Christian Liberty

Good morning, Redemption Church.

Uh so great seeing that video and hearing all of your voices together.

We can't wait to be able to do that again.

Um we're preparing the building for you.

Uh uh we've gone to prepare a place for you.

If it wasn't so, I wouldn't have told you.

Um that's a quote from someone slips my mind.

But we're uh uh as Zach said, the whole church building is just covered in tarps and is getting painted and it's starting to look pretty cool, uh, pretty bright in here, which is really exciting.

Uh we can't wait to be gathered back together again.

We will.

We're preparing to do that.

We're moving forward with our renovations and uh excitedly looking forward to uh assembling together once more.

Uh last week I got to take a week off and have a break because Kyle Boyd filled in preaching, uh, which was wonderful.

His message on confession and repentance was a joy to hear.

It was encouraging for me.

And I've heard from so many people throughout this past week of how it encouraged them to begin confessing, even to the people closest to them in their lives, their spouses or coworkers and friends.

And uh I love the idea of a church that is grounded in confession and repentance, because it sort of knocks the shine off in a good way.

It allows us to actually be who we are in Christ, um, to be vulnerable with one another before him, to, as a church, begin to develop a gospel culture so that uh we the gospel isn't just something that we uh talk about or define better or come to better understand in doctrinal terms, but it's also something that begins to shape our very culture, so that we're authentic with each other and that we realize that there is nobody, uh, no one in our church, no one in the world um who doesn't require the grace of Jesus.

Um, so that's our hope.

Um, and I was super encouraged by that message.

So this week uh planned at the beginning of the year what my preaching schedule would be for the year.

And this week uh it just left space to be able to pick uh something to preach on uh that I just would get to choose at the time.

Um likely thinking that I would need some extra space in the week to keep tabs on Indy 500 qualifying and make sure that everything was going well there.

But of course, this Memorial Day weekend, uh no Monaco, no Indy, no Coca-Cola 600.

Um just uh a strange Memorial Day weekend with no racing.

Um we all lament together, I'm sure.

Uh but instead uh we've got to focus on something that uh I think just needs to be said and uh it provide for our church some principles for navigating the current moment that we're in.

Right now, uh it's been 12 weeks that we've been online.

Um and so today we're going to go through some principles.

Uh why is it, uh when is it that we listen to the government and their recommendations for how we should be acting, even if it's prohibiting our own assembling together.

Um, and then how do we treat each other as we develop differing convictions about how we should be responding as a church or as a people or as a country?

Um that's what we're gonna be talking about today.

So I'm gonna read our text, and it is two chapters, uh excerpts from two chapters that are back to back, or actually remaining in Romans, uh, like we were in our last series.

And the first reading is from Romans 13, verses 1 to 5, which deals with our relationship to the government.

Romans 13:1–5

And the next is from Romans 14, verses 1 to 4, which deals with our relationship to each other.

Romans 14:1–4

Both have to do with our liberty as Christians.

So uh this is the reading of God's word.

This is Romans 13, one to five.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God.

And those that exist have been instituted by God.

Therefore, whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.

For rulers are not a terror to good conduct but to bad.

Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority?

Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval.

For he is God's servant for your good.

But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain, for he is the servant of God, an avenger, who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.

Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath, but also for the sake of conscience.

Next is Romans fourteen, verses one to four.

It says, As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions.

One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables.

Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him.

Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another?

It is before his own master that he stands or falls, and he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

This is the word of the Lord.

Immediately after uh our service today, you can join us for a Zoom prayer.

Uh we'll gather together as a church, and for about 15 minutes we'll pray together uh for our city and just come together and pray for each other as well.

The link for that is in the description of this video or in the app.

You can just tap Zoom meeting in the app.

I'll take you to the same meeting.

Uh okay, so as I said, uh let's go ahead and pray, and then we'll get in uh to where we're headed for today.

Holy Father, I pray that you would attend this time.

You would give us patience and uh Lord, uh we just long to be together, to preach to not a camera, to sing to not a TV, uh, to hear each other's voices, to say the doxology together, Lord, to worship you together.

I pray that you would hasten that time.

And now that that your word would bring peace into our hearts and peace amongst us and one another, and uh that by your word we might submit to your lordship where you've called us to.

