From the MLJ Archive

Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones: that we're still considering this important bit of argumentation that is found in the 14th chapter of Paul's epistle to the Romans, from verse 14 to verse 16.

Let me read them to you again, these words. "I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself. But to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. Let not then your good be evil spoken of."

We've already given an exposition of this statement and have dealt with the words and the meaning in general. Now, having done that, I suggested last Friday night that there were a number of general lessons to be learned here, a number of general points. We are to remember that some of the early Christians, because they had forgotten the importance of conscience in connection with faith, had, according to the Apostle, made shipwreck of their faith.

Very well, that's the first great lesson. But now we come on to a second matter, which is forced upon our consideration by this argument. And that is the whole question of the final perseverance of the saints. Or, if you like it in another way, the possibility of falling from grace.

Now, this is a very important subject, and it's raised, of course, for us acutely by this statement of the Apostle at the end of the 15th verse. "Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died."

And you remember that we saw, in a different connection last week, how the Apostle puts it in a slightly different form, but it's exactly the same idea that we've got here. He warns them not to cause the brother to perish. 1 Corinthians 8:11. "And through thy knowledge shall thy weak brother perish, for whom Christ died."

Now, looking at these statements on the surface, the Apostle seems to be saying that it is possible for us, by failing to observe what he teaches us about our attitude toward these indifferent matters, such as eating foods, meats offered to idols, and the observation of certain days. He seems to be saying that it is possible for us, in that way, to cause a man for whom Christ has died to be finally lost. That's what it looks like, doesn't it, on the surface.

So that does raise for us very definitely this whole question: Is it possible for one for whom Christ has died and who has been born again to be destroyed, or to be perished, or to be finally lost? Now, this is, of course, a very great matter indeed, and we've got to face it. Because, as I say, looking at these statements on the surface, it seems to be inevitable that you should come to the conclusion that such an ultimate fate of a true believer is a possibility.

Well, now, let's examine it together. Let me first of all, as we do so, get rid of a statement which is very often adduced in connection with this subject, but which I suggest to you has nothing at all to do with it. I'm referring to the statement in the Epistle to the Galatians, the fifth chapter and the fourth verse. Again, you see, the Apostle is dealing with the question of these Judaizers, who were saying that it wasn't enough for a man to be a Christian and to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, but he had got to be circumcised as well. You know, these people who are not content with your believing the gospel and being born again, they will add on some of their own regulations and say that these are essentials. Let me remind you of the context. "Stand fast therefore," he says, "in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law, you are fallen from grace."

And there are people who say, "Well, there it is. There's no need to discuss it." He says, "You can fall from grace." Well, now, of course, this is a very grievous misunderstanding of that statement. "You are fallen from grace," says this Authorized Version. A better translation is, "You have fallen away from grace." What does he mean by this? Well, what he means is this. He's referring to a type of thinking, and he says if you argue and insist that everybody must be circumcised in addition to believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, you are abandoning the faith position. The gospel, he says, the message of the gospel is that no man is justified by works. No man is justified by the deeds of the law. We are justified by faith only. And you mustn't add to it. And anybody who tells you that you can't be a Christian unless you add on something to your belief and final trust and reliance upon the Lord Jesus Christ, is going back under law.

Many are still doing this. Isn't it enough that you should be a believer, and that you trust entirely to him? You've got to do something else that they add on. He says, if you take that position, well, you mustn't talk any longer about grace; you're under works. You're under law. So what he means there is, he doesn't say that this statement doesn't say that a man who has been in grace can fall out of it. He says, as regards your thinking, you have abandoned, fallen away from, the grace position and the grace teaching. Very well. We therefore get rid of that in that way. No, that's not that's not the difficulty.

But what appears to be much more difficult is the kind of statement which you have in the famous sixth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and a similar passage in the 10th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. You remember it, don't you? Let me start reading to you at the fourth verse of Hebrews 6. "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away to renew them again unto repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to an open shame." And there's a similar statement in chapter 10 of that Epistle to the Hebrews.

