Lesson 13 December 23-29/30 Christian Living

Blue Script= Double underline= Boxed= Biblical Text & Green Script: A Possible Red Script = Directive Important to remember SDA Commentary Answer Main Point Reference

.Memory Text: “Why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (Romans 14:10). We are now in the last part of our study of Romans, the book from which the Protestant Reformation was born - the book that more than any other should, indeed, show us why we are Protestants and why we must remain that way. As Protestants, and especially as Seventh-day Adventists, we rest on the principle of Sola Scriptura, the Bible alone as the standard of faith. And it is from the Bible that we have learned the same truth that caused our spiritual forefather centuries ago to break from Rome - the great truth of salvation by faith, a truth so powerfully expressed in Paul’s epistles to the Romans. Perhaps the whole thing can be summarized by the pagan jailer’s question, “What must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30). In Romans, we got the answer to that question - and the answer was not what the church was giving at the time of Luther. Hence, the Reformation began, and here we are today. In this, the last section, Paul touches on other topics, perhaps not as central to his main theme, yet important enough to be included in the letter. Thus, for us, they are sacred Scripture, as well. How did Paul end this letter, what did he write, and what truths are there for us, the heirs not just of Paul but, indeed, of our Protestant forefathers?

Sunday December 24 Weak in Faith In Romans 14:1-3, the question concerns the eating of meats that may have been sacrificed to idols. The Jerusalem council (Acts 15) ruled that Gentile converts should refrain from eating such foods. But there was always the question as to whether meats sold in public markets had come from animals sacrificed to idols (see 1 Cor. 10:25). Some Christians didn’t care about that at all; others, if there were the slightest doubt, chose to eat vegetables instead. The issue had nothing to do with the question of vegetarianism and healthful living. Nor is Paul implying in this passage that the distinction between clean and unclean meats has been abolished. This is not the subject under consideration. If the words “he may eat all things” (Rom. 14:2) were taken to mean that now any animal, clean or otherwise, could be eaten, they would be misapplied. Comparison with other New Testament passages would rule against such an application. Meanwhile, to “receive” one weak in the faith meant to accord him or her full membership and social status. The person was not to be argued with but given the right to his or her opinion. What principle should we take, then, from Romans 14:1-3?

http://www.drcolinadunbar.com/4th-qrt-2017-sabbath-school-lessons.html 2 Romans 14:1-3 (The Law of Liberty) 1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2 For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. 3 Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 1. Weak in the faith. That is, one who has but a limited grasp of the principles of righteousness. He is eager to be saved and is willing to do whatever he believes is required of him. But in the immaturity of his Christian experience (see Heb. 5:11 to 6:2), and probably also as the result of former education and belief, he attempts to make his salvation more certain by the observance of certain rules and regulations that are in reality not binding upon him. To him these regulations assume great importance. He regards them as absolutely binding upon him for salvation, and he is distressed and confused when he sees other Christians about him, especially those who seem to be more experienced, who do not share his scruples. Paul’s statements in Rom. 14 have been variously interpreted, and have been used by some: (1) to disparage a vegetarian diet, (2) to abolish the distinction between clean and unclean meats, and (3) to remove all distinction between days, thus abolishing the seventh-day Sabbath. That Paul is doing none of these three becomes evident when this chapter is studied in the light of certain religious and related problems that troubled some of the 1st-century Christians. Paul mentions various problems that are an occasion of misunderstanding between brethren: (1) those relating to diet (v. 2), and (2) those relating to the observance of certain days (vs. 5, 6). In 1 Cor. 8 the problem of the strong versus the weak brother, as regards diet, is also dealt with. The letter to the Corinthians was written less than a year before that to the Romans. It seems reasonable to conclude that in 1 Cor. 8 and Rom. 14 Paul is dealing with essentially the same problem. In Corinthians the problem is identified as the propriety of eating foods sacrificed to idols. According to the ancient practice pagan priests carried on an extensive merchandise of the animal sacrifices offered to idols. Paul told the Corinthian believers—converts both from Judaism and from paganism—that inasmuch as an idol was nothing there was no wrong, per se, in eating foods dedicated to it. However, he explains, because of earlier background and training, and differences in spiritual discernment, not all had this “knowledge” and could not with a free conscience eat such foods (see on 1 Cor. 8). Hence Paul urged those without scruples regarding these foods not to place a stumbling block in a brother’s way by indulging in them (Rom. 14:13). His admonition is thus in harmony with the decision of the Jerusalem Council, and doubtless throws light on at least one reason why that council took the stand it did on this subject (see on Acts 15). Probably for fear of offending in this matter some Christians abstained from flesh foods entirely, which means that their food was restricted to “herbs,” that is, vegetables (see Rom. 14:2). Paul is not speaking of foods hygienically harmful. He is not suggesting that the Christian of strong faith may eat anything, regardless of its effect upon his physical well-being. He has already made plain, in ch. 12:1, that the true believer will see to it that his body is preserved holy and acceptable to God as a living sacrifice. The man of strong faith will regard it as an act of spiritual worship to maintain good health (Rom. 12:1; 1 Cor. 10:31). A further fact throws light on the problems Paul is discussing. Only dimly, at first, did many Jewish Christians comprehend that the ceremonial law had met its fulfillment in Christ (see on Col. 2:14–16) and was henceforth no longer binding. Indeed, the first Christians were not called upon abruptly to cease attendance at the annual Jewish feasts or to repudiate at once all ceremonial rites. Under the ceremonial law the Jews were to keep seven annual sabbaths. Paul himself attended a number of the feasts after his conversion (Acts 18:21; etc.). Though he taught that circumcision was nothing (1 Cor. 7:19), he had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:3), and agreed to fulfill a vow according to the stipulations of the ancient code (Acts 21:20–27). Under the circumstances it appeared best to allow the various elements of the Jewish ceremonial law gradually to disappear as the mind and conscience became enlightened. Thus, it was inevitable that among Jewish Christians there would arise questions as to the propriety of keeping certain “days”—Jewish holydays, in connection with their annual feasts (see Lev. 23:1–44; see on Col. 2:14–17). In view of these facts it becomes evident that Paul, in Rom. 14, is not (1) disparaging a diet of “herbs” (vegetables), or (2) doing away with the age-old Biblical distinction between clean and unclean meats, or (3) abolishing the seventh-day Sabbath of the moral law (see on ch. 3:31). The person who thus claims must read into Paul’s argument something that is not there. That Paul does not teach or even imply the abolition of the seventh-day Sabbath has been recognized by such conservative commentators, for example, as Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, in their comment on ch. 14:5, 6: “From this passage about the observance of days, Alford unhappily infers that such language could not have been used if the sabbath-law had been in force under the Gospel in any form. Certainly it could not, if the sabbath were merely one of the Jewish festival days; but it will not do to take this for granted merely because it was observed under the Mosaic economy. And certainly if the sabbath was more ancient than Judaism; if, even under Judaism, it was enshrined amongst the eternal sanctities of the Decalogue, uttered, as no other parts of Judaism were, amidst the terrors of Sinai; and if the Lawgiver Himself said of it when on earth, ‘The Son of man is LORD EVEN OF THE SABBATH DAY’ (see Mark 2:28)—it will be hard to show that the apostle must have meant it to be ranked by his readers amongst those vanished Jewish festival days, which only ‘weakness’ could imagine to be still in force—a weakness which those who had

[Type text] 3

more light ought, out of love, merely to bear with.” In Rom. 14:1 to 15:14 Paul urges the stronger Christians to give sympathetic consideration to the problems of their weaker brethren. As in chs. 12 and 13, he shows that the source of unity and peace in the church is genuine Christian love. This same love and mutual respect will ensure continuing harmony among the body of believers, in spite of differing opinions and scruples in matters of religion.1 A Possible Answer: Everyone must be given the freedom without judgment to follow their conscience in areas that do not conflict with Bible truth. It’s important, too, to realize that in Romans 14:3 Paul does not speak negatively of the one “weak in the faith” in Romans 14:1. Nor does he give this person advice as to how to become strong. So far as God is concerned, the overscrupulous Christian (judged overscrupulous, apparently, not by God but by his or her fellow Christians) is accepted. “God hath received him.” How does Romans 14:4 amplify what we’ve just looked at?

Romans 14:4 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. 4. Thou that judgest. Paul is addressing the weak brother, since “judgest” corresponds to “judge” in v. 3. Another man’s servant... The Greek word here used for “servant” (oiketēs) is rare in the NT, occurring only here and in Luke 16:13; Acts 10:7; 1 Peter 2:18. It denotes a “household servant,” distinguished from an ordinary slave, as being more closely connected with the family. The “weak” (Rom. 14:1) believer is condemning one of God’s servants, one who is responsible to God, not to the criticizing fellow servant. Standeth. Some have understood this to mean moral and spiritual steadfastness (cf. 1 Cor. 16:13; Phil. 1:27); others, acquittal or approval in the sight of God (cf. Ps. 1:5). Falleth. In contrast with “standeth” (see above). Some view this as moral and spiritual failure (cf. ch. 11:11, 22), others as condemnation or disapproval in the judgment. Both terms are used in the first of these two senses in 1 Cor. 10:12, “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” Holden up. Literally, “made to stand.” In spite of the criticisms of his censorious brethren, the believer who in faith exercises his Christian freedom in the matters under question will be strengthened and supported by his Master. The one whose faith is “weak” (v. 1) may even fear that the stronger brother is in great danger by not sharing his scruples. But Paul suggests that whatever the danger, the Master, who called His servant to freedom (Gal. 5:13), has power to preserve him from the perils that freedom involves, which perils the “weak” (v. 1) brother is seeking to avoid by other means. Some, however, interpret this phrase to refer to acquittal in the judgment. A Possible Answer: It amplifies what the preceding verses say by stating that it includes even the workers of other people... they too need to be free to do that which doesn’t concern those who may be inclined to judge them. Although we need to keep in mind the principles seen in today’s lesson, are there not times and places where we need to step in and judge, if not a person’s heart, at least his or her actions? A Possible Answer: Yes, most definitely. Are we to step back and say and do nothing in every situation? A Possible Answer: No. Isaiah 56:10 describes watchmen as “dumb dogs, they cannot bark.” How can we know when to speak and when to keep silent? A Possible Answer: First of all, we should pray and ask God to show us what to do. Then we need to ascertain whether or not the individual is teachable and open to what we feel we need to say. Our perimeters of response should include whether or not the issue is a matter that is within our capacity or jurisdiction to deal with. Even in those situations we must make whatever judgment based on evidence/fruit and not hearsay. We must ascertain whether our response is violating the person’s freedom in

1 Nichol, F. D. (Ed.). (1980). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Vol. 6, pp. 633–636). Review and Herald Publishing Association.

http://www.drcolinadunbar.com/4th-qrt-2017-sabbath-school-lessons.html 4 areas that do not conflict with the truth of the Bible as expressed in the established doctrines or guidelines of the church. How do we strike the right balance here? A Possible Answer: Maybe keeping a balance shouldn’t be a priority. We probably should evaluate everything on an individual basis and respond to the promptings of the Holy Spirit as to what we should do. He will guide us particularly because some things need to be said as a witness while other things need to be said with the hope of building the recipient up.

Monday December 25 Before the Judgment Seat Read Romans 14:10. What reason does Paul give here for us to be careful about how we judge others?

Romans 14:10 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. 10. Why dost thou judge? The first part of this verse is emphatically expressed in the Greek: “But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you also, why do you set at nought your brother?” The one judging his brother is the one who “eateth herbs,” and the one setting at nought is the one who conscientiously believes he “may eat all things” (v. 2). We shall all stand. In the Greek the word for “all” is in the position of emphasis. All of us, both weak and strong, are to stand before the divine tribunal. Since all believers are alike subjects and servants of God, and must all stand before the same judgment seat, they have no right to sit in judgment on one another. Such judging usurps a prerogative of God (Rom. 14:10; cf. 2 Cor. 5:10). Of Christ. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading “of God.” The reading “of Christ” may have come in from the parallel passage in 2 Cor. 5:10. God the Father will judge the world through Christ (see Rom. 2:16; cf. Acts 17:31). A Possible Answer: Since all believers are alike subjects and servants of God, and must all stand before the same judgment seat, they have no right to sit in judgment on one another. Such judging usurps a prerogative of God. (ibid, above) We tend to judge others harshly at times, and often for the same things that we do ourselves. Often, though, what we do doesn’t seem as bad to us as when others do the same thing. We might fool ourselves by our hypocrisy, but not God, who warned us: “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?” (Matt. 7:1-4). What is the significance of the statement from the Old Testament that Paul introduced here? Rom. 14:11.

Romans 14:11 For it is written: “As I live, says the Lord, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God.” 11. It is written. In the original quotation from Isaiah the oath of homage expressed by the phrase “shall swear” (cf. Joshua 23:7; 2 Chron. 15:14; Isa. 19:18) marks the submission of the whole world to Jehovah and the solemn confession of His sovereignty. A Possible Answer: The significance is that Paul uses these words to emphasize the universal character of the final judgment.

The citation from Isaiah 45:23 supports the thought that all must appear for judgment. “Every knee” and “every tongue” individualizes the summons. The implication is that each one will have to answer for his or her own life and deeds (Rom. 14:12). No one can answer for another. In this important sense, we are not our brother’s keeper. Keeping the context in mind, how do you understand what Paul is saying in Romans 14:14?

[Type text] 5

Romans 14:14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 14. I know... By this emphatic assertion he shows that consideration for the “weak” (Rom. 14:1) is to be based upon love and not upon a recognition that such scruples are justified. By the Lord Jesus. Or, “in the Lord Jesus.” Paul’s conviction springs from a mind dwelling in communion with Christ and thus enlightened by His Spirit. Compare ch. 9:1. Nothing. That is, in this context, those kinds of foods that Paul has been speaking about here (see on v. 1). The word “nothing” must not be understood in its absolute sense. Words often convey more than one meaning; therefore, the particular definition intended must in each case be determined by the context. For example, when Paul said, “All things are lawful unto me” (1 Cor. 6:12), his statement, when isolated from the context, could be interpreted as a declaration that the apostle was a libertine. The context, which is a warning against immorality, immediately prohibits such a deduction (see comment there). Similarly in Ex. 16:4 the expression “every day” could be interpreted as meaning every day of the week. However, the context shows that the Sabbath is excluded. Unclean. Gr. koinos, literally, “common.” This term was used to describe those things which, though “common” to the world, were forbidden to the pious Jew (see on Mark 7:2). Of itself. The foods that the “weak” (v. 1) brother refrains from eating, but which the strong brother allows, are not the kinds of foods that are unclean in their own nature, but owe their taint to conscientious scruples (see on v. 23). Paul is not here sweeping away all distinctions between foods. The interpretation must be limited to the particular foods under discussion and to the specific problem with which the apostle is dealing, namely, the sympathetic treatment of those whose partly-enlightened consciences prevent their eating certain foods. It is unclean. The uncleanness does not lie in the nature of the food but in the believer’s view of it. The “weak” (v. 1) Christian believes he ought not to eat foods offered to idols, for example, and makes it a matter of conscience to abstain from such foods. So long as he holds this conviction, it would be wrong for him to partake. He may be in error, judged from another’s point of view, but it would not be proper for him to act in violation of what he conscientiously supposes God requires (see v. 23). A Possible Answer: We are to understand that Paul is expressing his own personal, Spirit- enlightened conviction about the Christian’s freedom and right to reject certain scruples to which others hold (cf. 1 Cor. 8:4). The subject is still foods sacrificed to idols. The issue is, clearly, not the distinction between the foods deemed clean and unclean. Paul is saying that there is nothing wrong per se in eating foods that might have been offered to idols. After all, what is an idol anyway? It is nothing (see 1 Cor. 8:4), so who cares if some pagan offered the food to a statue of a frog or a bull? A person should not be made to violate his or her conscience, even if the conscience is overly sensitive. This fact the “strong” brethren apparently did not understand. They despised the scrupulosity of the “weak” brethren and put stumbling blocks in their way. Might you, in your zeal for the Lord, be in danger of what Paul is warning about here? A Possible Answer: Yes, we surely can be. Why must we be careful in not seeking to be the conscience of others, no matter how good our intentions? A Possible Answer: We must be careful because it is not within our prerogative to do so. We place ourselves in a position that God has not put us in. In the end, we would be assuming the position and activity that only God should occupy and do.

