14:1 The believer who is weak in faith is overly conscientious about matters not regulated by Christian revelation. Paul commanded believers to welcome weak Christians but not to get into arguments about disputed matters.[1]
14:1 As for the one who is weak. The Christian’s basic attitude to a fellow-Christian is one of welcome and acceptance based on God’s attitude to us in Christ (v. 3; 15:7). There must be charity toward the “weak” person whose conscience is still bound by scruples from which the gospel normally sets us free (v. 2).
quarrel over opinions. In this instance, questions of food, drink, and the religious observation of days. While Paul does not regard these controversies as insoluble, he regards the unity of the church’s fellowship as more important than resolving them (cf. 12:5, 10, 16). The issues in view here did not belong to the gospel, but to the relative strength or weakness of the individual’s faith in the gospel. Where essentials of the gospel were at stake, Paul’s response was very different (e.g., Gal. 1:6, 7; 3:1–5; Phil. 3:2, 18, 19).[2]
14:1 one who is weak in faith Likely refers to Christians who remained committed to observing certain parts of the law, such as food laws and the Sabbath (vv. 2–3). The immediate context probably refers to Jewish Christians, though other practices concerning food and observing certain days (v. 6) were issues for non-Jewish people as well (see Gal 4:1–11). The law of Moses designated certain animals as ritually unclean, and it therefore prohibited Jews from eating them (see Lev 11:1–47).[3]
14:1 As for the one who is weak. The exhortation here is directed to the strong, for they are tempted to enter into quarrels with those who have a weaker faith.[4]
14:1 accept. The Gr. word refers to personal and willing acceptance of another. weak in faith. This characterizes those believers who are unable to let go of the religious ceremonies and rituals of their past. The weak Jewish believer had difficulty abandoning the rites and prohibitions of the Old Covenant; he felt compelled to adhere to dietary laws, observe the Sabbath, and offer sacrifices in the temple. The weak Gentile believer had been steeped in pagan idolatry and its rituals; he felt that any contact with anything remotely related to his past, including eating meat that had been offered to a pagan deity and then sold in the marketplace, tainted him with sin. Both had very sensitive consciences in these areas, and were not yet mature enough to be free of those convictions. Cf. 1Co 8:1–13. passing judgment on his opinions. The mature believer should not sit in judgment on the sincere but underdeveloped thoughts that govern the weak believer’s conduct.[5]
14:1 Romans 14:1–15:13 deals with important principles to guide God’s people in dealing with matters of secondary importance. These are the things that so often cause conflict among believers, but such conflict is quite unnecessary, as we shall see.
A weak Christian is one who has unfounded scruples over matters of secondary importance. In this context, he was often a converted Jew who still had scruples about eating nonkosher foods or working on Saturday.
The first principle is this: a weak Christian should be received into the local fellowship, but not with the idea of engaging him in disputes about his ultra-scrupulousness. Christians can have happy fellowship without agreeing on nonessentials.[6]
| 14:1
|
| NASB
|
“Now accept”
|
| NKJV
|
“Receive”
|
| NRSV, TEV
|
“Welcome”
|
| NJB
|
“Give a welcome”
|
This is a PRESENT MIDDLE IMPERATIVE (cf. 15:1). This is an ongoing command with emphasis on the subject. The PRONOUN “you” is in the Greek VERB, but is implied in English and refers to “strong” Christians (cf. 15:1). This implies two groups in the church at Rome. This may have related to (1) the tension between believing Jews and Gentiles (cf. 15:7–21) or (2) differing personality types. This whole context is dealing with true, sincere believers; some strong, some weak in their faith. Faith is used here in the sense of the understanding of the gospel and its radically new and freeing implications.
| ©
|
| NASB, NKJV
|
“the one who is weak in faith”
|
| NRSV, TEV
|
“those who are weak in faith”
|
| JB
|
“If a person’s faith is not strong enough”
|
This phrase is emphasized by being fronted, or put first, in the Greek text. Literally it is “weak in faith.” The PRESENT TENSE focuses on the fact that it is a lifestyle characteristic. This refers to a legalistic mindset. The over-scrupulous Christian brother is described in this chapter in three ways (1) prohibitions of food (cf. 14:2, 6, 21); (2) emphasis on special days (cf. 14:5–6); and (3) prohibition of wine (cf. 14:17, 21). This same type of person was mentioned in Rom. 15:1 and 1 Cor. 8:9–13; 9:22. Be careful not to categorize yourself too quickly as a strong or weak Christian. Often believers are weak in one area and strong in another.