Now, what do we make of that? Take those two passages and put them with what we've got here in Romans 14 and that other statement in 1 Corinthians chapter 8. What do we make of this? Well, let's start with the Hebrew passage. I don't want to spend time on this now, to go into it, but it seems to me that the only adequate answer, the only adequate way indeed of dealing with that chapter, is to indicate this: that first of all, the Apostle is dealing with a hypothetical position, this "if." I don't want to put too much weight on that, but it is itself almost sufficient as an answer. But the really important thing about that passage is this: that the Apostle nowhere says of those people that they have been born again.

It is possible for us to have a taste of the heavenly gift, and to experience the powers of the world to come, without being regenerate. This is a phenomenon that happens almost invariably at the time of revival. I've even known such people personally who, during the last revival in Wales in 1904 and 5, came under what I would call a general influence of the Spirit, and seemed for the time being to be true and genuine Christians. But later, it was quite obvious that they were only experiencing some temporary influence of the Spirit. And they went right back and not only showed in their lives that they had never been Christians, but denied the truth entirely. We've got to remember this. The Spirit, when he comes in power, as it were, carries up a certain number of people with the tide. And you can't tell the difference for the time being. But later, the difference is obvious. It is possible for one to have many experiences produced by the Holy Ghost without being regenerate. And nowhere are we told in that passage in Hebrews 6 that those people had actually been regenerate.

That's the particular answer with regard to that passage. But now, let us go on to certain other considerations. How do we deal with this kind of difficulty where the scripture appears to be contradicting itself? The answer is always that the scripture never contradicts itself. Never. It is all of the Spirit. We haven't got here the writings and the opinions of men. It's the same author in the whole of scripture. So there not only is no contradiction, there can be no contradiction. Very well, it is for us then to reconcile these passages that appear on the surface to be contradicting one another. How do we do so? Well, there is a great rule in this matter.

And the rule is this: that whenever you come across a difficulty, what you do always is to start with certainties. Start with great, explicit, certain statements. Or, even if you like, before that, you can take what I would call the general tenor, the great, overwhelming teaching of the whole of the scripture. And then you consider your difficulties in the light of these two great principles. There is a great message in the scripture, running right through from beginning to end. Now, any particular teaching must never contradict that. Then there are certain great, explicit statements. And any particular statement must always be considered in the light of that. Now, what am I referring to? Well, what I'm trying to say is this: that here we are in an apparent difficulty in Romans 14. How do we deal with it? Well, the thing to do here is to go back to Romans 8.

And there you find statements like this. I can't read it all to you, but I do commend you to read it to yourselves once more when you go home. Start at verse 28. "We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." Now, remember, that all things, and that's an absolutely comprehensive term; nothing is left out. All things work together for good to them, to to to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. Then, "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, then he also glorified." Now, he has done it. This is aorist. This is not future. In the mind and the purpose of God, this has already happened. Well, then, the Apostle does, those of you were here when we were dealing with this will remember so well, he does what he always does. Having put down this great proposition, he then takes it up and works it out in detail.

"What shall we say then to these things?" The answer is, "If God be for us, who can be against us?" And on and on it goes. "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not also with him freely give us all things?" And in the end, he works it up, you see, with this tremendous conclusion in the last two verses. "I am persuaded," which means "I am certain." It's an absolute certainty "that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

Now, that's the greatest statement in the Scriptures on this doctrine of the final perseverance of the saints. The absolute assurance of the ultimate arriving in glory of all who are called according to God's purpose. Of course, you've got another great statement also. And that is by our blessed Lord himself, as it's recorded in the 10th chapter of John's Gospel. Verses 28 and so on. "And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish."

Now, that's enough, isn't it? For those of you who say, "But it says here, 'shall thy brother perish for whom Christ died.'" They say, "You must take what it says there." All right, take what it says there. And here is our Lord saying, "They shall never perish." Never. "Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." But Romans 14 seems to be saying that you and I, by not behaving as we should with regard to the weaker brother, can destroy him and cause him to perish. Here our Lord says, "Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hands. I and my Father are one." Very well.

Now here, you see, is is is is a controlling statement: that it is impossible for any one of these ever to perish or to be separated from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. But come, let's work it out a bit, in order that we may be perfectly clear about all this and see why this must inevitably be the case. I've already shown you in the exposition that we mustn't press this word "destroy" too far. What it means is, you put him on the road that eventually leads to destruction. The same is true of the word "perish" in 1 Corinthians 8. But in addition to all that, I say, take these great, overwhelming, overarching statements about the final perseverance of the saints, and the impossibility of these ever falling away or perishing. Why must this, I say, be true of necessity?

Why is it, in other words, impossible that any one of us should be responsible for the everlasting destruction of any one of God's people? See, that's what Romans 14:15 seems to be saying: that you and I can cause the everlasting destruction of a soul. Now, why is this, I say, impossible? Why must we, why must we of necessity submit to these great assertions and asseverations of the doctrine of final perseverance? Well, here are some of the reasons. The first is, is it not obvious that the final and the ultimate destiny of a soul could never be in your hands and mine? What is so important as the salvation and the ultimate destiny of a soul? The Scripture everywhere teaches us that this is the most important thing of all. "What shall a man give in exchange for his soul? What shall it profit a man though he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?" And yet you see, if you adopt that other teaching, or if you misinterpret this statement in Romans 14:15, you will have to put yourself into the position of saying that the ultimate destiny of souls is in your hands and mine. My friends, the thing is inconceivable. Not only is it inconceivable, if it were true, I suggest to you that life would be impossible. I certainly would never venture into a pulpit. I'd almost be afraid to live in contact with men and women. I'd isolate myself in some kind of glass case, lest I, inadvertently, by anything, cause the destruction of a soul. I'm asking, is it conceivable that God should ever have allowed a matter such as this to be dependent upon your understanding of this particular teaching and mine? The thing is inconceivable, in and of itself.

Because, you see, it follows, a second thing follows. It would also mean this: that man has greater power than God. God has taken all this great action in his Son for our salvation. He has sent the Spirit, and the Spirit does his convicting and converting work in us. And yet we are told that we as men have got the power to undo all that. Our power becomes greater than the power of God. It means ultimately, in the third place, that if that were true, that no one would ever be saved finally. If it is possible for a man to fall, well then he will fall. We all fall into sin. We all are disobedient. We misunderstand teaching. We're prone to error, prone to wander, Lord, I feel it. And if it were ultimately a matter that is in our hands, I say there's only one conclusion: no one would be saved. None at all. Thank God it is not the position. The position is, "Oh, love that wilt not let me go."

Oh, well, let's go on. Another very important argument in this matter is this: If the ultimate falling away of some of God's children is possible, well then it would mean that the devil, after all, has defeated God. And he is the victor. Look at it like this. This is the great message of the Bible, isn't it? God made the world. Then he made man in his own image. And there it tells that the devil comes in and tempts man, and man listens, and man falls. All the troubles have eventuated from then. Now, I say that if it is possible that any of God's children should finally perish, it means that the devil has defeated God ultimately. And is therefore stronger than God.

These things, you see, are impossibilities. But then consider another one. Look at the teaching which says that it is possible for a true child of God to fall away. It leaves you in this position: that here you are, one day, you are regenerate. But then, owing to the action of somebody else who doesn't understand, or something you do yourself, you fall away. And then you realize it afterwards and you come back. And again you're regenerate. You see, the teaching is that you can be regenerate and lose it, and be regenerate and lose it. Now, this is something which is quite impossible. Regeneration is not the action of men; it is the action of God. You can't go in and out of regeneration. Of course, you can go in and out of your decision. You and I can go in and out of many things. But there is one thing we can never go in and out of. You are either unregenerate or you are regenerate. Regeneration is the action of God. And you can't be passing in and out of that. This is something which is inconceivable. And it is just at this point, of course, that the doctrine of backsliding is an important one. We don't hear enough about this at the present time, nor as much as the church used to teach this matter. Backsliding. What is backsliding? Well, backsliding is a child of God being disobedient. As a child in a family can be disobedient and can do things which disgrace the family, and besmirch the name of the family. A child of God can do that. And he may do it to such an extent that if you just look at him at that point, you'd say, "This man is not a Christian and has never been a Christian." I've seen that many times, unfortunately.

Well, how do you know that they are Christians? says someone. The answer to that is this: the backslider always comes back, invariably. I'll tell you more about him. The backslider is even miserable while sinning. He gets a kind of enjoyment out of it, but he's got a condemnation also. That is their testimony, invariably. But because he is a child of God, however far he may have gone away, he is bound to come back, and he will come back, and he does come back. That is where this doctrine of backsliding is such an important one in this connection. But let me lift it to a still higher level.

To say that it is possible for a child of God, a regenerate person, finally to fall away is, it seems to me, to misunderstand why God ever sent his Son into the world to do what he did. What is it? Well, it's like this. I've already reminded you of what happened in the first creation. God made man in his own image, and he gave him free will. And man was given there the power of determining his immediate destiny. And he used it in the way with which we are familiar. Now then, what is the difference between the first creation and the new creation? Or, if you prefer, what is the difference between Adam and the new man, the new creature in Christ Jesus? Or, let's put it in a still higher way. We've already had all this in the fifth chapter of this great Epistle. What is the difference between Adam and the Lord Jesus Christ as the representative man? You're familiar with this teaching, aren't you? As in Adam all died, so in Christ shall all be made alive. The first man, second man. First Adam, last Adam, and so on. What's the difference? Well, you see, the great difference between them is this: that Adam could fall and did fall. That Adam could fail as our representative, and he did fail as our representative. And we all bear the consequence. But, you see, what God has done in his Son is entirely different in this way. Here is something that cannot fail.

That is why God ever sent his Son into the world. This was the possibility, wasn't it? The first man had been put on probation, as it were, and had failed. Very well. If you and I had the power of suggesting to God what he should do about it, what we would have undoubtedly have suggested to him was this: "Make another man. Create another man." He surely will learn the lesson, and he won't fall. But God knows better than we do, and he doesn't act according to our wisdom, but according to his own wisdom. For, if God had just created another Adam, he would have repeated exactly what the first Adam did. The first Adam was absolutely perfect. You could never make a man that was more perfect than Adam. Adam was entirely perfect. Yet he fell. No, God doesn't take the risk, if I may so phrase it, of a second failure. God now has done something that cannot fail. He sent his own Son. And the Son has taken unto him human nature. Here is the firstborn of many brethren. Here is the head of a new humanity. Here is something which cannot fail, and which will not fail.

Now, let me give you my quotation to prove this. It's all, you see, in this Epistle to the Romans, in chapter 4 and verse 17. And where he puts it like this. No, rather in verse 16. "Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace." Now here's the statement, "to the end," with the object, "that the promise might be sure to all the seed; not only to that which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all." You see what he's saying? He's been contrasting the attempt to justify by works, with justification by grace through faith. Now he says, "It is of faith, that it might be by grace, to the end that the promise might be sure."

It is of grace, it is of God only, in order that it might be sure. If man comes in at all, it's going to fail, and it'll not be sure; it'll be uncertain, and it'll be final disaster. God has done it in this way in his Son in order that it cannot fail. It shall not fail. As I say, the honor of God is involved. It would mean the devil was triumphant. And that the devil has defeated God again, even in his own Son. But the thing is impossible. God has done it in this way, the way of salvation, grace, and faith through Christ Jesus, in order that it cannot fail. The promise is made sure to all the seed. Nothing. Neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. People sometimes foolishly say, "Oh, yes, but he doesn't say that you yourself can't do it." I see you are the great exception, are you? You are the one in the universe who is stronger than God, and stronger than the principalities and powers, and the height and the depth, or any other creature. My dear friend, you're included. Nothing, not even you yourself, can separate yourself finally from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Thank God for this. If we could do it, we would have all done it long ago, and none would ever arrive in the glory. Don't you take credit to yourself. When you arrive in the glory, you won't say, "I'm here because I held steadfast while others fell." Not at all. You'll say, "I'm a debtor to mercy alone, and covenant mercy I sing. I am what I am by the grace of God and nothing else."

This is the way to deal with this matter. It is inconceivable that the eternal destiny of a soul, I say, should be dependent either upon himself or upon any one of us, and that we have the power to destroy a soul, or to cause a soul to perish. Thank God, it is one of those things that is impossible. Well then, I'm left with the final question. What's the meaning of this sort of teaching? This statement in Romans 14:15, 1 Corinthians 8, Hebrews 6, Hebrews 10. I entirely accept the teaching which has been traditional at this point, which is just this: that it is through teaching like this, these tremendous warnings, that God preserves his people, and keeps them from that fate. This is the very method that he employs. I remember reading once, someone made a comparison, I think it's a good one, of what happened in connection with the shipwreck of Saint Paul, as it's recorded in the 27th chapter of the book of the Acts of the Apostles. You remember Paul was given a vision. And God told him that none of them were going to perish. "There stood by me this night an angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve, saying, 'Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar; and, lo, God hath given thee all them that sail with thee.'"

So Paul now addresses the captain and so on of the ship and says, "Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer, for I believe God that it shall be even as it was told me. Howbeit, we must be cast upon a certain island," and so on. Then there is this interesting statement later on, verse 30. "As the shipmen were about to flee out of the ship, when they had let down the boat into the sea, under colour as though they would have cast anchors out of the foreship, Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, 'Except these abide in the ship, you cannot be saved.'" Now, you take that on its surface. And what the Apostle is saying to the centurion and to the soldiers is this: "If these men escape and leave us like that, you cannot be saved. Except these abide in the ship, you cannot be saved. You're all, if those escape and just save their lives and abandon us, you are going to be drowned. Your lives are going to be lost," says the Apostle.

But you see, the Apostle has already been told by God that not one of them is going to be lost. "There shall be no loss of any man's life among you, but of the ship." He'd been given this message, which had given him this absolute assurance: "God hath given thee all them that sail with thee." And yet Paul says, "If these men are allowed to escape, you're going to perish." You see what it means is this. That's Paul's way of getting the centurion and the soldiers to prevent the others from escaping. He knows that this could not happen. He's had the assurance from God that they're all going to be saved. But he puts it in this strong form in order to guarantee and to make certain that the will of God is going to be done. And it was done, and not one of them perished. Well, I think that's a very good comparison with this whole point that is being made here. These threatening, minatory, alarming passages are the very way that God uses to preserve the saints. Now, there is not a saint in this congregation tonight but that is troubled by this kind of statement, and terrified by it. That's right, nobody else is. The unbeliever is not terrified by it; he laughs at it. This is God's way of keeping his people. He's got many ways of doing it. He showers blessings upon us, he gives us teaching. Sometimes he threatens us in this way, by giving us a glimpse of perdition, and thereby makes it impossible for us. Very well. Now then there is this great matter then which we had to consider because of this statement, which seems to suggest on the surface that it is possible for us to destroy the soul of one of God's children.

All right, we leave that at that. And we go on to what I regard as the final problem in connection with this teaching. And it is this: doesn't this teaching of the Apostle here make of the weaker brother a tyrant? Doesn't he make growth in the church impossible? Isn't he leveling everybody down to the level of the weaker brother? You remember the argument is this: that though it is perfectly right for those who are enlightened and who understand these things, those who are stronger in their understanding of the faith, to eat these meats and to observe these days, they mustn't do so because of offending the conscience of the weaker brother, and putting him into this terribly dangerous position. Well, says somebody, "At that rate, the weaker brother is the one who controls the church. He controls the entire teaching of the church. You'll never have any growth, you'll never have any development." It is a kind of leveling down. How do we answer this? Well, it's again a very right and a very important question to ask.

But there, I think, there should be no difficulty about this. First of all, it is the simple truth to say that historically, this teaching did not have that effect. The church did grow. And the church and Christian people became enlightened on these matters. I've already reminded you of this. Go just into the next century without going any further. And you find that this problem had gone. And you find in the same way that the observation of days and so on, soon disappeared out of the life of the church. So that historically, this teaching did not have the effect of preventing the growth of the church. Secondly, it is essential that we should realize that this is temporary teaching, if interim teaching. It isn't permanent legislation. All the Apostle was doing, as I trust I've shown you on several occasions, was to deal with a situation as it then confronted him and the Christian people. They were passing through this period of transition. Here are people who have just come out of Judaism, others have just come out of paganism. That's what he's dealing with. He's helping these people in this peculiar crisis through which they are passing. Thirdly, we must remember that the whole time we are only dealing with matters that are indifferent. These are not matters that are essential to salvation. Of course, some fall into the error of making them so, but they're not that. They're matters that are indifferent, not essential to salvation. You must keep on remembering that. Well, then, another one is this.

The weaker brother is to be teachable, and he is to be taught, and he is to grow in knowledge as well as in grace. Now the Apostle is only dealing with him as he is at the moment. But now he's going to be taught. The Scriptures are going to work out with him, and it is his business to accept them. If the weaker brother refuses to be taught, and says, "No, he's not interested. He won't listen. And nobody's allowed to say anything to him. He knows, and he stands." Well, then the position is this: that he becomes a sinner. He is no longer acting according to his conscience. His trouble now is that he's guilty of obstinacy, that he's become unteachable. It isn't a question of a sensitive conscience any more. It is a refusal to learn. And then, of course, the whole attitude toward him is to be different. He is now to be told very plainly that he is wrong. We've borne with him hitherto, we didn't want to offend his weak conscience, we wanted to help him. But if he sets himself up as the ruler and the master and the dictator, we then just find out from him that he is not, that he's ignorant and that he is all wrong. And that now he's got to bear the consequences and the punishment of refusing to be teachable, and to listening to to listen to instruction. The Apostle is only dealing here with genuine cases of troubled consciences. Not with obstinacy, not with laziness, not with refusal to learn.

So, I would end this matter by putting it to you like this. What then are the kind of rules or principles by which we govern our conduct and our behavior with respect to the weaker brother or with regard to anybody whom we are trying to help? And I would suggest the following rules. First, let's be careful that we don't misunderstand Paul's teaching when he says, "I am become, or made, all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." That is his teaching in this connection. But it's been often misunderstood. You see, there are some people who say, "Ah, well, in order to help these people, we must come down to their level, as it were, and we must do what they do." And so they do things that are actually wrong, but try to justify themselves in terms of that their object is to help people. It's a very specious and a very subtle argument, this, you know. People who give themselves license at certain points, they say, "Of course, I don't really want to do this, I'm really out to help this man." You're familiar with that kind of argument, how you excuse things that your conscience condemns you for doing. You say, "Oh, but if my motive is, I don't want to make this person feel awkward, so I do it with him." Well, now, there's a classical example of this. There was a man, some of you may remember, who went by the name of Woodbine Willie.

Woodbine Willie was a chaplain in the First World War. And this was his argument. He said he wanted to evangelize the men in the trenches. And he observed that the men in the trenches didn't smoke the more expensive brands of cigarettes; they smoked a very cheap type of cigarette, which was known as Woodbine. They were then obtainable, five for a penny, packets of Woodbines. And he said, "Well, very well, in order to win these men." He wouldn't smoke Gold Flake any longer; he smoked Woodbine, hence the name Woodbine Willie. Not only that, he found that these men in their conversation used to swear a good deal, and use a lot of language that he would not use himself. And he said, "Well, of course, if I'm going to evangelize these men, I've got to speak their language." So he'd start swearing, and use their slang, and all the rest of it. Woodbine Willie. So you see, by smoking Woodbines, drinking beer, swearing, using their oaths and cursing, being one of them, you were going to win them. Of course, he soon discovered that he didn't win them. It passed as a vogue, and a very foolish one. Being all things to all men does not mean that you've got to do the wrong things that they're doing in order to win them. Never. People say, "But our Lord was a friend of publicans and sinners, and mixed with them." Yes, but he never sinned. He got mixed with them without becoming defiled.