We praise you for your presence and your care for us, how you lead us like a good shepherd.

We trust that we are safe in your hands.

We lift this up in Jesus' name.

Amen.

Okay, so as I said, this is week twelve.

Week twelve of us not getting to meet together in person.

And you might have noticed the dialogue is starting to ramp up.

Uh after I uh right after I finished this sermon, which is dealing with how we relate to the government, um, uh our president uh announced that churches are essential.

Great, we're essential.

It's wonderful to be essential.

Um and it sort of threw into this question, okay, well now what does that mean?

Because we've got some conflicting orders from the president and then from our local government uh in Denver, uh limiting it, limiting us to meetings of 10 people or less.

Um we're supposed to get some news tomorrow.

Uh so Monday this week from the governor as well as Mayor Hancock describing um what's next for places of worship in Denver.

So today I'm not announcing what our plan is to begin assembling together again.

Uh we don't know it yet.

We don't have the information we need yet to be able to make those decisions.

Um, but uh it I know that you're in these conversations, be it with your place of work or with your own family.

How do we begin coming back together again?

Do we begin coming back together again?

Uh what principles can we use to make decisions like that?

Now, as I said, today I'm not laying out precisely what our plan is, but scripture does provide us clear principles for how it is that we're supposed to relate to the government and relate to one another.

Now, I think this is an opportunity for our church to paint a different picture of what it means for a community to have the highest possible uh commitment of unity to one another, because we are united in the risen Lord, in Christ who sits at the right hand of the Father.

There's no higher authority in the world.

And when we're united under him, that allows us to maintain a unity together that transcends all of these other petty things that might separate us.

So we're going to look at Romans 13 in order to understand the government and us, and we're going to look at Romans 14 to understand how we relate to one another.

So I'll begin with uh we'll just play a little political philosophy game.

If this was a political philosophy class, we would make an absurd example.

So let's start with an ex an absurd example.

Say you're driving down the road and you're in like Wyoming, where there's no humans, and you can see that there's a four-way stop approaching, but you can see that miles in either direction, the road is completely empty, but you're coming up on a stop sign.

There's no cars coming.

Are you morally obligated to stop at the stop sign?

Is there some sort of real authority, real moral or ethical authority in the law that would require you to stop at the stop sign?

This question is getting at uh is accountability to the government's authority real in an ethical sense?

Would you be doing something wrong to run the stop sign?

Now, our our intuitions on the stop sign experiment are pretty different.

And I've noticed that with myself it's pretty different depending on what car I'm imaginarily driving.

Uh but if uh our our intuitions about this are pretty split, and I think it's because for most of us, our view of where the government gets its authority is we imagine that governments gain their authority from the consent of the governed.

It's a very modern Western way of viewing governmental authority.

That's uh that it's the consent of the governed or some sort of uh social contract between the governed that gives the government their authority.

Now, if it's true that the government gets its authority from some sort of uh social contractor because we say, yes, government, you are permitted to exercise your authority in this way, uh, then that prevents uh that that causes our intuitions on the stop sign to be kind of split.

Because we can imagine two different scenarios.

One is you're driving through the stop sign, and you consider I'm so bound together with my fellow man.

And uh we uh by our own consent have uh allowed the government to exercise this authority over us for our own good, and we agree together that stop signs are a good thing.

Therefore, when I approach this stop sign, I will remember how bound I am to my brothers and sisters, and I will stop at the stop sign uh and patriotically salute or something.

And so you would imagine that you would stop at the stop sign.

But just as likely, you could imagine approaching the stop sign and think the government gains their authority only from the consent of the governed.

I, the governed, understand the intention and the purpose of the stop sign is to keep me and others safe so that we do not collide in a four-way intersection uh by uh aligning our cars in both space and time.

And therefore, I know that the intention of the stop sign is to prevent the accident.

I can tell that there is no accident coming because I don't see another car.

Therefore, I am not required to stop at the stop sign.

Why?

Because government's authority originates in me and in my consent.

See, with our intuition split on where government authority comes from, our intuitions remain split on what to do with that authority when it imposes itself on us in an instance such as a stop sign.

Now the Bible chimes in relating directly to this.

And uh if you know, if you reach back into like some civics class or something back into your mind, and you remember Rousseau's state of nature and how that developed into scarcity, which caused us to make contracts with each other, and that develops into some sort of government.

