Jesse G. Jenkins	February, 2000
16077 Bench Lane
Bryan, TX 77807
(409) 778-9332

ROMANS 14

Jesse Jenkins’ Rebuttal To Paul Earnhart

Thank you Brother Earnhart and all of you brethren for your kind attention. I want to mention two things that Brother Earnhart said. He said there may have been the situation where one was uncertain, that he was not fully convinced yet in regard to whether eating meat was right. And then in connection with this, he asked how could the strong destroy the weak if he now understood the faith. In regard to the first point, I do not see any room in Romans 14 for some to still be uncertain after receiving the inspired revelation. One of two things is so: (1) After receiving the inspired instructions, they now understood that it was not a matter of violating the faith for one to eat meats and that observing certain days was not required, or (2) they flatly rejected and denied the revelation of the Holy Spirit. Before receiving the inspired instructions, some thought eating certain meats was prohibited by God. They now read Paul’s letter that told them plainly that all meats were clean and that it was all right with God if they ate or did not eat and that they were not to judge one another or cause one another to offend in regard to it because under the New Covenant, the Old Covenant law of abstaining from certain meats does not obtain, is not applicable. How could one be uncertain without rejecting inspired revelation? Revelation told him it was all right. He either believed it, disbelieved it, or he was not sure about it; if either of the last two cases he rejected inspired revelation. Further, I point out that Romans 14 was not written to tell them how to behave if they rejected the Holy Spirit’s instructions. And it was not written to tell them how to behave if they had doubts as to whether it was correct. They were told how to behave now that they had received the Holy Spirit’s instructions. They were to abide by it and stop thinking eating or not eating was a matter of salvation in regard to self or others; thus, stop judging others. But if because of personal background they wanted to abstain from meats, that was fine with God. And that brings me to the second part of what Brother Earnhart said. How could the strong destroy the weak if the weak now understood the faith relative to eating meats? Let me refer you back to the converted Adventist. He understood that eating pork did not violate the faith. He knew that I did not sin when I ate pork. For his conscience sake, I never set pork before him when he ate with us. However, I have been in another brother’s house where pork was the only meat served. We ate pork and vegetables; he ate vegetables. If under that circumstance my eating pork would have shamed him and caused him to eat, feeling about the matter of eating pork as he did, I believe I would have caused him to violate his conscience and sin – conscience not based upon revelation, he knew revelation said it was all right – but conscience based upon his own personal feelings and background. He could not in good conscience eat pork, and if I had influenced him to do so, I believe I would have influenced him to sin. If he had said my eating pork was going to cause him to go against his conscience, I would have thrown the pork to the dogs. I would not have eaten it and caused him to violate his personal background conscience any more than I would have eaten it had it caused him to violate his conscience based upon scripture. So, I believe that is the way the strong could have caused the weak to violate his faith in that matter. I believe this one point will either go a long way in helping brethren understand Romans 14, or it is going a long way in causing me to misunderstand it. I fully believe the Holy Spirit intended for them to understand and accept His instructions. I believe they did accept the instructions. If they rejected what the Holy Spirit said, or if on the other hand, they were not sure – still uncertain – about the matter, I do not believe God would have received them or have told other brethren to receive them into the fellowship. So I am fully persuaded in my own mind that after receiving the instructions they all now understood that eating all kinds of meats was clean and that observing certain days was a matter of indifference to God. And they understood that, if because of personal conscience and background, one chose to abstain from certain meats and observe certain days, that was all right with God also. Now, those who had been weak in their understanding of the faith would no longer condemn those who understood the faith and those who had understood the faith would no longer set at nought and despise those who had been weak in their understanding of the faith. I believe this is a focal point in understanding the chapter. That is all I have to say in rebuttal, and I thank you.

To purchase a bound version of "Toward A Better Understanding..." please contact the publisher: Preceptor Co., P.O. Box 22283, Beaumont, TX 77720, Phone (409) 866-3598, FAX (409) 866-8259.

[Outline] [Intro] [Mtg Format] [Mtg Agenda] [Opening Address] [Final Address]
False Teachers:	[Halbrook] [Owen] [Halbrook rebuts Owen] [Owen rebuts Halbrook]
Romans 14:	[Earnhart] [Jenkins] [Earnhart rebuts Jenkins] [Jenkins rebuts Earnhart]
Fellowship:	[Pickup] [Roberts] [Pickup rebuts Roberts] [Roberts rebuts Pickup]

	Created on 04-Sep-00	Page last updated