VictoryinJesus
Well-Known Member
- Jan 26, 2017
- 10,582
- 8,429
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
The fundamental principle here is that if a believer has scruples about any practice (which in itself may be harmless) the stronger Christian must always accommodate the weaker Christian, and avoid causing offence. For example if a Jew or a Muslim becomes a Christian, it becomes the responsibility of Gentile Christians to avoid pork and bacon when they are invited to a meal. If a Hindu or Buddhist becomes a Christian, this then applies to foods offered to Hindu or Buddhist idols, and should be totally shunned.
once they convert to Christian that is, yea? Until they become brothers? Not before?
Honestly you have stumped me on that passage because the version you shared I’ve never read before, and it made realize I may seriously be mistaken.
Revisiting it again, the Lexicon version, and why that passage became significant to me in the first place, which now I’m doubting based off the version you quoted.
Love makes arrogant. (Oops, correction…not Love) Knowledge makes arrogant.
But love edifies.
maybe I am wrong and there has to be a conversion or belief or choosing first before it can be said “one for whom Christ died.”
still, even if that is the case the topic of that passage seems to be. Edification. “The Building up”…whether it is edification and a building up ONLY of those “for whom Christ died”…as you said those above (Hindu, Muslim, Jews, Buddhist…)only become brothers once they convert to Christianity, then and only then, are Christians who are strong in the faith are then to support the weak? Newly converted? (Did I understand that correctly?)
Last edited: