Query: Submission to the weaker brother?

[MaxPC]

I wanted more to use that text of the forgiving one being the more spiritual to help with seeing who actually is the weaker or stronger brother as we could talk in circles always trying to decide who is the one who should submit... We can't know if we can't identify who is the weaker.

And I don't want to confuse weakness with sin...

True. What are your thoughts on my two follow-up queries?

I am appreciating the Anabaptist view of this and I'm beginning to see some corollaries. Please bear with me as I query for further clarification.

At the same time, the weaker brother should not hold the church hostage.

I have seen modern examples of a small group of individuals who insist that a church abandon the Biblical teachings in its doctrine regarding homosexuality because they feel it's "unChristian" to make them feel bad about their active homosexual lifestyle. Likewise another individual or group would insist that a church abandon Biblical teachings regarding divorce, remarriage and adultery because they feel it's unfair and makes them feel like pariahs. (Yes, even in our own church there is this harassment to change our doctrine and to abandon Biblical teaching to make individuals "feel better".)

Queries:
1. In this "submission to the weaker", how does the Anabaptist fellowship draw the line so that they can avoid abandoning the teachings of Christ and the Bible because of the weakness of a few; as well as preventing those who are living contrary to the Bible from leading the entire fellowship into error?

2.

as Jesus said, "Go and sin no more," He did not submit to sin, or the sinner, he forgave it, and instructed to not to return to it.

Good observation.
Once that line is drawn, how does the Anabaptist fellowship proceed to encourage the weaker brother to embrace Christ's grace and the perfection of Christ's strength in his own weakness so that he may grow stronger and leave a life of gravely sinful ways, such as drugs, homosexual lifestyle, etc. (to "sin no more")? (2 Corinthians 12, 7-10)

[Bootstrap]

And I don't want to confuse weakness with sin...

True. What are your thoughts on my two follow-up queries?

Don't your two follow-up queries confuse weakness with sin? Aren't they about a different topic than the "weaker brother" passages?

[Wade]

I wanted more to use that text of the forgiving one being the more spiritual to help with seeing who actually is the weaker or stronger brother as we could talk in circles always trying to decide who is the one who should submit... We can't know if we can't identify who is the weaker.

And I don't want to confuse weakness with sin...

True. What are your thoughts on my two follow-up queries?

I am appreciating the Anabaptist view of this and I'm beginning to see some corollaries. Please bear with me as I query for further clarification.

At the same time, the weaker brother should not hold the church hostage.

I have seen modern examples of a small group of individuals who insist that a church abandon the Biblical teachings in its doctrine regarding homosexuality because they feel it's "unChristian" to make them feel bad about their active homosexual lifestyle. Likewise another individual or group would insist that a church abandon Biblical teachings regarding divorce, remarriage and adultery because they feel it's unfair and makes them feel like pariahs. (Yes, even in our own church there is this harassment to change our doctrine and to abandon Biblical teaching to make individuals "feel better".)

Queries:
1. In this "submission to the weaker", how does the Anabaptist fellowship draw the line so that they can avoid abandoning the teachings of Christ and the Bible because of the weakness of a few; as well as preventing those who are living contrary to the Bible from leading the entire fellowship into error?

2.

as Jesus said, "Go and sin no more," He did not submit to sin, or the sinner, he forgave it, and instructed to not to return to it.

Good observation.
Once that line is drawn, how does the Anabaptist fellowship proceed to encourage the weaker brother to embrace Christ's grace and the perfection of Christ's strength in his own weakness so that he may grow stronger and leave a life of gravely sinful ways, such as drugs, homosexual lifestyle, etc. (to "sin no more")? (2 Corinthians 12, 7-10)

Since I have never been a member of any fellowship I don't feel adequate to answer... However I never really thought of the whole "hostage" situation until it has been talked about recently and I can certainly see how that can relate to a marriage. When disagreements are held - it can feel like nothing moves forward... And that can mean not pressing toward the mark...

[MaxPC]

I am appreciating the Anabaptist view of this and I'm beginning to see some corollaries. Please bear with me as I query for further clarification.

I have seen modern examples of a small group of individuals who insist that a church abandon the Biblical teachings in its doctrine regarding homosexuality because they feel it's "unChristian" to make them feel bad about their active homosexual lifestyle. Likewise another individual or group would insist that a church abandon Biblical teachings regarding divorce, remarriage and adultery because they feel it's unfair and makes them feel like pariahs. (Yes, even in our own church there is this harassment to change our doctrine and to abandon Biblical teaching to make individuals "feel better".)

Queries:
1. In this "submission to the weaker", how does the Anabaptist fellowship draw the line so that they can avoid abandoning the teachings of Christ and the Bible because of the weakness of a few; as well as preventing those who are living contrary to the Bible from leading the entire fellowship into error?