Paul’s attitude toward these matters is very different in Gal. 4:9–10 and Col. 2:16–23. These texts reflect the attitudes and teachings of false teachers. In Romans these are sincere believers who have over-scrupulous consciences.
| SPECIAL TOPIC: WEAKNESS
Here is the contrast. The false teachers boast in their credentials and rhetorical style, but Paul knows the value of “weakness” (astheneō). Notice how often these terms (or their various forms) are used in I and II Corinthians.
|
|
|
Boast
|
Weak
|
|
|
1 Corinthians 1:29, 31
|
1 Corinthians 1:25, 27
|
|
|
3:21
|
2:3
|
|
|
4:7
|
4:10
|
|
|
5:6
|
8:7, 9, 10, 11, 12
|
|
|
9:15, 16
|
9:22
|
|
|
2 Corinthians 1:12, 14
|
11:30
|
|
|
5:12 (twice)
|
12:22
|
|
|
7:4, 14 (twice)
|
15:43
|
|
|
8:24
|
2 Corinthians 10:10
|
|
|
9:2, 3
|
11:21, 29, 30
|
|
|
10:8, 13, 15, 16, 17
|
12:5, 9, 10 (twice)
|
|
|
11:12, 16, 17, 18, 30
|
13:3, 4 (twice), 9
|
|
|
12:1, 5, 6, 9
|
|
| Paul uses the concept of weakness in several different ways.
1. weakness of God, 1 Cor. 1:25
2. weak in the world, 1 Cor. 1:27
3. Paul’s weakness and fear, 1 Cor. 2:3; 9:22; 2 Cor. 11:29, 30; 12:5
4. Paul and his mission team, 1 Cor. 4:10; 2 Cor. 11:21
5. weak believer (cf. Rom. 14:1–15:13), 1 Cor. 8:7, 9, 10, 11, 12; 9:22
6. physical illness, 1 Cor. 11:30
7. parts of the human body, 1 Cor. 12:22
8. physical body, 1 Cor. 15:43
9. Paul’s physical presence or his rhetorical skills, 2 Cor. 10:10
10. Paul’s weakness amplified God’s strength, 2 Cor. 12:9, 10; 13:4, 9
11. Christ’s message through Paul, 2 Cor. 13:3
12. Christ’s physical body, 2 Cor. 13:4
|
| ©
|
| NASB
|
“but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions”
|
| NKJV
|
“but not to dispute over doubtful things”
|
| NRSV
|
“but not for the purpose of quarreling over opinions”
|
| TEV
|
“but do not argue with them about their personal opinions”
|
| JB
|
“without starting an argument”
|
|
|
|
|
Believers must fully accept other believers with whom they disagree without trying to change them! This demands freedom of conscience as the basis of fellowship, not an imposed uniformity. Believers are all in process. They must give the Spirit time to work and mold each into maturity, but even in maturity, they will not all agree.[7]
1. Him who is weak in faith accept, but not with the idea of passing judgment on (his) opinions.
Paul is telling the members of the Roman church, whom he regards as being “strong”—he evidently is thinking of the majority—that they must not commit the moral error of passing judgment upon those who are “weak” in faith, must not condemn them for refusing to eat any meat.
The “weak” members probably reasoned as follows: “In this pagan city how do we know whether any meat at all is really ‘clean’? How do we know whether the animal from which it came was actually a ‘clean’ one? How do we know whether it was slaughtered in the prescribed manner? And how do we know whether it was not first of all offered to idols?”