Or you remember Hobbes describing uh how life is, we can say it together, nasty, brutish, and short without government.

Uh and therefore we uh impose this leviathan onto nature so that we are protected from the terrors of a world without government.

You see that the world is trying to define where this great authority that government has comes from.

The Bible comes in with a very different story.

It's not a state of nature, it's not a social contract that the authority of government uh uh shows itself to us.

But rather in Romans 13, verse 1, Paul says this let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Romans 13:1

Consider this.

He's saying this isn't the consent of the governed, this isn't a social contract, but the authority of the government comes from God.

There in fact, there is no authority except from God.

Now, there's I don't know that there's a political philosophy class in the world at any secular university anyway, that would teach that, you know, where does government gain their authority?

Ultimately, it's from God, because all authority comes from God and it's on loan from God.

And you may be thinking, but I remember voting.

I showed up and I voted, and it that person won.

And so doesn't the authority somehow come from me more directly?

And yes, there are all sorts of means that God uses to appoint his authority in the world.

And in certain uh countries, he may use the means of just birth.

You're born a king.

In other countries, like ours, he graciously allows for the means of voting so that we can apportion that.

But that means is not the ultimate cause of the authority that's granted.

The ultimate cause of the authority of government is from God.

All authority is from him.

Now, this means that our understanding of government is both stronger than many conservatives would understand it to be, and it's weaker than many liberals would understand it to be.

So here's what I mean: it's stronger than many conservatives would understand it to be because government is not required to legitimize its own authority.

Now, the classic, uh uh a classic way of understanding governmental authorities is from the perspective of anarchism.

And I know we hear anarchism and and we think like a, I don't know, like a weird teenage phase or like an annoying subreddit.

But uh anarchism is a is a legitimate philosophical perspective on government, which basically just says all governmental authority must legitimize itself to me in order for me to then obey it.

Now that that's sort of a hyper-conservative approach.

But what the Bible says is the government actually doesn't need to legitimize its authority to you in order for you to be subject to it.

Instead, its authority is from God and on loan from God as all authority is.

So that's far stronger than many conservatives uh would understand the authority of government to be.

Now, it's also far weaker than many liberals would understand the authority of government to be.

Because it's not just that it doesn't have to legitimize itself, but it's that it can't legitimize itself.

It must receive its legitimacy from God, which means that it has a limit.

It is not the ultimate authority.

God is the ultimate authority, and it has an apportioned authority for particular tasks.

And so we can imagine a world where we could say, look at all the overwhelming good we could do with government.

You know, in fact, I can imagine all sorts of things that the government could simply accomplish because they've got, quite frankly, the power of the sword in a way that no other organization does.

And with the power of the sword, gosh, it, you know, I'm starting to feel like I'm talking about the one ring or something.

Um I get all excited and of, you know, if we could use that power for good, um, I'm showing my humanity.

Or just I'm just acting like a nerd.

Um but the uh uh we could say if we if we imagine the good that we could do with this power, then that will legitimize us using the power of the government.

See, that and that tends to be a more liberal way of understanding the government.

Government is a neutral power so long as you use it for good, then its power is legitimized.

But its power isn't legitimized in how it is used.

The legitimacy of its power comes from God.

It is on loan from God, and therefore it is given limits.

So we can see that government is both stronger than many conservatives view it as in uh the Bible's description, and weaker than many liberals view it as in the Bible's description.

I hope that uh uh feathers are getting ruffled in terms of we're starting to realize, wow, I haven't had a very biblically informed understanding of the way we relate to government.

And uh how could we?

Uh this is not intuitive.

Uh it has to be shown to us.

All right, now it's important to see likewise that this is a loaned authority.

And there are two pitfalls that are common uh for governments and in in their relationship to God and how they hold their authority.

So, first of all, uh the first mistake is that the government assumes the identity of God in their holding of the authority.

So you can think of uh Caesar in Rome.

He says, You must worship me as God.

Uh, and by worshiping me as God, uh then uh I will be able to have all of the authority of God.

You see how that blends the line between God's authority and the government's authority.

Second approach is to ignore God in our understanding of the government's authority.

And this is what you see in in basically any communist country.