Tuesday December 26 No Offense Read Romans 14:15-23 (see also 1 Cor. 8:12, 13). Summarize on the lines below the gist of what Paul is saying.

http://www.drcolinadunbar.com/4th-qrt-2017-sabbath-school-lessons.html 6 Romans 14:15-23 15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 Therefore let us pursue the things, which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. 21 It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. 22 Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin. 15 Be grieved. The weak brother is pained and troubled in conscience by seeing more experienced believers indulging in what he considers sinful. This grief may result in his destruction, for either he may be turned away from the Christian faith, which seems to be associated with practices he regards sinful, or he may be led by the example of his stronger brethren into a cowardly acquiescence in a course of action which to him appears to be sinful (see 1 Cor. 8:10–12). Meat. Gr. brōma, a general term for “food.” Destroy not. Whatever tends to influence anyone to violate his conscience may result in the destruction of his soul. A conscience once violated has been greatly weakened. One violation may lead to another until the soul is destroyed. Therefore a Christian who, by selfish indulgence even in something he regards as perfectly proper, exerts such a destroying influence, is guilty of the loss of a soul for whom Christ died (cf. 1 Cor. 8). Christ died. Christ died to save the “weak” (v. 1) brother, and his fellow believers must not destroy him for the sake of indulgence in certain foods. A very small sacrifice is asked in comparison with what Christ gave. He gave His life. Surely Christians who are strong in faith will be willing to forgo the pleasure of some favorite item of food or drink for the sake of their weaker brother. 17. Joy in the Holy Ghost. This is the holy gladness with which the Spirit of God suffuses those who “life in the Spirit” (Gal. 5:25; cf. Rom. 15:13; Gal. 5:22; 1 Thess. 1:6). Those who are the strongest in faith understand best that the kingdom of God consists in such spiritual graces as these, and not in such material things as food and drink. Consequently as regards their Christian freedom in eating and drinking they would rather curtail their own personal liberty than to have their exercise of such freedom destroy the peace of the church (Rom. 14:13), or lead a weaker brother to do what, for him, would be unrighteous (v. 14), or rob him of his joy in the Spirit by grieving his conscience (v. 15). 23. Faith. Here referring to a conviction of right and wrong, resulting in the determination to do whatever is believed to be God’s will. Paul’s meaning is that if a Christian does not act from strong personal conviction that what he does is right, but, instead, complies weakly with the judgment of others, then his action is sinful. The Christian should never violate his conscience. It may require educating. It may tell him that certain things are wrong that in themselves may not be wrong. But until convinced by the Word and the Spirit of God that a certain course is proper for him, he ought not to pursue it. He must not make others the criterion for his conduct; he must go to the Scriptures and learn for himself his duty in the matter (see 2T 119–124). A Possible Answer: He is saying to not do anything that would cause a person to stumble. It is best not to eat or drink anything that makes your brother’s question the genuineness of your relationship with Christ. The strong man should not let the selfish use of his liberty give occasion to those “weak in the faith” to condemn and speak evil of something that to him is a good thing and a blessing. He should beware lest he give any cause for others to reproach him for the harm his personal conduct may have brought to some who may be viewed as an over-scrupulous brother.

