When Paul affirmed that "there is no
distinction between Jew and Greek: for the same Lord is Lord of all"
(Rom. 10:12), he was fully aware of the problems posed by the
fellowship of Christians with such different religious backgrounds. The
Greeks were used to change, continually adjusting to many new and
strange doctrines being introduced into their religious tradition; the
Jews, however, for many centuries had submitted themselves to the
absolute and immutable law of God. It was not an easy matter for them to
change, even when the Messiah came. Not long before Paul wrote Romans, a
group of Jewish Christians had gone from Jerusalem to Antioch "and
taught the brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the custom
of Moses, ye cannot be saved" (Acts 15:1). The crisis
precipitated by their demand necessitated a clarification of the basis
of fellowship between Jewish Christians and their Gentile brothers who
had not been circumcised. The problem was finally resolved in a meeting
with the apostles at Jerusalem. But there remained other questions that
had not been fully clarified in the apostolic decrees, such as the
conditions under which meat sacrificed to idols could be eaten and the
keeping of Jewish holy days. It was to these matters that Paul turned
his attention in the fourteenth chapter of Romans.
General Principles
Several fundamental principles had to be
respected by both parties in the dispute over dietary regulations and
religious festivals. First, the Lordship of Jesus had to be
maintained: "Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of
the dead and the living" (Rom. 14:9). "The rights of the Lord"
had to be respected when anyone asserted his individual liberty.
Second, the parties in dispute were to be aware of the judgment of
God: "Each one of us shall give account of himself to God" (Rom.
14:12). One Christian's judgment of another always had to be made
within the context of his own judgment by God. Third, each
individual's faithfulness to God was placed in jeopardy by an uneasy
conscience: "Let each man be fully assured in his own mind" (Rom.
14:5). Paul made this point plain, "Happy is he that judgeth not
himself in that which he approveth. But he that doubteth is condemned if
he eat" (Rom. 14:22, 23). Fourth, the opposite party in
the dispute had to be considered ahead of oneself: "It is good not to
eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor to do anything whereby thy brother
stumbleth" (Rom. 14:21). The weak brother was not to be run over
roughshod; if he were led by the example of another to do what he
believed to be wrong, he would be brought to grief and eventually
overthrown and destroyed. Thus an activity one man had considered to be
wholly right and good might be spoken of as "evil" because his action
had destroyed one "for whom Christ died" (Rom. 14:15).
Specific Terms
The proper interpretation of Romans chapter
fourteen necessitates that certain expressions be understood in context.
For instance, consider the word "faith." Paul says, "Whatsoever is not
of faith is sin" (Rom. 14:23). Some believe the word "faith" is
used here in an objective sense, referring to the faith revealed. They
affirm from this passage, therefore, that any action not authorized by
the Bible is sinful. Although I agree with the conclusion reached, this
interpretation woefully misrepresents what Paul intends to say. He uses
the term "faith" in a subjective sense. To act in faith means to believe
that what one does is right; faith reflects a clear conscience (Acts
23:1; 1 Tim. 1:5).
It is often assumed that the Christian who is
"weak in faith" is always wrong, and the one who is "strong" is always
right. Paul classifies himself as strong in Romans 15:1, and
presumably he is right in what he practices, but in First Corinthians
the strong brothers who participate in a pagan festival, "sitting at
meat in an idol's temple" (1 Cor. 8:10), are condemned. Paul
tells them, "Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of demons:
ye cannot partake of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons"
(1 Cor. 10:21). If one keeps in mind that the terms "weak" and
"strong" pertain to matters of conscience which are subject to errors of
judgment, he will not automatically be led to despise the weak brother.
In Romans 14:1 Paul admonishes that
the brother who is "weak in faith" is to be received, but "not for
decision of scruples" (me eis diakriseis dialogismon). The King James
Version translates the Greek into English as "not to doubtful
disputations." Some commentators leave the impression that Paul does not
believe Christians should debate about inferences nor attempt "to settle
doubtful points" (NEB). It must be recognized, however, that matters of
difference between strong and weak brothers are not necessarily to be
considered indifferent matters. At least one party in dispute usually
believes that participation in such activities would constitute sin.
I prefer to translate the phrase under
consideration "not in order to judge his thoughts," so as to judge his
actions unacceptable and to consider him unworthy of fellowship. Paul
says later on, "Let not him that eateth set at nought him that eateth
not . . . Who art thou that judgest the servant of another" (Rom.
14:3, 4)? The strong brother obviously considers the weak brother's
position wrong, but if what the weak brother believes is not forced on
others, he must be left to answer for himself "before the judgment-seat
of God." Otherwise, if the weak brother's resistance is shaken and under
pressure he is led to eat meat sacrificed to idols, he will be
overthrown or destroyed by doing something he considers to be a sin.
Paul mentions that the weak brother may be
"grieved" (Rom. 14:15). The thought is not that he merely
dislikes what the strong Christian is doing. If Paul meant that
Christians are not to engage in any activity considered inappropriate by
others, one's liberty would be restricted to the point of absurdity. The
grief referred to here-results from a guilty conscience; the weak
brother has been encouraged by the conduct of the strong brother to
engage in an action that he believes is wrong. Consequently, the example
of the strong has become "a stumbling block" and "an occasion of
falling." It has allured, enticed, and tripped up the weak brother so
that he has fallen into sin. How could one be walking in love and do
such a thing to a brother in Christ?
