Chapter 14
14:1- Paul now turns more specifically to the matter of unity and fellowship in the church. The first of two examples Paul references concerns choice of food. No doubt many of the Jewish Christians sought to continue observing their ceremonial laws and customs. Among these were their dietary restrictions. The issue at hand in this chapter doesn’t deal with a difference of opinion on objective Christian moral issues, but rather religious rituals and customs within the Christian community. In regards to the dietary issue, Craig Keener notes that “Most Jews continued to keep these laws regardless of where in the Roman Empire they went. Many Gentiles ridiculed these distinctive food customs as being separatist and complained that Jews refused to dine with other peoples.” Paul is commanding inclusiveness regardless of one’s conviction on dietary matters. To those who do not practice such things (most likely Gentile Christians), they were to accept those that did and not for the purpose of lecturing them, looking down on them, or as Douglass Moo puts it, not to “extend grudging tolerance to the weak, but to welcome them.” But why does Paul use a pejorative title “weak in the faith” for the Christians who had such dietary scruples? Grant Osborne writes that “this does not mean they were quasi-Christians; rather they had not understood that their faith (i.e., their relationship to God in Christ) meant complete freedom from all legalistic requirements.” They were those who had accepted their Messiah, yet still felt an obligation to continue their religious customs. Paul, for example, would have been a Jewish Christian who understood that His freedom in Christ didn’t require him to strictly hold to the ceremonial dietary standards, thus one of the “strong in faith” (see Gal. 2:11-14, 1 Cor. 9:19-22).
14:2-4- Paul clarifies that one such as himself may understand that all food is fine to eat, but someone may still be convinced that abstaining from certain foods is required. Again, the mentality behind this wasn’t such that these Christians felt as if they had to follow these rules to be justified before God (they had accepted the gospel message after all), but that these ceremonial laws were still included as part of following Christ. But why did Paul mention those with such a conviction only ate vegetables? The Mosaic Law allowed some meats. Ben Witherington III helps shed light on this when he writes, “Meat sold in public meat markets would not have been slaughtered according to Jewish rules (for example, it would likely have blood in it), and most of it would have come to market from pagan temples. So for a Jew who did not want to risk eating ritually impure meat, the only option was abstinence from meat.”
So Paul says in verse 3 that the one who eats freely is not to look down upon or ridicule those who still feel convicted to honor God by abstaining from certain foods, and likewise, the one who abstains ought not to pass judgement on the one who understands his liberty in this matter. Both have been accepted by God through their faith in Christ Jesus. Though the context here is different, the broader principle can still be applied to us today in regards to food choices. Believers who abstain from meat for ethical convictions pertaining to animals shouldn’t pass judgement on fellow believers who feel free to eat meat. Likewise, those who have no qualms about enjoying a steak ought not ridicule or pass judgment on their brother or sister in Christ who abstain (more will be said on this matter in the following verses in relation to the importance of following such convictions and unity in fellowship).
Paul makes a strong analogy to illustrate his point in verse 4. The only one in a “higher” position than us is our Master, Christ Jesus. Each one of us is accountable directly to Him. What Paul is effectively saying here is that no one has the right to go into someone else’s house and tell the master’s servants what to do. The approval of the servant comes from their master only, not from someone outside of the house. We are all servants of Christ (James 4:12).
14:5-6- Paul now mentions the second of the two examples. That is, differences over the importance of certain days. Considering the Jewish/Gentile context here, the Sabbath is probably foremost in mind, though this also likely includes the multiple festival days (see Lev. 23, Col. 2:16-17). Whether one held to certain days as more consecrated to God than others, or one held that every day ought to be equally so (for God is the maker of every day) comes down to a matter of conscience in this case. What ultimately matters is that one is fully convinced in his own mind that what he chooses is what honors God most.
Because, as Paul goes on to say in verse 6, whatever position one takes, we take that position for one reason only, to be part of how we honor God. Those who abstain from certain foods and are firmly convicted do so to honor God. Those who don’t abstain, but eat do so with a thankful heart that God has provided. Robert Mounce states, “There is no difference in their motivation. Both conduct themselves in such a way as to please their Master.” In other words, while the expressions of faith may differ in ritual practices, the motivation behind those practices is the same and that is to honor and glorify Christ. It’s worth restating that this is in the context of non-moral issues. There is certainly no room for committing sinful acts and justifying them by claiming it’s done for “God’s glory.” For example, one Christian making a graven image of God for the purpose of bowing to and worshiping it as a representation of God is no mere difference of opinion or matter of conscience. That would be a violation of the second commandment and a grave sin. Such issues are not the focus of what is in view here. To quote Alexander Maclaren: “Of course, these principles do not affect the eternal distinctions of right and wrong. Paul is not playing fast and loose with the solemn, divine law which makes sin and righteousness independent of men’s notions. He is speaking of things indifferent—ceremonial observances, and the like.”