1 Corinthians 8:12, 13 12 But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble. 12. Sin so. He who has the love of Jesus in his heart will not wish to use his liberty in such a way that his brethren are misled. On the contrary, he will be glad to deny himself privileges and pleasures if by so doing he can avoid giving offense to anyone. There is a fallacious idea entertained by some that every man has the right to do what he pleases irrespective of the effect of his conduct upon others, so long as he does nothing contrary to law (cf. Rom. 14:13, 16, 21; 1 Peter 2:15, 16). Strong Christians should be careful to avoid doing that which will offend weak believers, or lay a stumbling block in their path. By causing others to be wrongly influenced, one violates the law that instructs Christians to love their brethren and seek their welfare (see Matt. 22:39; John 15:12, 17; Rom. 13:10; Gal. 5:14; James 2:8). 13. Meat. Gr. brōma, food in general; not only flesh, but all kinds of food. Flesh. Gr. kreas, “flesh.” The

[Type text] 7 word occurs only here and in Rom. 14:21. Flesh foods were particularly involved in sacrifices to idols. Paul was willing to do without food that he might lawfully have eaten, rather than lay a stumbling block in a weak brother’s way. Liberty is valuable, but the weakness of a fellow human being should induce believers to waive their liberty in his interest. Love for one’s neighbors is to be the guiding principle in such matters. Surely the gratification of one’s desires is of much less importance than the salvation of the weak brother who may stumble over one’s exercise of liberty. This principle is applicable to many phases of living, such as recreation, dress, music—in fact, it applies to life in general. The denial of self for the good of others is a prominent feature of the experience of a genuine follower of Jesus (see Matt. 16:24; John 3:30; Rom. 12:10; Rom. 14:7, 13, 15–17; Phil. 2:3, 4). This principle is the essence of the spirit of Jesus, in whose earthly life it was constantly manifest. While the world standeth. Literally, “forever,” here meaning a lifetime (see on Matt. 25:41). What principle can we take from this passage that we can apply in all areas of our life? A Possible Answer: Sacrificially avoid doing anything that would cause a person to stumble. Rather, The strong Christian should be willing to give up his freedom in comparatively inconsequential matters rather than to offend a weaker brother. When contemplating a certain course of action, the Christian will not only ask, Is this lawful? but also, How will this affect my brother’s soul? Or to put it another way, “The denial of self for the good of others is a prominent feature of the experience of a genuine follower of Jesus (see Matt. 16:24; John 3:30; Rom. 12:10; Rom. 14:7, 13, 15–17; Phil. 2:3, 4).”

In Romans 14:17-20 Paul is putting various aspects of Christianity into proper perspective. Although diet is important, Christians should not quarrel over some people’s choices to eat vegetables instead of flesh meats that might have been sacrificed to idols. Instead, they ought to focus on righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. How might we apply this idea to questions of diet today in our church? However much the health message, and especially the teachings on diet, can be a blessing to us, not everyone sees this subject in the same way, and we need to respect those differences. In Romans 14:22, amid all this talk about leaving people to their own conscience, Paul adds a very interesting caveat: “Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves” (NIV). What warning is Paul giving here? A Possible Answer: Paul is warning us to not permit our liberties (which in itself may cause another person to sin), to bring us to the point of sinning because we where not discrete in our conduct. How does this balance out the rest of what he is saying in this context? A Possible Answer: It balances it out in that the person who feels free to do certain things should perform them discretely (privately, at home if needed) while at the same time be mindful of the weaker persons limitations. While their faith is not to be paraded openly to the offense of the “weak” (v. 1) brother, they are still free to demonstrate that faith in appropriately eating ‘all things’... but it is to be kept between themselves and God.

Have you heard someone say, “It is none of anyone’s business what I eat or what I wear or what kind of entertainment I engage in”? Is that so? None of us lives in a vacuum. Our actions, words, deeds, and even diet can affect others, either for good or for bad. It’s not hard to see how. If someone who looks up to you see you doing something “wrong,” he or she could be influenced by your example to do that same thing. We fool ourselves if we think otherwise. To argue that you didn’t force the person is beside the point. As Christians, we have responsibilities to one another, and if our example can lead someone astray, we are culpable.

http://www.drcolinadunbar.com/4th-qrt-2017-sabbath-school-lessons.html 8 What kind of example do you present? A Possible Answer: An example that is not just “good” or “positive” but hopefully, a positive Christlike example. Would you feel comfortable with having others, particularly young people or new believers, following your example in all areas? A Possible Answer: “ALL” areas? Maybe not. In some or most areas? Yes. What does your answer say about you? A Possible Answer: It says that I have not reached the high ideal that I know that God desires me to reach. It says that while they me see ‘good’ in me, I am a work in progress.... I desire them to look to Jesus first and foremost instead of looking at me as the best example.

Wednesday December 27 Observance of Days In this discussion about not judging others who might view some things differently than we do, and not being a stumbling block to others who might be offended by our actions, Paul brings up the issue of special days that some want to observe and others don’t. Read Romans 14:4-10. How are we to understand what Paul is saying here?