The apostle reasoned that as long as the vegetarianism of these people did not result from the conviction, “By becoming vegetarians we are putting God in debt to ourselves,” they must be viewed as believers, brothers and sisters in Christ. They must be fully “accepted,” that is, not only should they be formally recognized as members in good and regular standing of the church but they must also be heartily welcomed into daily fellowship with all other believers. From every aspect the welcome extended to them must be warm and genuine. The very suggestion of “accepting” (?) them with the purpose of adversely criticizing them for their “opinions” (or “scruples”) must not even occur to anyone.[8]
The positive principle (1)
The positive principle is in two parts. First, Accept him whose faith is weak (1a). We note that there is no attempt to conceal or disguise what these brothers and sisters are. They are weak in faith (here meaning ‘conviction’), immature, untaught, and (as Paul’s unfolding argument makes clear) actually mistaken. Yet on that account they are to be neither ignored, nor reproached, nor (at least at this stage) corrected, but rather to be received into the fellowship. Proslambanō means more than to ‘accept’ people, in the sense of acquiescing in their existence, even in their right to belong; more even than to ‘receive or accept in one’s society, into one’s home or circle of acquaintances’ (BAGD). It means to welcome into one’s fellowship and into one’s heart. It implies the warmth and kindness of genuine love. Thus, it is used in the New Testament of Philemon giving to Onesimus the same welcome that he would give to the apostle,13 of the Maltese who welcomed the bedraggled, shipwrecked company after they had swum ashore, and even of Jesus who promises to welcome his people into his presence in heaven.15
‘Acceptance’ is a popular word today, and rightly so. Theologically, God’s acceptance of us is quite a good contemporary term for justification. But we should be cautious about modern talk of ‘unconditional acceptance’, as when the concept of an ‘open church’ is canvassed, in which membership is offered to everybody, with no questions asked and no conditions laid down. For though God’s love is indeed unconditional, his acceptance of us is not, since it depends on our repentance and our faith in Jesus Christ. We need to bear this in mind when we consider that we are to accept the weak (14:1) since ‘God has accepted him’ (14:3), and to accept one another ‘just as Christ accepted’ us (15:7).
Secondly, having reflected on the principle of acceptance, we need to observe its qualification: without passing judgment on disputable matters (1b). Both Greek words have a range of meanings. Diakriseis (translated passing judgment) can mean discussions, debates, quarrels or judgments, and dialogismoi can mean opinions, scruples or ‘the anxious internal debates of conscience’. Paul is saying, then, that we must receive the weak person with a warm and genuine welcome, ‘without debate over his misgivings’ or scruples (reb), or ‘not for the purpose of getting into quarrels about opinions’ (BAGD). In other words, we are not to turn the church into a debating chamber, whose chief characteristic is argument, still less into a lawcourt in which weak persons are put in the dock, interrogated and arraigned. The welcome we give them must include respect for their opinions.[9]
RESPECT FOR SCRUPLES
Romans 14:1
Welcome the man who is weak in the faith, but not with a view to passing judgment on his scruples.
In this chapter, Paul is dealing with what may have been a temporary and local problem in the Roman church, but is also one continually confronting the Church and always demanding a solution. In the church at Rome, there were apparently two lines of thought. There were some who believed that in Christian liberty the old taboos were gone; they believed that the old food laws were now irrelevant; they believed that Christianity did not consist in the special observance of any one day or days. Paul makes it clear that this in fact is the standpoint of real Christian faith. On the other hand, there were those who were full of scruples; they believed that it was wrong to eat meat; they believed in the rigid observance of the Sabbath tyranny. Paul describes the ultra-scrupulous person as weak in the faith. What does he mean by that?
Such people are weak in the faith for two reasons.
(1) They have not yet discovered the meaning of Christian freedom; they are at heart still legalists and see Christianity as consisting of rules and regulations.
(2) They have not yet freed themselves from a belief in the efficacy of works. In their hearts, they believe that they can gain God’s favour by doing certain things and abstaining from others. Basically, they are still trying to earn a right relationship with God, and have not yet accepted the way of grace, still thinking more of what they can do for God than of what God has done for them.