Uh because it with God being outlawed, the authority that fills that void is the authority of the state, uh, because it is the state that has been given by God this authority of life and death.

And so uh the two mistakes are to say this isn't some authority that's on loan from God, but this is the very authority of God, and either I am God or I have all the authority of God.

And you can see that mistake repeat itself throughout history.

But in a biblical understanding, the authority isn't God Himself, it is on loan from God Himself.

And God stands over the authority of the government so that it has some authority, but not all.

That's why we can see instances where uh Paul can say in this letter, obey all authority.

That have been set over you, because that very authority is from God.

And then in other instances, we can see in scripture the apostles, as in Acts 5, where they're brought before the religious and political authorities of their day, and they're told to stop preaching and proclaiming the name of Jesus.

And in Acts 5, 29, but Peter and the Apostles answered, We must obey God rather than men.

So even in this letter, Paul will be imprisoned by the state in Rome.

He'll be beheaded in Rome by the state for refusing to comply with the orders to not preach in the name of Jesus.

And so here's the principle that it's so important for us to see.

There's God's authority, and then God loans his authority to the government.

And so the government's authority is real, it's from God, it has a divine origin, but it's not ultimate.

The ultimate authority is God.

And so for someone like Paul, who is writing submit to the authorities in the context of a government that is explicitly persecuting Christianity, he doesn't sense a contradiction in himself.

Because in both his compliance with the government and his noncompliance to the government, he is demonstrating an ultimate lordship to Christ.

Okay, that's the point that I want us to really be able to see in this.

In Paul's compliance and his noncompliance, he is demonstrating an ultimate lordship to Christ.

I think as Americans, we understand the idea of demonstrating ultimate lordship to Christ in our non-compliance.

You know, we've got a revolutionary spirit, at least a revolutionary heritage.

And so we uh imagine the martyr who says, I will not submit to you, and in my lack of submission to you, I am demonstrating the higher authority who is God alone.

But it we don't really have the category that Paul really has, which says, In my submission to government, I am likewise demonstrating my ultimate, that the ultimate lordship over my life is to Christ.

Paul was able to hold both of these together.

Romans 13, 2 through 3, he continues, Therefore, whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.

For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.

Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority?

Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval.

So he's saying that if you are to shirk the government's authority, then in shirking the government's authority, you will incur judgment on yourself.

Now there's the obvious judgment, which is that from uh the judgment that comes from uh the government itself.

But implicit in this is the judgment that actually comes from God that you incur on yourself by shirking the government's authority.

For many of us, those categories are so separate, but in scripture, they're saying that your submission to the authorities that have been placed in your life is a demonstration of your submission to Christ.

And your throwing those off is a demonstration of you throwing off the true authority of Christ.

We also see in this passage that there's this sort of overlapping understanding of goodness, where a government, uh even bad ones, you know, uh I think it's difficult to say that the government that Paul is writing under is a good government.

But even in that bad government, there is this overlap of goodness, where the good things that you do as a citizen are rewarded and honored by the government.

Um, Romans 13, verses 4 through 5 says, For he is God's servant for your good.

Romans 13:4–5

Now, this word servant here is uh could also be translated minister.

You know, God created governments for your good.

But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain.

For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.

Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath, but also for the sake of conscience.

Okay, so there's two appeals.

There's one says, uh obey, and consider that the government has been given the sword by God.

Governments have a real position in the world in which they can uniquely, as these entities, operate in terms of life and death.

They're able to wage war, they're able to imprison, they're able to avenge wrongdoing.

Uh, and in doing so, they are aligning themselves with the justice of God.

So God has appointed the government to enact his justice in the world.

And a good government does that well, and a bad government does that poorly.

Uh, but they have a purpose, nonetheless, that comes from God.

And so we ought to obey them in accord in accordance with that purpose.

So uh one reason to obey, you avoid the wrath of God, second, which is probably a good enough reason.

Second reason to obey is uh for the sake of conscience.

This is an amazing thing to say with regard to why to obey the government.

It's for the sake of our own conscience.

This is saying that the Christian, in their disobedience to the government, would would sense in their own conscience that they have disobeyed the Lord Himself.

They have ignored the institutions that he has placed in their lives for their good.

And in ignoring that, they uh uh in ignoring that, they have incurred the very wrath of God, and so their conscience would be weakened.