Romans 14:4-10 4 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. 5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 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. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. 8 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. 9 For to this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. 10 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. 4. Thou that judgest. Paul is addressing the weak brother, since “judgest” corresponds to “judge” in v. 3. Holden up. Literally, “made to stand.” In spite of the criticisms of his censorious brethren, the believer who in faith exercises his Christian freedom in the matters under question will be strengthened and supported by his Master. The one whose faith is “weak” (v. 1) may even fear that the stronger brother is in great danger by not sharing his scruples. But Paul suggests that whatever the danger, the Master, who called His servant to freedom (Gal. 5:13), has power to preserve him from the perils that freedom involves, which perils the “weak” (v. 1) brother is seeking to avoid by other means. Some, however, interpret this phrase to refer to acquittal in the judgment... 5. Fully persuaded. Or, “fully convinced” (see on ch. 4:21). Paul does not suggest that Christians should have no convictions regarding these matters about which there may be disagreement. Rather, he urges believers to come to clear and definite conclusions. But at the same time they should do so with charity toward those who reach other conclusions. No attempt should be made to rob anyone of this freedom to make up his own mind with respect to personal duty. Compare DA 550; Ed 17. 6. Unto the Lord. The motive of both parties is the same, whether in the observance or neglect of a day, or in the use of, or abstinence from, food. The stronger brother thanks God for “all things” (v. 2) and partakes of his food to the glory of God (cf. 1 Cor. 10:31). His weaker brother thanks God for what he eats and to the glory of God abstains from foods that may have been sacrificed to idols (see on Rom. 14:1). 9. The dead and living. The reversal of the usual order of these words is perhaps due to the order of the words about Christ in the first part of the sentence. Even in death the Christian belongs to Christ, because when he dies he falls asleep “in Jesus” (1 Thess. 4:14 cf. Rev. 14:13). “The dead in Christ shall rise” and thenceforth “ever be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:16, 17). Even those who reject Christ cannot escape their responsibility to Him by death. For all the dead shall rise again, either “unto the resurrection of life” or “unto the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:29; cf. Rev. 20:12, 13). In that day “every one of us shall give account of himself to God” (Rom. 14:12). This verse is used by some commentators as evidence that the soul is immortal and that death simply transfers the believer from one sphere of conscious service to another. The interpretation is out of harmony with the rest of Scripture. The question of whether the soul is immortal must be determined on the basis of other passages that deal with the condition of the soul in death, which Paul is not here discussing (see Job 14:21; Eccl. 9:5; John 11:11; etc.). A Possible Answer: We understand that Paul is saying that our Master (God) is able to strengthen all of us... so give each other the freedom to be persuaded in their own mind about how we are to

[Type text] 9 demonstrate commitment to the Lord. Since all believers are alike subjects and servants of God, and must all stand before the same judgment seat, they have no right to sit in judgment on one another. Such judging usurps a prerogative of God. Does this say anything about the fourth commandment? If not, why not? A Possible Answer: No, it doesn’t. The subject under discussion (the observance or neglect of a day, or in the use of, or abstinence from food sacrificed to idols) pertains to individual freedom in areas that are not specified by God in the Word. We are commanded to ‘keep or observe’ the forth commandment as well as the entire ten. Any other stance would be inconsistent with Paul’s preceding counsel in Romans and other letters to the NT churches. Paul is speaking about which days? Was there a controversy in the early church over the observance or nonobservance of certain days? Apparently so. We get a hint of such controversy in Galatians 4:9, 10, where Paul berates the Galatian Christians for observing “days, and months, and times, and years.” As we noted in lesson 2, some in the church had persuaded the Galatian Christians to be circumcised and to keep other precepts of the law of Moses. Paul feared that these ideas might harm the Roman church, as well. But perhaps in Rome it was particularly the Jewish Christians who had a hard time persuading themselves that they need no longer observe the Jewish festivals. Paul here is saying: Do as you please in this matter; the important point is not to judge those who view the matter differently from you. Apparently some Christians, to be on the safe side, decided to observe one or more of the Jewish festivals. Paul’s counsel is: let them do it if they are persuaded they should. To bring the weekly Sabbath into Romans 14:5, as some argue, is unwarranted. Can one imagine Paul taking such a laid-back attitude toward the fourth commandment? As we have seen all quarter, Paul placed a heavy emphasis on obedience to the law, so he certainly wasn’t going to place the Sabbath commandment in the same category as people who were uptight about eating foods that might have been offered to idols. However commonly these texts are used as an example to show that the seventh-day Sabbath is no longer binding, they say no such thing. Their use in that manner is a prime example of what Peter warned that people were doing with Paul’s writings: “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction” (2 Pet. 3:16). What has been your experience with the Sabbath? A Possible Answer: The observance of the Sabbath has been a ‘life-saver’. The observance of that particular day has given God uninterrupted time and unobstructed excess to help me experience unlimited transformation as I am being sealed by the Holy Spirit. Has it been the blessing it was meant to be? A Possible Answer: Yes... and it continues to be just that. It largely depends on my submission to the prompting of the Holy Spirit and my establishing parameters relating to my time, subjects of contemplation and activities. What changes can you make in order to experience more fully what the Lord offers you in the Sabbath? A Possible Answer: Changes relating to... 1) What I involve myself in. 2) What I permit my mind to dwell on. 3) What I consider priorities. 4) Who I make the center of my attention.