Paul encourages the stronger Christians to welcome such people and not to bombard them with continual criticisms.
This problem is not confined to the days of Paul. To this day in the Church, there are two points of view. There is the more liberal view, which sees no harm in many things and is content that many innocent pleasures should go on within the Church. And there is the narrower point of view, which is offended at many things in which the liberal person sees no harm.
Paul’s sympathies are all with the broader point of view; but, at the same time, he says that any of these weaker Christians who come into the Church must be received sympathetically. When we are confronted with someone who holds the narrower view, there are three attitudes we must avoid.
(1) We must avoid irritation. An impatient annoyance with such a person gets us nowhere. However much we may disagree, we must try to see the other person’s point of view and to understand it.
(2) We must avoid ridicule. People cannot remain unhurt when something that is important to them is laughed at. It is no small sin to laugh at another person’s beliefs. They may seem prejudices rather than beliefs; but no one has a right to laugh at what others hold sacred. In any event, laughter will never woo other people to a wider view; it will only make them withdraw still more determinedly into their rigidity.
(3) We must avoid contempt. It is very wrong to regard narrower people as old-fashioned fools whose views may be treated with contempt. People’s views are their own and must be treated with respect. It is not even possible to win others over to our position unless we have a genuine respect for theirs. Of all attitudes towards other people, the most un-Christian is contempt.
Before we leave this verse, it should be noted that there is another perfectly possible translation. ‘Welcome those who are weak in the faith, but do not introduce them straightaway to the discussion of questions which can only raise doubts.’ There are some people whose faith is so strong that no amount of debate and questioning will really shake it. But there are others who have a simple faith which is only needlessly disturbed by clever discussion.
It may well be that we are over-fond of discussion for discussion’s sake. It is fatal to give the impression that Christianity consists of nothing but a series of questions under debate. ‘We have found’, said the writer G. K. Chesterton, ‘all the questions that can be found. It is time we stopped looking for questions and started looking for answers.’ ‘Tell me of your certainties,’ said the German poet Goethe; ‘I have doubts enough of my own.’ There is one good rule which should guide the progress of any discussion: even if it has been a bewildered discussion, and even if it has been considering questions to which there is no real answer, it should always finish with an affirmation. There may be many questions left unanswered, but there must be some certainty left unshaken.[10]
14:1 / Paul begins with a word to the strong: Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. J. D. G. Dunn suggests that Paul’s use of the singular may refer to Jewish Christians who were trickling back to Rome in ones or twos after Claudius’ death (Romans 9–16, p. 798). Paul admonishes the strong not to gang up against weaker believers or to treat them condescendingly. The key issue, after all, is faith. Weak in faith does not mean lack of faith, but rather, as the following examples show, a lack of “knowledge” (as Paul says in 1 Cor. 8:10). The weak, who have not (yet) thought through the full implications of the faith, attempt to impose their doubts on the strong to prevent them from a full exercise of the Christian liberty that their faith allows them. The strong are enjoined to welcome the weak not for purposes of settling accounts with them or of trying to show them the folly of their beliefs. They are charged to accept them genuinely for what they are—as fellow Christians.
