you shouldn't drink, play video games or whatever you do to waste God's time that He has so graciously given to us.
And what is legalism? Is this a theological term found in scriptures? Does it apply to this?
1Co 10:31 Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
1Co 10:32 Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God;
1Co 10:33 just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many, so that they may be saved.
If this is your heart in playing a video game....then rock on!
I also may be missing something...I think Jason, then Marc, and lastly Alex has touched on the heart of the issue- that is, from the perspective of weaker/stronger brother and legalism.
Jason asked:
Has anyone established that playing a game like Halo is considered a sin by God? Quote me that verse.
Marc responded:
..."sins" for some but not for others. Playing HALO is not the sin issue, going against your conscience is the sin...
First, after I confessed Christ, I continued to do things evil in God's sight, most assuredly, for 4 years. All the while, not once was my conscience pricked. Thus, your conscience may be tempered because of your lack of knowledge of Scripture and your lack of love and knowledge of God. Therefore, just because you go against your conscience on a matter has no bearing on its inherent sinfulness. I have to reject the notion that your conscience (rather than faith) has any bearing on what is sinful.
Rom 14: 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.
We must keep in mind that "what he approves" isn't anything you have the ability to approve. Paul just finished in chapter 13 talking about walking properly in your behavior. In chapter 15, Paul makes crystal clear that you are to bear the pain of the weaker brothers, for the joy set before Him even Christ did not seek to please Himself.
And Alex pontificated:
Will someone kindly outline what freedoms and liberties are being considered, in respect to what the scriptures say they are?
This is the issue: what are Christian liberties in regards to video games? Christian liberties are not applied universally for every activity that we may be involved in. Therefore, this scripture is not rightly applied to whether video games are right or wrong. So, the point is (mostly) that this scripture (Rom14) is misapplied in this instance. But I think the video game issue needs to be addressed, along with watching football, playing golf, and a whole host of activities we pour an inordinate amount of time into.
Okay...I think I'm gettin' it. Fide-O and the comment folks may have just kicked-me-some-knowledge. Sweet, now I can play Halo guilt free! Kidding...
I do want to stress the importance of our love here. I mean sometimes those that use the "weaker" brother argument are doing so out of ignorance. I know I have. It's confusing. And I don't think I'm a total ignoramus. Anyhow, my motive, as are others I'm sure, have always been from a standpoint of passion for truth and purity. I may be sincerly confused...but at least I'm sincere. That doesn't make me a legalist...or angry...or mean. I love my brother and want to know why he spends his time doing "that" while I decide to abstain from "that". All I want is to glorify God. The sharpening iron thing is hard...you really gotta' put yourself out there sometimes.
Alex said, There are SOoooo many scriptures that would be more applicable as to why you shouldn't drink, play video games or whatever you do to waste God's time that He has so graciously given to us.
I must take exception to your indication that drinking alcohol is a waste of time, any more than drinking another beverage is. Now if you drink to drunkenness, you are violating a whole host of Scriptural commands (besides being a waste of time), but that is an entirely different matter. If you eat to the point of gluttony, that is also a Spiritual problem. It's not as condemned because it's effects aren't as visible as the effects of drunkenness, but it's just as wrong.
----------
In the past, I did not drink and looked down upon those who did. At some point while I was in Bible college, I came to the realization that Scripture did not condemn alcohol, but I still did not partake because of the old standby "well, I might be an alcoholic but I don't know so I won't take that chance," (which is completely bogus, I think now). At this point, I did my best to not look down on others who did drink.
There was a period of time during this where I would drink a minimum of 5 cans of Coca-Cola per day, with some 2-liters interspersed here and there. This was gluttonous and wrong. I also, for years, over-indulged my passion for coffee. This was also wrong. I also had problems with overeating.
About the time my church started doing a Sunday School series on alcohol, I began studying the issue of alcohol, which made me start evaluating areas in my life in which I might be gluttonous. I realized that I eat too much and drink too much coffee, and started bringing these items into subjection to Christ.
I also started drinking alcohol about this time, because I finally realized that the Bible doesn't just allow the drinking of alcohol, but it praises it in moderation, not just because it's tasty, but for the effect it has.
What's interesting is that even unbelievers realize that the Bible doesn't condemn alcohol, and it seems to me that my abstinence was a worse testimony than proper use of alcohol, because it had no Scriptural basis.
With God's help, my usage of alcohol will be such that I glorify the giver of the good gift, and don't become absorbed with the gift itself.
I know this is a bit rambling and maybe off topic, but if you think so, you must be a weaker brother [he said with tongue firmly in cheek]. If anyone is interested in reading the article I wrote on alcohol after studying the issue out, you can find it at my personal blog site, http://fitzage.com/?q=node/32 or a site my brother and I have put together, http://celestialonline.com/?p=19.
ttfn
Matt
I apologize for forgetting to make those into links.
Here they are in link form:
My Site
Other Site
Scott - my opinion, but I do believe your new hobby here at FIDE-O has benefited you and the kingdom far more than your amoral video gaming. I say keep up blogging about Christ more than you are blasting cartoon characters.
Alex Dunn said...
Unless I am missing something,...
Alex I think you are missing something, but that may be my fault. Maybe I wasn't as clear as I thought. This post wasn't really about video games or drinking. It was about using the weaker brother arguments in situations where it doesn't apply. My point was that most of the people who use that argument are really saying I don't like it when you play video games, drink alchohol, go to movies, drive a Ford etc. Whether they like or not has nothing to do with the Romans 14 or 1 Corinthians passages. The very fact that they have taken offense reveals to me that they are not the weaker brother, because I have in no way tempted them to do the same. I would say, however, that unless they have a biblical reason for not likeing it then they have sinned. Which I think is the point Tony was trying to make in his "Off the Fence on Offense" blog.
Bret I have to say blogging has been more fun that Halo.
Does any of this weaker brother, stumbling stuff apply to raising our kids? We are to be good stewards of the safe keeping of the children that God has entrusted to our care. So it made me think about the children God has placed in our lives, our own, the Sunday School kids, etc... Does anything, at all, in my life, potentially become a stumbling block for them? And am I willing to surrender that right to God, for their sake? What is okay for this gander, may not be okay for the gooslings. Just another convicting moment brought to you by the nice fellow on this blog.
Theosobes, I will go into more detail in a few days, but the short answer to your question is no. You cannot use the weaker brother argument in the case of general child rearing. The text of Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8 don't allow for it unless it is an occasion that would fit the text.
You can use the stumbling block verses that the gospels quote of Jesus and some Proverbs verses, but they are not the same argument as the Romans and 1 Corinthians verses though.
Scott....the comment section of this post is so long now I am not sure if you will get this, but thanks for clearing that up.
That is the rub sometimes with post and email, it can be hard to clearly communicate what you are saying and how you are saying it.
Of course there is another possibility, that the person actually is concerned with the weaker brother or sister.
I don't think that this is the case with video games, unless you're playing video games in Sunday School. In the example you gave, it seems to be very much a cop out for someone to try to use Romans14.
In the case of alcohol, Romans 14 definitely applies if it is within the context of church. Just like Paul's audience, there are people who come into our churches who have lost the ability physically and morally to drink safely. Flaunting your liberty in church by drinking wine only, or thinking that all you need to do is 'disciple them' to drink or to teach moderation is very unloving.
That's my belated $.02
Post a Comment