Thursday December 28 Final Words Read Romans 15:1-3. What important Christian truth is found in this passage?

http://www.drcolinadunbar.com/4th-qrt-2017-sabbath-school-lessons.html 10 Romans 15:1-3 (Bearing Others’ Burdens) 1 We then who are strong ought to bear with the scruples of the weak, and not to please ourselves. 2 Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, leading to edification. 3 For even Christ did not please Himself; but as it is written, “The reproaches of those who reproached You fell on Me.” 1. We then that are strong. Literally, “but we the strong.” The word translated “strong” means “able,” “powerful,” and describes those who are spiritually strong. Such believers are not only standing firm themselves but should also help others to stand. Bear. Gr. bastazō, “to take up,” “to lift,” “to carry.” The word is sometimes used in the sense of “to bear with,” “to endure patiently” as possibly here (see Matt. 20:12; Rev. 2:2). Infirmities. Or, “weakness,” “failings,” here specifically the acts that reveal weakness of faith, such as unnecessary scruples or erroneous judgments. These the strong are well able, and in fact duty bound, to bear with loving patience. Please ourselves. Instead of insisting on our rights and desires, we should be willing to subordinate them to the welfare of our brother, no matter how weak and prejudiced he may seem to be (see 1 Cor. 9:19, 22; cf. 1 Cor. 10:24, 33; 13:5, 7; Phil. 2:4). 2. Neighbour. Probably intended to be a broader term than “weak” (v. 1), including also the strong. To edification. That is, to benefit the neighbor spiritually and to help him in his growth to perfection. Paul does not mean that the strong should please the weak by agreeing with their opinions and practices or by feebly complying with what they may mistakenly think is good. 3. Pleased not himself. Paul illustrates and enforces the duty of sacrificing our own pleasure for the good of our brethren by referring to the one supreme example of self-sacrificing love. Christ was willing to give up even His heavenly glory for the sake of fallen man, and He expects corresponding self-denial and sacrifice on the part of those whom He came to save and bless (see 5T 204). Surely His servants (ch. 14:4) should not deem themselves too exalted to condescend as their Master has done (see Phil. 2:5–8; 1 Peter 2:21) A Possible Answer: Jesus left us an example where the spiritually strong are not to please themselves but rather to patiently bear with others who are weak. In what way does this passage capture so much of what it means to be a follower of Jesus? A Possible Answer: This passage captures what it means to be a true follower of Christ in that it asks us to replicate the example of Jesus who humbled himself, gave up divine privileges and became one with weak human beings in order that He might be of benefit to us and win us to Himself and His Father. What other verses teach the same idea? Most important, how can you, yourself, live out this principle? A Possible Answer: 1 Cor. 13:5. Philippians 2:5-11. 1 Cor. 10:33. Gal. 6:1. 1 Peter 5:5. Heb. 5:8. We can live out this principle by... 1) being considerate of others who are weaker than we are, 2) seeking the welfare of others even to the neglect of our personal desires and pursuits, 3) Elevating others over against aspiring for only personal promotions. 4) Commending and encouraging others who may have a history of being antagonistic to us. 5) Supporting the plans of others who may be from a different ethnic group or of a different religious persuasion. 6) Gracefully absorbing the slights and accusations of others who you know has their own faults and weaknesses. As Paul brought his letter to a close, what varied benedictions did he utter? Rom. 15:5, 6, 13, 33.

Romans 15:5, 6 5 Now may the God of patience and comfort grant you to be like-minded toward one another, according to Christ Jesus, 6 that you may with one mind and one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 13 Now may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that you may abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit. 33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen. 5. To be likeminded. Literally, “to think the same thing” (see on ch. 12:16). Paul is not praying for identity of opinion on inconsequential matters, but for a spirit of unity and harmony, in spite of differences of opinion. According to Christ Jesus. Mere unity or unanimity is not what Paul desires for his fellow Christians, but a spirit of unity patterned after the perfect model of Him whose whole purpose was to do, not His own will, but the will of Him who sent Him (John 6:38). This same mind that was in Christ Jesus must be in each of His followers (Phil. 2:5). 6. With one mind. Gr. homothumadon, “of one accord,” “unanimous.” Such unity was a characteristic of the early church (Acts 1:14; 2:46). One mouth. Unity of mind and heart results in harmony of praise and worship. A Possible Answer: A benediction, being that of a blessing or prayer expressing a blessing, Paul prays that.... A) They may be granted the ability to be like Jesus in patience towards each other. B) Live in

[Type text] 11 such a manner that their unity of mind and heart would glorify God. C) Their faith may give them a life full of joy and peace and hope, which are all the results of true faith and of the presence of the Holy Spirit (see Rom. 5:1, 2; Gal. 5:22). D) Where these fruits of the Spirit are found, there will be love and harmony among believers. Jew and Gentile, strong and weak, all will live together in joy and peace in the common hope of sharing in the glory of God (Rom. 5:2). E) They may experience peace. The God of patience means the God who helps His children to endure steadfastly. The word for “patience,” hupomone, means “fortitude,” “steadfast endurance.” The word for “consolation” may be translated as “encouragement.” The God of encouragement is the God who encourages. The God of hope is the God who has given hope to humankind. Likewise, the God of peace is the God who gives peace and in whom one may have peace. After numerous personal greetings, how does Paul bring his letter to a close? Rom. 16:25-27.