14:7-8- These verses summarize one, big truth. That is, we do not belong to ourselves, we belong to Christ. We are His possession as 1 Peter 2:9 states. Paul says in 1 Cor. 6:19-20 (NIV), “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.” As Christians, we don’t live for our own desires, benefit and pleasure. All we do in this life should be done for Christ and with the understanding that the breath in our lungs is because of God’s sustaining power and is for Him. Even in death, we are His and will be with Him. Witherington III writes that everything a Christian does “should be done in the context of realizing that their lives are a gift from God, and their actions, whether eating, abstaining, worshipping, or whatever, should be suitable for offering up to God in thanks.”
14:9-12- Christ came to give His life a ransom for His bride. We are indeed bought by Christ (Mark 10:45, Acts 20:28). Because Christ died and rose again, He is Lord over the dead as well as the living. Truly, nothing can separate us from Him (8:38-39). Paul says in Phil. 1:21-23 that to live is to live for Christ and to die is to be with Him. He is Lord over us in this life as well as the next.
So why then, Paul asks in verse 10, do we think we can have either contempt for or judge one another? Just as the master’s servant only answers to his master, so we all will have to give an account not to each other, but our Master. We will all stand before the judgment seat of God (2 Cor. 5:10). For the believer, this isn’t a judgment of one’s salvation, but a judgment based on one’s works in this life (Matt. 16:27, Rom 2:6, Rev. 22:12).
As we expect from Paul, he anchors his argument in the Old Testament to make his point in verse 11. The quotation “As I live, declares the Lord” is found in multiple passages in the Old Testament, but in this context likely comes from Isa. 49:18. What comes after is a quote from Isaiah 45:23. The purpose is to show that we will all give an account to God on the Day of Judgement (as his summary statement in verse 12 shows). There is a day in which everyone who has ever existed will have to give an account to the God who made them. Paul wants this knowledge to have practical implications with how Christians interact with one another and that they do not live for themselves, but for God.
14:13-16- Knowing this reality should impact how we live in relation to others. These verses contain a practical application of what Paul stated in 12:10, “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor;” This certainly includes not putting an obstacle or stumbling block in front of a fellow believer, even if that requires a limitation of the “freedom” we might have in certain areas. As Paul makes clear, better to limit ourselves than to cause someone to stumble in their faith or violate their convictions concerning secondary or even tertiary doctrines. In Mark 7:15-23, Jesus had declared all foods clean. Everett Harrison notes that, “not everyone has been enlightened on this issue, and if one is convinced in his heart that some foods are unclean (e.g., in terms of the Levitical food laws), for him such foods remain unclean. Until he is convinced otherwise, it would violate his conscience to partake of them.”
Verse 15 should cause us to stop and seriously consider the gravity of our actions. The Greek word lypeō is what is rendered as hurt/distress/pain/grief depending on the translation. If we knowingly do things that would cause another believer great pain, distress, hurt or grief, we are no longer acting in love and in fact have violated the law of love (13:8-10). This could potentially lead them into destruction and shipwreck of their faith! The Greek word for “destroy” here is apollymi and used in this context means to bring about ruin, especially eschatological ruin. Therefore, Kenneth Wuest says of this: “To tamper with conscience, it is here implied, is ruin: and the selfish man who so uses his Christian liberty as to lead a weak brother to tamper with his conscience is art and part in that ruin.” Moo simply remarks, “In other words, the cavalier attitude of the strong may lead to the weak believer’s damnation.” And says Osborne, “Jesus gave himself as an atoning sacrifice for these people, and the strong glibly bring them to complete spiritual ruin just for the sake of their freedom!” And on the note of what Christ has done for our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, Mathew Henry’s commentary hits with the conviction of a classic Puritan when he states: “Did Christ quit a life for souls, such a life, and shall not we quit a morsel of meat for them? Did he think it worth while to deny himself so much for them as to die for them, and shall not we think it worth while to deny ourselves so little for them? Thou pleadest that it is thy own meat, but remember that, though the meat is thine, the brother offended by it is Christ’s.”
Therefore, as Paul concludes in verse 16, Let us not take what is for us a good and acceptable thing and turn it into a weapon for evil by hurting the conscience of another brother or sister in Christ. This is what it means to “give preference to one another.” This is part of what Paul means when he says, “do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others” in Phil. 2:4. A topic that will be further discussed by Paul at the beginning of the following chapter.
14:17-19- Paul is in essence saying that this topic is an example of “majoring in the minors.” The kingdom of God is about more important things than food, it’s about righteous living. Or as Harrison puts it, “His readers, all of them, are the loyal subjects of Christ in the kingdom of God. In that sphere the real concerns are not externals such as diet but the spiritual realities motivating life and shaping conduct.” This includes peace and joy as provided by the Holy Spirit.
Those who seek these things rather than to please themselves are serving Christ which is pleasing to God (verse 18). A humble person who promotes unity and who is selfless is obviously a joy to be around, thus “approved by men.” The goal then (verse 19) is to pursue peace and live in such a way that builds up the body of Christ, not to act in ways that would tear each other down. This may involve sacrificial love and a willingness to forego privileges for the sake of unity and love. Maclaren notes, “But if, on the other hand, you show that you are Christ’s servants by righteousness, peace, and joy, you will be pleasing to God and men will recognize that your religion is from Him, and that you are consistent professors of it.”
