The Tyranny of the Weaker Brother [closed]

Question

The Bible has a couple of sections talking about responsibility to the "weaker brother", primarily 1 Corinthians 8 and Romans 14. Both ask someone stronger in their faith, who is not disturbed by something like eating food sacrificed to idols, to forgo it if it'll offend a brother or sister weaker in their faith. I think it's fairly obvious to say that this concept applied past the scope of eating into general behavior, and it's a commonly accepted principle in most American mainline traditions.

The problem is, it's been my experience that there are some Christian somewhere who are offended by anything, as you are all probably realizing given the Q&A on this Stack Exchange. I've known Christians against Halloween, against Christmas, against instrumental music, against worship on Sunday, against evolution, against creationism and so on.

When you deal with larger, more diverse groups, like you tend to meet in Internet-based Christian communities, there's always a weaker brother offended by some belief or practice of yours. Needless to say, there are also people "offended" by mutually contradictory beliefs or practices.

Unfortunately, many of them like to use the weaker brother scriptures to justify why you should behave differently. It's effectively the "you shouldn't do anything I don't like" argument, or at least "you shouldn't speak out about having a belief different than mine on this subject."

How does one handle the "weaker brother" issue? How does it not become carte blanche for people of a controlling mindset to not manipulate you into behaving the way they think you ought?

How do you deal with these attempts at bullying?

---

Example

Here, in the spirit of how SE should work, I'll provide a specific time I faced this behavior, with the caveat that this question is not about this specific issue; please don't give your personal opinions on its morality (open another question for that if you really want to).

I am a Christian, and play role-playing games (and am a mod on RPG.SE).

I had been involved in an online Christian RPG group, the Christian Gamers Guild, back in the day. There were no end of people coming by and saying that from a weaker brother perspective, that a) we shouldn't play those games, b) those games are OK but not if they have magic or various gods in them, c) are OK as long as they're not Dungeons & Dragons, d) are only OK if they have an explicitly Christian theme, e) are only OK if they don't have Christianity in them (because that puts the gamemaster in the place of God) and so on, in manifold and often contradictory glory. Some were drive-bys, but others were group members who were offended by others' gaming preferences.

Because of this and tolerance for other essentially insane behavior (e.g. tolerance for extremely disruptive and inappropriate behavior in the name of forgiveness), I decided that it was easiest to just not participate in the group, problem solved.

But of course it's against the spirit of Christian community to just avoid all churches and social groups, or, I think, to be seriously cagey about all details of your life and beliefs because someone in that group won't like it and be "offended" and "stumble," right?

Answer 1

First off... I think this is an excellent question, here's my try at an answer...

Romans 14:3, I believe, balances out both sides.

The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them.

I know a person who thinks celebrating holidays or birthdays is wrong, and putting up Christmas trees is wrong, etc. I am cool with him, and he doesn't try to ever prove that I am wrong if I celebrate these things. And what I do in return is make sure I don't throw a birthday party for him, because that's me being sensitive to his beliefs.

Also, I think it's key to denote the difference between offend and stumble. Because this scripture was used to make sure we don't flaunt our freedom to the point where it causes someone else to fall into sin... and it is sin for them because they may do it even though they think it is a sin. (But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin. Romans 14:23)

If a person clearly is NOT going to stumble, but is just being offended because they don't do something you do, then I am not so sure that "weaker brother" argument applies.

Here's an example that I think applies... if my friend (who doesn't celebrate stuff) says, "man when christmas comes I used to get so focused on the gifts, trees, etc, and I forgot about God, so I made a decision to remove it and not celebrate it." Then I would say... I understand Christmas became an idol to you, therefore it is good for you, if it helps you not to sin. Therefore, I can honor that. Basically, I am accommodating him, so that he won't stumble into sin.

I do believe that's our job as Christians is to accommodate the person who may be weaker in an area that you're strong in.

An example in scripture....

Looking at Acts 16:3 - Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.

Paul here circumcised Timothy because of the Jews in that area, which really meant Paul didn't want them getting hung up on circumcision, because he wanted them to hear the Gospel without them being offended.

This is a choice made by Paul to "be all things to all men so that some may be saved" (1 Cor 9:22). Because Paul could have easily told them "in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." Gal 5:6

(In the spirit of Galatians, I do think at times people's law driven beliefs can be sinful, hence why Paul rebukes the Galatians)

We don't have to live in a box because of someone else's beliefs, but at the same time we can't merely enjoy our freedoms without consideration for others' true weaknesses either.