Romans 16:25-27 (Benediction) 25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith— 27 to God, alone wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen. According to my gospel. Compare ch. 2:16. Paul’s gospel was the message of salvation that had been entrusted to him. The preaching of Jesus Christ... Jesus Christ is the subject of Paul’s gospel (see also Rom. 1:3; 2:16; 10:8–13; Gal. 1:6–8). The mystery. See on ch. 11:25. This mystery is God’s eternal purpose to save His fallen creatures (see 1 Cor. 2:6, 7; Eph. 3:3–10; Col. 1:26). Secret. Literally, “in silence.” Since the world began. Literally, “in eternal times,” meaning “for ages past.” “Through times eternal” (RV) God’s plan to save man by faith in Christ had been shrouded in silence, but is now revealed. 26. Now is made manifest. That is, since the coming of Jesus (see DA 22, 23; cf. 2 Tim. 1:9, 10; Titus 1:2, 3). The scriptures. It is through these that the mystery of God has been “made known to all nations.” God’s plan of saving men by faith in Jesus Christ has been predicted by and is in full accordance with the teachings of the OT (see chs. 1:1, 2; 3:21). According to the commandment. The messengers of the gospel are called to their work by God’s command (see Acts 13:2; Rom. 10:15). Paul believed he had been directly commissioned to preach to the Gentiles (Rom. 1:1, 5). For the obedience of faith. Or, “to bring about obedience to the faith,” or “to win them to the obedience that springs from faith” (see on ch. 1:5). 27. To God only wise. Compare 1 Tim. 1:17; Jude 25. God’s divine wisdom has been especially displayed in the plan that has now been revealed (cf. Rom. 11:33, 34) and that has been the subject of this epistle. A Possible Answer: He brings his letter to a close by giving sharing his confidence in what God’s original purpose was and giving a doxology of praise to God.

Paul ends his letter in a glorious ascription of praise to God. God is the one in whom the Roman Christians, and all Christians, can safely put their trust to confirm their standing as redeemed sons and daughters of God, justified by faith and now led by the Spirit of God. We know that Paul was inspired by the Lord to write this letter in response to a specific situation at a specific time. What we don’t know are all the details regarding what the Lord had revealed to Paul about the future. Yes, Paul did know about the “falling away” (2 Thess. 2:3), although how much he knew, the text doesn’t say. In short, we don’t know if Paul had any inkling of the role he and his writings, especially this letter, would have in final events. In one sense, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that in these texts Protestantism was born, and in them those who seek to stay faithful to Jesus have had and will have the

http://www.drcolinadunbar.com/4th-qrt-2017-sabbath-school-lessons.html 12 scriptural foundation upon which to base their faith and commitment, even as the world wonders “after the beast” (Rev. 13:3 ) .

Friday December 29 Further Thought:

Read Ellen G. White, “Unity and Love in the Church”, pp. 477, 478; “Love for the Erring”, pp. 604-606, in Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5; “Helping the Tempted”, p. 166, in The Ministry of Healing; p. 719, in The SDA Bible Commentary,vol. 6. “I was shown the danger of the people of God in looking to Brother and Sister White and thinking that they must come to them with their burdens and seek counsel of them. This ought not so to be. They are invited by their compassionate, loving Saviour to come unto Him, when weary and heavy-laden, and He will relieve them. . . . Many come to us with the inquiry: Shall I do this? Shall I engage in that enterprise? Or, in regard to dress, Shall I wear this or that article? I answer them: You profess to be disciples of Christ. Study your Bibles. Read carefully and prayerfully the life of our dear Saviour when He dwelt among men upon the earth. Imitate His life, and you will not be found straying from the narrow path. We utterly refuse to be conscience for you. If we tell you just what to do, you will look to us to guide you, instead of going directly to Jesus for yourselves.” - Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 2, pp. 118, 119. “We are not to place the responsibility of our duty upon others, and wait for them to tell us what to do. We cannot depend for counsel upon humanity. The Lord will teach us our duty just as willingly as He will teach somebody else. . . . Those who decide to do nothing in any line that will displease God, will know, after presenting their case before Him, just what course to pursue.” - The Desire of Ages , p. 668. “There have ever been in the church those who are constantly inclined toward individual independence. They seem unable to realize that independence of spirit is liable to lead the human agent to have too much confidence in himself and to trust in his own judgment rather than to respect the counsel and highly esteem the judgment of his brethren.” - The Acts of the Apostles , pp. 163, 164.

Discussion Question: Given some of the themes of this week, how do we as Christians find the right balance in: 1 Being faithful to what we believe, yet not judging others who see things differently than we do? 2 Being true to our own consciences and not seeking to be the consciences for others, while at the same time seeking to help those who we believe are in error? When do we speak and when do we keep silent? When are we culpable if we do keep silent? 3 Being free in the Lord and yet at the same time realizing our responsibility to be good examples for those who might look up to us?

[Type text]