Food, Drink, and Holy Days
Perhaps a brief discussion of specific
problem areas mentioned in Romans fourteen is in order. First, there is
the problem of eating "meat" (broma, Rom. 14:15, 20),
specifically the eating of animal flesh (kreas, Rom. 14:21). For
the Jewish Christians who were "weak in faith" there were at least three
problems associated with eating animal flesh: some flesh was unclean
because it violated the dietary laws in the Old Testament, other flesh
was prohibited because it contained blood, and some could not be eaten
because it had been sacrificed to idols (Acts 15:29, 21:25; 1 Cor.
8:1, 4, 7, 10; 10:19, 28; Rev. 2:14, 20). Part of the sacrificial
tueat "was burned on the altar, part was eaten at a solemn meal in the
temple, and part was sold in the market for home use" (Arndt and
Gingrich Lexicon, p. 220). The problem was so acute in Gentile
communities that some Jews dared only to eat herbs, avoiding any
possible contamination.
Paul affirms the position of the strong:
"Nothing is unclean of itself" (Rom. 14:14), a truth taught
elsewhere in the New Testament (Matt. 15:11; Mark 7:18, Acts
10:14-24; 1 Tim. 4:4). He is quick to add, however, "Save to him who
accounteth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean" (Rom. 14:14),
implying that when a Christian considers certain meat to be unclean, an
innocent practice becomes "evil" for him if he eats "with offense"
(Rom. 14:20).
Second, Paul mentions the problem of drinking
wine (oinas, Rom. 14:21). Oinos is used in the New Testament both
for grape juice and fermented wine. Just what Paul has in mind here is
not certain. Several suggestions are offered in the commentaries: some
appeal to the total abstinence required of the Nazirites (Num. 6:3)
and the Rechabites (Jer. 35:6); others think Paul refers to the
wine used in pagan worship; still others find here the problem of
compulsive drinking. Whatever the specific problem, Paul admonishes the
strong to "bear. the infirmities of the weak" (Rom. 15:1),
affirming that "it is good not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor to
do anything whereby thy brother stumbleth" (Rom. 14:21).
The third problem concerns the observance of
special days. Paul never tolerated the binding of Jewish holy days on
Gentile Christians (Col. 2:16; Gal. 4:10, 11); however, he
permitted the observance of such practices by Jewish Christians so long
as they did not bind them on others. Some Jewish Christians could not
bring themselves to abandon the observance of Sabbaths and holy days
after they were baptized into Christ; not to rest on the Sabbath would
have violated their consciences. Paul's rule is: "Let each man be fully
assured in his own mind" (Rom. 14:5). Let the person with the
conscience problem answer to God, but let him keep his practice to
himself. The strong is not to "set at naught" the weak in such matters;
nor is the weak to judge the strong.
Application Today
The teaching of Paul in Romans fourteen
concerning the liberty of individual action is not to be construed as
license to sin. The Christian is always free to do what is right; he is
never free to do what is wrong.
No Christian will escape the judgment of God
in respect to any action he chooses to perform. Whether one is fully
persuaded that a deed is right or doubts that he may perform it with
God's approval does not preclude the judgment. As Paul observed, "With
me it is a very small. thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's
judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing against
myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the
Lord" (1 Cor. 4:3, 4).
No Christian, strong or weak in faith, has a
right to refuse what Christ says. We all belong to the Lord; His will
must be our will. For this reason also, I prefer not to designate the
activities in Romans fourteen "indifferent matters." One can be dead
wrong with a clear conscience. Whatever we do, let us remember that "we
are the Lord's" (Rom. 14:8).
No Christian, strong or weak in faith, has a
right to raise a private practice to the level of public worship,
wherein all present are required to participate. Brethren have been able
to disagree on hundreds of issues without withholding fellowship from
one another. But issues such as the use of instrumental music in worship
or the contribution to human institutional arrangements from the
treasury of the local church have divided brethren because some
Christians are compelled to violate their consciences in the performance
of these activities. "Let. each man be fully assured in his own mind"
(Rom. 14:5) before he participates, but also remember that "we that
are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please
ourselves" (Rom. 15:1). Respect for these simple principles by
both "strong" and "weak" Christians would have avoided many divisions
that have occurred within the body of Christ.
Finally, no Christian has a right to use
individual freedom as an excuse for learning the truth. Paul does not
intimate that Christians are to cease from arguing their differences.
Brethren must be free to preach and teach what they believe to be the
truth, always being careful to listen to opposite views, and, above all
else, studying what God has to say on the issue at hand.
Brethren, "let us follow after things which
make for peace, and things whereby we may edify one another" (Rom.
14:19).
QUESTIONS
1.
Contrast the religious backgrounds of Jews and Gentiles.
2.
What specific issues created a problem at Rome?
3.
What four principles were all parties to respect while dealing
with their differences?
4.
How does Paul use the word "faith" in Romans 14:23?
5.
To what do the terms "weak" and "strong" pertain?
6.
What will finally become of the brother who is pressured into
violating his conscience?
7.
When the Holy Spirit warns us against causing our brethren grief,
he thereby forbids us from ever doing anything that another brother
dislikes. Discuss whether this is true or false.
8.
Why did the Jews have scruples of conscience with regard to
certain observances regarding meats, drinks and days? Were these things
observed in public worship assemblies: or by the action of each
individual on his own?
9.
Since we are to follow things which make for peace, we are free
to receive and bid God speed to those who use instrumental music in
public worship, and free to be received by them. Would this be a fair
modern application of Romans 14?
10.
What are some modern questions which an individual can settle to
his own satisfaction, keeping his conscience clear, without making his
own conclusion a guide for everyone else's conscience?
Truth Magazine - January 4,
1979
Other Articles
The Blessing and Danger of Humor
A Review of the Lord's Supper as
Presented in Radical Restoration
Mind YOUR Business
Hope is to be Found in Christ