Secondly, and this is an important one. We must never, in order to help these weak brethren, or those who seem to be under conviction, we must never adopt any of their practices into the church in order to make it easy for them. What do I mean by that? Well, now, this is something that the Roman Catholic Church has actually done as a principle, and still does it. Her argument has always been this: She goes to a country and evangelizes amongst pagans. She says, "We mustn't condemn their practices; we must baptize them into the church." And that is what she thinks she has done. The Roman Church, throughout the centuries, has deliberately taken over the practices of pagans, and has made them a part of the life and the ritual and the behavior of the church. Most of the things that they do in that way, they've taken up in that precise manner. You don't find them in the Scriptures. There is no not only no justification for them in the Scriptures, the Scriptures are against them. But they have taken them up with this great idea of helping the weaker brother. "Well, we we don't tell them to leave all that they've always been doing. Then we say, 'Come along, bring these in. Do them all now for the sake of Christ.'" So you have them wearing these strange vestments and all these various other things. So many of their practices, and they'll admit this to you, have been taken straight over from pagan religions and these false kinds of worship. There is nothing in the teaching of the Apostle here or anywhere else to justify such a procedure. Indeed, it is the exact opposite.

Thirdly, he only allows this kind of liberty with regard to things that are indifferent, as long as they are not regarded as being vital. The moment they are regarded as being vital, or something important, he doesn't allow them. Now, the proof of that is to be found in 1 Corinthians 10. And in verses 27 and 28. Listen, "If any man of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and you be disposed to go, whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake. But if any man say unto you, 'This is offered in sacrifice unto idol,' eat not for his sake that showed it, and for conscience sake." In other words, you're going to the house of one of these men, they put meat before you, and say nothing, eat it, says Paul. But if the man says, "Now look here, this meat is meat that has been offered to idols." He puts a religious significance to it. "Don't touch it," says the Apostle. You see the difference in principle that he introduces in that way. Paul often acted on this. People think he contradicts himself; he says he doesn't. You will read in Acts 16 that he got Timothy to be circumcised when he was going to take him with him. You will find in Galatians 2 that he refused to have Titus circumcised. Is he being inconsistent? Not at all. You will find in Acts 16 that he had Timothy circumcised, not a cause of offense. Same principle that we've got in this chapter. But when he met these Judaizers, who said that a man must be circumcised, Paul would not have him circumcised at all. And he refused and resisted, as I say, in the case of Titus. As long as it's indifferent, all right, you can make concession. But if they insist upon it and say it's vital and essential and important, don't do it, says the Apostle.

Now, these are very important points, leading to the next point, which is this: the truth itself should never be accommodated at all. The truth is eternal, it's fixed, it's static. There's no accommodation there. Accommodation only comes in in the way in which we present it. And in these matters of application, where we are dealing with things that are indifferent. In other words, we end again on the great controlling principle. "All things must be done to the glory of God." "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." Keep that first. Secondly, "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God." And thirdly, "Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved." The glory of God, being concerned not to offend, and the supreme desire for the salvation of the souls of men. Well, may God grant us wisdom to work out these things, comparing Scripture with Scripture, and submitting ourselves always to our only authority, which is the Word of God, in the power of the Spirit. Oh, Lord, our God, we come to thee again, and thank thee more than ever that thou hast given us this blessed word. Oh, we see how easily we can go astray, and how wrong our notions and ideas can be. God, have mercy upon us. But receive our praise, that thou hast cared for us, and provided for us, in this amazing manner. Go on, we pray thee, to fill us with thy Spirit, keep us humble and teachable, ready to listen and to learn. Above all, give us a single eye, not to the triumphing of our opinions, but to the glory of thy grace. And now, may the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship and the communion of the Holy Spirit, abide and continue with us, now this night, throughout the remainder of this our short and uncertain earthly life and pilgrimage, and evermore. Amen.