And so if you want to have a clean conscience before the Lord, then that means we we've got to tell the truth on our taxes.

And we've got to obey speed limits and and uh perhaps even stop at stop signs in the middle of nowhere in Wyoming.

I I don't know.

It's it feels a little absurd, but look, the it seems to be a real implication of this for the sake of our own conscience.

So here's the question then.

We've seen in scripture that this this uh demonstration of why you should comply with government, but I also shared with you an example of of when the apostles themselves didn't comply with government.

And this plays out throughout scripture in a in a lot of different circumstances.

We consider Daniel, um, who in obedience to the law makes this incredible ascension to second in command.

Uh and then uh likewise on uh a couple of occasions uh disobeys explicitly the law.

And the occasions of that disobedience are like the occasions of the disobedience of the law of the apostles.

So we can put it in a phrase when are we called to not comply with the government, but to demonstrate that God is the highest authority?

Well, uh that will be the case when the government forbids what God commands or commands what God forbids.

Do you hear it if we're commanded to do something that God forbids us doing?

Uh Daniel, you need to bow down to Nebuchadnezzar and pray to this statue.

I can't do it.

I can't pray to another God.

Uh you are commanding something that God forbids of me.

Or if government forbids what God commands, you can no longer speak in the name of Jesus.

Well, then how am I supposed to go and make disciples of all nations?

How am I supposed to baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit and teach them to obey all that Jesus commanded them if I can't speak in the name of Jesus?

You are forbidding the very thing that God commands me to do.

And in those instances, we would be then called to demonstrate that God is the highest authority, and we must obey him rather than man.

Now, here we are.

And this conversation is has uh in light of those previous examples, it may feel a bit silly, but I think it's still important for us to be able to understand uh and have these principles just as a church.

Uh here we stand, and and and I've heard it said, look, Hebrews 10.25, don't neglect your own assembling together, as is the habit of some.

And here the government is saying, don't assemble together.

So what do we do?

Have they not forbidden what God has commanded us to do?

Uh and some of you are getting excited already, like, man, I can't wait.

The revolution's about to begin.

Red, the blood of angry men.

So uh we've got our principles now.

The government forbids what God commands, or commands what God forbids.

The government has a real authority, but it's not the ultimate authority.

These are the principles that Scripture gives us.

So now let's try and use them together wisely.

We can imagine if the government's prescription was too narrow.

If they had said something like, uh, no religious gatherings, but all other gatherings are able to remain.

Or we can imagine something even worse.

If they had said no Christian gatherings, but all other gatherings are able to remain.

Well then, uh in that case, I think we would be called to some sort of disobedience in our gathering together.

Um that would be too narrow of a claim, and it would be uh a direct forbidding of what God has called us to.

Or we could imagine a situation in which uh the restrictions were too broad, perhaps in terms of time.

If they had said you're never able to gather again, then I think at that point we'd say, uh, you know, that means we're gonna have to start to use our own discernment to decide uh w what the risk um uh is in our gathering together because of COVID-19.

Uh and in discerning that risk, then we'll need to determine on our own the time that we will gather together, but it won't be never again, uh, because that would be forbidding uh something that God has commanded us to.

In our present moment, however, uh the government has not made a claim that is too narrow in terms of targeting just religious institutions, nor has the government made a claim that is too broad in terms of something that is indefinite.

Uh but rather they have made a claim that is within their jurisdiction, which is matters of life and death.

Now, this is a different conversation than uh how dangerous COVID-19 is.

It's related, but this but what we're having is a different conversation than that.

Because there's uh in uh in our minds, the way that we tend to think about this is it's and even the way that the dialogue has been structured around this, is it's either the the worst possible thing and to say otherwise is is to put people in harm's way, or it's either nothing at all.

And uh to say otherwise is to buy into some uh you know East Coast media elite conspiracy.

I just like to use that phrase.

Um what what we as Christians, rather, I think are called to is to say, look, this is a very difficult thing to discern.

Uh it seems dangerous, and it's a developing story.

We don't have all the information, but we have our marching orders.

And our marching orders from Scripture are are not to discern whether or not what the government is doing is the most effective or the most accurate, even necessarily uh the most true.

Because the government can be wrong in the ways that they demonstrate their use of authority.