2. Good observation.
Once that line is drawn, how does the Anabaptist fellowship proceed to encourage the weaker brother to embrace Christ's grace and the perfection of Christ's strength in his own weakness so that he may grow stronger and leave a life of gravely sinful ways, such as drugs, homosexual lifestyle, etc. (to "sin no more")? (2 Corinthians 12, 7-10)

Since I have never been a member of any fellowship I don't feel adequate to answer... However I never really thought of the whole "hostage" situation until it has been talked about recently and I can certainly see how that can relate to a marriage. When disagreements are held - it can feel like nothing moves forward... And that can mean not pressing toward the mark...

Ah yes; the dreaded "entrenchment mentality" or "us vs them".

[RZehr]

I can appreciate what has already been said regarding hostage taking or that reality.
But it seems to me that the concept has been completely lost in many churches. What churches actually practice this? We in America are so afraid of being run over, that immediately the conversation goes to staking out my "rights" and giving reasons why I shouldn't listen to you, and be bullied by you. And refusing to honor the other person unless, and until, such a time as I clearly understand all his reasons. And until then, I refuse to bend for him.

Isn't there more Biblical support for bending and giving up "rights" than there is Biblical support in making sure that you aren't bending unnecessarily? Is there an element of simple, basic human decency as well? Along with the scriptures listed, Romans 12:3 says “For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to thing; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. Then it talks about members of one body and gifts given. Then Romans 12:10 says “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;
I think this “preferring one another” is a rare commodity.

But yes, it definitely requires a balance, no doubt. If one person continually cannot accept where the others in the group are at on issues, that person should find a group more aligned with his beliefs instead of constantly being at odds and creating havoc. He shouldn't stay and grind, and grind, on the group to move to his belief. He should bring it up to the group, and if he does not get his way, he should be able to peacefully accept that and either leave, or not make an issue of it.

[MaxPC]

I can appreciate what has already been said regarding hostage taking or that reality.
But it seems to me that the concept has been completely lost in many churches. What churches actually practice this? We in America are so afraid of being run over, that immediately the conversation goes to staking out my "rights" and giving reasons why I shouldn't listen to you, and be bullied by you. And refusing to honor the other person unless, and until, such a time as I clearly understand all his reasons. And until then, I refuse to bend for him.

Isn't there more Biblical support for bending and giving up "rights" than there is Biblical support in making sure that you aren't bending unnecessarily? Is there an element of simple, basic human decency as well? Along with the scriptures listed, Romans 12:3 says “For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to thing; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. Then it talks about members of one body and gifts given. Then Romans 12:10 says “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;
I think this “preferring one another” is a rare commodity.

But yes, it definitely requires a balance, no doubt. If one person continually cannot accept where the others in the group are at on issues, that person should find a group more aligned with his beliefs instead of constantly being at odds and creating havoc. He shouldn't stay and grind, and grind, on the group to move to his belief. He should bring it up to the group, and if he does not get his way, he should be able to peacefully accept that and either leave, or not make an issue of it.

Excellent points, RZehr. Re the entrenchment not being helpful. Neither is a person or groups of people within a fellowship who insist on abandoning Biblical precepts and teachings - which is another facet of destructive rather than loving brotherhood. I've seen both behaviors take place in small groups as well as large.

As a part of "one anothering", instead of excommunication, I formulated query #2.

2.

as Jesus said, "Go and sin no more," He did not submit to sin, or the sinner, he forgave it, and instructed to not to return to it.

Good observation.
Once that line is drawn, how does the Anabaptist fellowship proceed to encourage the weaker brother to embrace Christ's grace and the perfection of Christ's strength in his own weakness so that he may grow stronger and leave a life of gravely sinful ways, such as drugs, homosexual lifestyle, etc. (to "sin no more")? [bible]2 Corinthians 12, 7-10[/bible]

Should I use this query to start another thread or is it easier to speak of ways to encourage and strengthen weaker brethren on this thread?

[Bootstrap]

Should I use this query to start another thread or is it easier to speak of ways to encourage and strengthen weaker brethren on this thread?

Max, could you please say more about how you understand the passages from which the concept of submitting the weaker brother comes, mentioned earlier in this thread? I think encouraging and strengthening weaker brethren is Scriptural - or rather, strengthening and encouraging all brethren. I'm not convinced that it is Scriptural to compare ourselves to others and proclaim ourselves as the stronger brethren. But I don't think this is what "submitting the the weaker brother" means.

If we really want to follow Scripture, I think we have to look at it carefully, in context, to see what it is saying. And in this thread, I would like to wrestle with the issue of how we deal with brethren who have specific temptations or religious beliefs who really might stumble if we lead them astray, even though they are not requirements of Scripture. I think that's what these passages are talking about.

I can start a new thread for that if need be, but I'd like to be able to discuss the passages that involve the concept that the title is about. Do I need to start a new thread if that's what I want to do?