14:20-21- Paul again asserts his position here with regard to these matters of conscience. The seemingly superfluous repetition of these two verses ought to highlight the importance of the issue. Repetition was a matter of emphasis in ancient writing. The message should be clear at this point. We ought not do things that can jeopardize our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, regardless of the fact that it’s permitted. Freedoms to do certain things become sinful if done in the wrong manner and if it causes harm to others. It is lawful for me to drive a car. It is unlawful for me to drive a car in a reckless manner that could harm or kill people (say, at a high rate of speed on the wrong side of the highway).
Paul expands this to a universal principle by adding “anything else” in verse 21. This certainly applies to more than just the two examples mentioned in this chapter (though apparently two very relevant issues for the audience he was addressing). Osborne notes, “The mature Christian will not do anything that could cause spiritual harm to another believer.”
14:22-23- The NLT translates the first half of verse 22, “You may believe there’s nothing wrong with what you are doing, but keep it between yourself and God.” In the spirit of everything Paul has been saying, even though one might be convinced that eating certain foods is perfectly fine, if doing so would cause offense to another, best to refrain from doing so and keep quiet about it. Or in other words, when in the company of those who would object or be a cause of offense, do not exercise your freedom. Also, don’t pressure or force those to affirm your freedom. “Keep it to yourself.” Paul goes on to offer a beatitude. “Blessed is the one” or “Happy is he” depending on the translation. Paul is saying that blessed is the one who, even though he is confident of his freedom to eat certain foods, would forgo doing so if it means unity and not causing another to stumble. Not only is he not causing another to sin, but he himself is keeping from turning something that is permitted into a sinful act unto himself! John Chrysostom notes, “It is not the eating which is unclean, but the intention behind it.”
On the flip-side in verse 23, no one should eat certain food if he believes doing so is wrong. This would be to go against a conviction and therefore would not be an action from faith and honor to God. To quote Mounce, “Whatever is done without the conviction that God has approved it is by definition sin.”
Excursus: (Personal Freedom)
We very much live in a society and a culture that values personal autonomy and individual freedom above all else. While certain freedoms and rights are not inherently bad, the self absorbed attitude which they can produce can be very dangerous. The thought of foregoing freedoms and privileges for the sake of others can be seen as an attack on one’s own personal “sovereignty.” I speak not only as someone who can observe these things around me, but as someone who has been guilty of this same self-centered mindset. An example of this sentiment can be seen in Acts 15 where, despite the conclusion that Gentile Christians did not have to observe the law of Moses in ceremonial areas, they were still instructed to abstain from certain things for the sake of the consciences of their Jewish brothers and sisters and to promote unity within the church. Paul, though staunch in his belief that Christians were free from such restrictions (such as abstaining from food offered to idols), still affirmed the conclusion reached by the council and part of his reasoning for doing so might be found in this passage. The Gentiles would do well to give deference to the Jews in these matters. The “strong in faith” bearing with the scruples of the “weaker in faith” (as we will see in 15:1). Paul also addresses this topic in 1 Cor. 8 and says in 1 Cor. 8:7-13 (NIV)… “But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. For if someone with a weak conscience sees you, with all your knowledge, eating in an idol’s temple, won’t that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. When you sin against them in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall.”
Paul then goes on to give himself as an example in 1 Cor. 9 as one who was “free” to receive compensation for his ministry (a right he validates from Scripture), but forgoes this freedom for the sake of the gospel. His “freedom” was not the top priority. His entire point in Rom. 12 and in the second half of chapter 13 was to exhort the Christian to present themselves as living sacrifices to God, followed by instructions on how to do so. Looking out for our own interests, doing what best benefits ourselves and thinking less of others is nowhere to be found in the job description of someone who serves Christ. In fact, in Phil. 2:3-8 (ESV) we read, “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” Christ said in Mark 10:45 that He didn’t come to be served, but to serve and give Himself a ransom for many. Paul is saying that we all should imitate Christ in this way.
If we reflect on the love that Christ has shown us, how He humbled Himself, sacrificed Himself, was tortured and brutally murdered all while experiencing God’s justified wrath for us, this will compel us to humble ourselves and show our love in return to our Savior and Lord by serving Him, following His commands and loving our fellow brethren in Christ. Douglas Moo rightly states: “Our culture insists on rights, and it is easy for Christians to bring that attitude into the church. But the spiritual health of the body is far more important than our rights. The freedom God has purchased for us through his Son is a precious gift, but it is a freedom to live as God wants, not as we want.”
Bibliography (Works Cited):
-Craig Keener: The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament (Romans)
-Douglas J. Moo: NIV Application Commentary, One-Vol. Edition (Romans)
-Grant R. Osborne: Romans, IVPNTC, 2004
-Ben Witherington III: Paul’s Letters to the Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary
-Robert H. Mounce: Romans, NAC, 1995
-Alexander Maclaren: Expositions of Holy Scripture, Vol. 12 (Romans 14)
-Everett F. Harrison: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 10, Romans, 1976
-Kenneth S. Wuest: Word Studies in the Greek New Testament, Vol. 1 (Romans)
-Matthew Henry: Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible
-John Chrysostom: Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament Vol. 6 (Romans)