And our marching orders don't change.

We may be able to demonstrate as this goes on that, like, you know, the way that this was handled is actually the worst possible way.

And I can prove it with statistical analysis and the this breakdown of things and charts, and there'll be charts.

And uh by uh looking, excuse me, by seeing the wrongness of it, that won't have changed the way that we as Christians were called to respond in light of the government's recommendations.

Our submitting to the government in those things which are not forbidden in Scripture or which are not uh commanded against in Scripture.

Our relation uh to those to the government's commands in that way uh is a required submission to demonstrate that our ultimate submission is to the Lord.

Okay, so this still begs the question: where's the line?

You know, at some point we're called to assemble together, and at some point the line is coming, which says, uh, look, this has become completely unreasonable.

This has become discriminatory in an important way, and now we have crossed over this threshold into uh uh this is something that we need to cast off the restraints of and demonstrate that the Lord is our highest authority.

So where is that line?

I don't know.

Uh is it maybe it's maybe maybe we see just like this terrible spike in in the way that uh coronavirus is taking place in Denver County.

And then you know that line might get six months further or a year further, year and a half further.

Maybe things like level off in this incredible way, and we get information that says like it's gone, you know.

Uh in sort of a war of the worlds, it's allergic to water type of thing.

Wait a minute.

That's signs.

War of the worlds was something else.

It wasn't water.

Uh but uh in either case, uh the reasonableness of it is is something that we'll need to discern just by wisdom.

We're not going to be able to point and say, look, I this is certainly when we should begin to disobey, and this is certainly when we should continue to comply out of our respect uh for the authority that God has placed in our lives.

So here's what I'm saying.

I don't I don't know where that line is.

You don't know where that line is.

And uh, although I believe it's something we could uh come to reasonable understandings of, it is likely that two reasonable people will disagree as to where that line is.

So now what do we do?

Two reasonable people can't come to the same conclusion.

Well, the next chapter uh of this very book continues on in that theme.

And so that's what I want us to talk about next.

If we have these principles of how we relate to government, and those principles bring us into the situation where uh two reasonable people can disagree, then how do we operate as a church?

Next in over the next couple weeks, we'll likely roll out a plan, uh, hopefully, uh, depending on the information that we get for how we'll reassemble.

To some of you, that plan will be like, this is crazy.

What are you insane?

You're you're ignoring the evidence, the medical evidence.

And to others, it'll be like, this is a total half step.

Don't you believe in God?

You're called to assemble together.

Come on, let's get together.

Uh it both could be completely reasonable arguments, yet how do we bear that disagreement?

Paul moves into this very category, this realm of Christian liberty and our convictions.

This is Romans 14, verses 1 through 3.

Romans 14:1–3

This is how we relate to one another.

As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions.

One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables.

Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him.

Okay, so I'm using this kind of analogously for our situation.

But uh Paul was talking about a very particular situation that the first century church had to deal with.

So there were a lot of issues with being a Christian in the first century, like a lot of them, you know, uh uh trying to be killed and stuff, becoming torches.

Rough time to be a Christian.

But one of those difficulties that they faced in the first century church was whether or not to eat the meat.

Meat was a part of an economic system uh that uh in which it was often the case that the meat that you would purchase in a market was sacrificed to a particular idol or deity of the city that you were a part of.

And so to purchase the meat is supporting this godless pagan system, and it could also be demonstrating an affiliation with that deity.

And so there's this huge question of like, look, we don't think those gods exist, we don't think that deity is legitimate.

Uh so can I eat the meat, or do I have to become a vegetarian now that I'm a Christian?

And it here's where the church landed.

It this is a matter of conscience.

Some people uh described here had a weak conscience.

And that meant that whenever they would eat the meat, they would think, oh my gosh, this is reminding me of how committed I was to this idolatrous way of living.

And this is uh causing me to feel guilty before the Lord and as though I'm supporting a system that I just can't be a part of.

And so in the weakness of their conscience, they would abstain.

But some people described here had a stronger conscience, in which case they would say, uh, look, I know that that's not real, uh, and that these deities, this whole system is a false system.

Uh I'm gonna eat the meat because I'm free to in Christ.

All things are free for me in Christ.

So what does Paul then tell them to do?