Answer 2

You are correct that for nearly everything you do, short of breathing and eating (and sometimes including eating) you can probably find some believer somewhere to object to it on some grounds.

However, when Paul says "Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak", he is not saying to never exercise your freedom under any circumstance lest someone might be offended or stumble.

Rather, you should ensure that your involvement with something which would be sinful (as a matter of conscience) for another believer does entice that believer to participate in something they consider sinful.

In your context, you play RPGs; so do that in such a way so as not to cause someone who thinks it's sinful to take them up. You don't have to hide it, but be careful not to entice another for whom it would be sin to become involved with RPGs.

You have to exercise judgment and care; no one's going to spell it out for you, because it's not black and white. If people at your church think it's sinful, don't advertise in the church bulletin; before inviting someone to join you, feel them out for where they stand, etc, etc. If rock music is seen as sinful, don't have band practice in the church basement.

Answer 3

I've always read this passage as not causing brother to stumble rather than offence though this seems to be a fairly fine line.

For example a small group leader might not want to drink alcohol in public as it may cause a brother in his group to think that "since my leader can drink then so can I" and use this as justification to get drunk off his skull. Or maybe a Pastor might decide not to as there may be some of their congregation around who might be alcoholic.

Another example might be that a person might believe it is wrong to watch horror movies and another Christian brother/sister (knowing this) might tell them that they should watch a horror movie with them. In this example that would be causing them to stumble.

Though this shouldn't be taken to an extreme. It does say that if you know your brother is weaker then you should not flaunt your freedom in front of them.

Its the whole "Love thy neighbour" idea.

EDIT:- aftyer reading your update I'd like to add that what you do in your own private time is between you and God. (Assuming you are over the legal adult age etc. etc.)

Answer 4

The Bible is clear about a lot of sin areas and about how Christians should act around each other (Ephesians 5) that I don't feel the need to think, "how will some random person interpret my actions?" Who can live with that level of forethought and the resulting guilt thereof? Not me. People who suggest this is at all possible haven't thought through the logic of it all. We can never truly predict how someone will respond to our actions.

That said I do think we should exercise due care when interacting with friends who have particular problems (e.g. alcoholism) and tempering our freedoms in Christ around them to accommodate.

"To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it." -- GK Chesterton

Answer 5

I believe it is important to emphasize the importance of identifying an idol in this case. Idols are not something that exist of their own accord, but are something created by man which they worship or place as higher importance than God. This is why Paul can say, "We know that 'An idol is nothing at all in the world' and that 'There is no God but one.'" 1 Corinthians 8:4 NIV

We know that sacrificing meat to an idol means nothing since an idol is nothing. Now if someone who is still trying to understand God, that idol may still have a deeply rooted meaning to them. If they see us in that idol's shrine eating the food sacrificed to it, what would keep them from thinking that we are not making our own sacrifices to the idol?

Now if we shift that idea of an idol to the modern day, some people definitely idolize RPGs (and everything else in existence). Playing RPGs can become their life, and they may not even have Christ in their life.

You, on the other hand, do not idolize RPGs (which is obvious from the fact that you were able to walk away from it). You understand that the RPGs do not give you life, but you receive life through God. As long as that RPG isn't something you hold on to and believe you require to survive, you are fine pretending to slay trolls in the name of Christ.

Now, you should always be on guard that it does not become more than that for you or the people you play with (which it sounds like it may have). If it does, that's when it's time to step away.

Now, maybe I can finally get to answering your question. The believers who are playing the weaker brother card are probably not the ones who are the weaker brother. If they are saying you might be leading them to sin, then they obviously know that playing RPGs/listening to rock music/watching Teletubbies can lead to sin. The weaker brother in John's example would not even understand when they are participating in idolization.

Perhaps you can use this knowledge of their knowledge to help them. "Yes, you are correct that playing this game can become a problem when you stop honoring God and elevate the game over him. Since you understand that, as long as you keep God in sight, you will likely not fall into the sin of idolization. Why don't you join us and help us to ensure we are praising God with our game?"

Edit: I am not saying completely disregard the weaker brother passage. I think you just need to be able to identify the weaker brother. If someone knows fully well themselves that worshiping an idol is sinning, but fall into that worship anyways, they have themselves to blame. However, there are those who are still learning of Christ, and they are the true weaker brother. If by your actions you lead someone who does not have a full understanding into worshiping an idol, you are to blame for their sin.