Well, we can continue on in uh verse 14 uh uh uh verse four.

Paul says, Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another?

It is before his own master that he stands or falls, and he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

So what Paul says here is that there will be differences in these matters of conscience.

And so what must you do with one another?

You bear with one another.

You allow for the difference of conscience, and and you don't pass a judgment on this person in terms of where they are in their relation to the Lord or uh what this means about the development of their faith, because of whether or not they choose to eat the meat.

In our circumstance, I think the analogy that I'd like to draw is it it's not whether it's not where you're wearing your mask that determines your level of um maturity as a Christian.

Uh it's not it's not how you intend to assemble together with us once it becomes time for us to assemble again.

Think that there's a broad diversity of opinion and data that's very difficult to discern.

And uh this means that we need to allow space for people to come to their own conclusions as a matter of conscience.

So I want you to notice the parallel here.

In our relationship to the government, in both our compliance and our noncompliance, recognizing is the ultimate lordship of Christ, that's the determining factor for our actions.

It's the lordship of Christ in our lives.

And in this situation as well, when you see the whole world pitted against each other in judgment of one another, this is our opportunity as a church to step back and say, you know, it actually isn't my place to judge that person in this circumstance, because this is a matter of conscience.

One person meets with friends, another remains isolated.

One person uh uh thinks that the church should reopen, another person thinks that the church should be closed down.

Some person some people uh should go back to work, others others shouldn't.

A requirement in Christ is to work to preserve our friends.

It's to work to remember that our ultimate responsibility, the ultimate Lord of our lives is Christ.

And so this is not a cause to judge one another, but this is a cause to experience peace among one another.

I don't think uh uh I think that this is a huge opportunity for the church to stand out in the way that we relate and understand one another throughout a very difficult to discern season.

One that requires us to have space for one another in our own conscience and freedom to develop real convictions uh uh amidst this situation that don't bring a distance or separation between us.

Some will eat meat, some won't.

And by the way, I haven't even I've just been talking about convictions.

I haven't even mentioned the differences among us in actual risk factors, uh, in people who you know have underlying conditions that may prevent them from assembling or gathering together with us in this way.

And in that case, us as a body need to be so committed to stepping out to love those people in ways that we are able.

Romans 14, 13 says, Therefore, let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.

Remember our Lord.

No one was freer than him, in control of all things.

But he laid down that freedom for the sake of his love towards us.

If we hold our freedom in that way, then we are truly free.

We're free in him.

Means that when we submit to things, even if we consider that they're wrong, if we're submitting to those authorities, we know that we're submitting to the one who's made us free.

And if it is time to rebel against them, then it is only out of submission to the one who has made us free.

So you may hear, what does your church think about reopening?

Megan and I have been getting asked by friends and texted, hey, what are you guys doing?

What's the church doing?

What does your church think about it?

What do you guys think about this?

And the reality is in our church, we will think a lot of different things about how we ought to reopen, when we ought to reopen, how we ought to assemble together.

There'll be a lot of different opinions.

But you can say this: our church thinks a lot of different things.

But our ultimate lordship is to Christ.

And we love one another, and we support each other in those differences, and we seek to maintain our love for one another as we're figuring out something together, which quite frankly is really complicated and difficult to figure out.

But the Bible provides us space and grace with each other to make those decisions.

That's a counterculture.

Father, I I'm I've I've gone pretty long.

So I is it okay if I cut the question or is it a pretty important question?

Okay, I'm gonna cut it.

You can email me, james at redemptiondenver.com.

Holy Father, I pray that you would um create this type of culture in our church where we consider your lordship um as the highest lordship, in that in all areas of our lives, even in our political thinking, you reign as king and you are our true Lord.

So that in both our submission and uh if ever we are in a situation where uh we need to no longer submit to what the government is calling us to, that it would ultimately be a submission to you.

And Father, I pray that in our dealing with one another, as there are all sorts of differing uh uh convictions, um some legitimate, some illegitimate, uh, and all over the spectrum in between.

I pray that uh love for one another and bearing with one another would be our guide as we remember your gospel, that you laid down your liberty, that you might have peace with us.

Uh white might we freely do the same for one another.

And let that love, uh, that love for one another demonstrate to our community that we truly are your disciples.

Father, we lift this up in Jesus' name.

Amen.