An acceptance that is predicated on converting another to one’s own opinion in such matters is coercive. It is an unlovely love rather than Christian love, for agapē “is not self-seeking” (1 Cor. 13:5). The middle voice of the Greek verb translated as accept suggests a genuine embracing of the weak, not a reluctant toleration. Had not Jesus taught that his Father would clothe those “of little faith” (Matt. 6:30), and, in speaking of little children, that “the kingdom of God belongs to such as these” (Mark 10:14)? This is no less true of the weak in Rome. Passing judgment on disputable matters simply exalts the strong and humiliates the weak. It is an exercise of knowledge (1 Cor. 8:1) rather than of faith. Knowledge creates gulfs; faith and love build bridges. To accept the weak is to accept Christ, for Christ comes to us incognito, as one despised and rejected, as one from whom men turn their faces (Isa. 53:3), as one who “was rich, yet for your sakes … became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich” (2 Cor. 8:9).[11]
1 Paul concludes his exhortation to the strong and the weak with a plea for mutual acceptance (15:7). But he begins by urging that the community “receive the one who is weak with respect to faith.” By making the weak in faith the object of this command, which appears to be directed to the community as a whole, Paul implies that the strong were the dominant element in the Roman church. This fits with our identification of the strong as mainly Gentile Christians, since Paul treats the church in Rome as predominantly Gentile (see the Introduction). To “receive” the weak is not simply to accord them official recognition as church members. The verb means “receive in(to) one’s home or circle of acquaintances” (BDAG), and implies that the Roman Christians were not only to tolerate the weak but that they were to treat them as brothers and sisters in the intimate fellowship typical of the people of God.495
Paul’s description of those who are to be received, “the weak with respect to faith,” obviously carries a pejorative connotation: it is certainly better to be strong than to be weak!497 It was probably the strong in Rome who described those with whom they disagreed in this way. Yet the phrase is not as negative as it may seem at first sight. Crucial here is the meaning of the word “faith” in this description. Paul uses the language of faith to describe the dispute between the two groups at both the beginning (vv. 1, 2) and end (vv. 22, 23) of chap. 14. The words certainly have some reference to that basic response to God in Christ demanded by the gospel which faith and believe have denoted throughout Romans.500 Yet this distinctively Christian notion of faith has (at least implicitly) the person of Jesus Christ as its object: to believe is to entrust oneself to a person. In v. 2, however, “believe” has the notion “believe that something is legitimate.” Paul is not therefore simply criticizing these people for having a weak or inadequate trust in Christ as their Savior and Lord. Rather, he is criticizing them for lack of insight into some of the implications of their faith in Christ. These are Christians who are not able to accept for themselves the truth that their faith in Christ implies liberation from certain OT/Jewish ritual requirements. The faith with respect to which these people are weak, therefore, is related to their basic faith in Christ but one step removed from it. It involves their individual outworking of Christian faith, their convictions about what that faith allows and prohibits. As J. Barclay puts it, “the difference between strong and weak faith is the degree to which faith, although always expressed in culturally specific practice, is disaggregated from any one cluster of cultural norms.”504 Paul’s decision to use the pejorative phrase “weak in faith” makes clear where his sympathies lie. We cannot avoid the impression (though his pastoral concerns lead him to keep it implicit) that Paul would hope that a growth in Christ would help those who were weak become “strong.”
In the meantime, however, Paul is concerned with the unity of the church. This is why he not only urges the strong to “receive” the weak but to receive them with the right motivation and in the right spirit. Don’t, Paul says, welcome the weak simply “for the purpose of quarrels over disputed matters.”506 The “disputed matters” are those differences of opinion respecting the eating of meat, the observance of days, and the drinking of wine that Paul mentions later in the chapter (vv. 2, 5, 21). Paul wants the strong to receive the weak into full and intimate fellowship, something that could not happen if the strong, the majority group, persist in advancing their views on these issues, sparking quarrels and mutual recrimination.[12]
Where Is the Chasm?
Romans 14:1
Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.
If someone spends a lot of time talking about a particular subject, it is usually because the person is interested in it and thinks it’s important. So apparently Paul is very interested in the way Christians treat other Christians, since he writes on this subject at length.
Romans 14 begins a new section (Rom. 14:1–15:13), and it is one of the book’s longest parts—certainly the longest single part of the closing application portion of the letter (Rom. 12:1–16:27). Why does Paul give so much space to discussing why Christians need to accept those with whom they disagree on less than essential matters? What about matters that in our judgment are much more important, like Christian economics, politics, ecology, or the emancipation of oppressed peoples? Is something as “insignificant” as accepting and getting along with other Christians really that important?
Apparently Paul thought so.
His instruction about developing a Christian mind, which I personally think is very important, was completed in two verses. To discuss a right estimate of oneself and others and the need to encourage others took six verses. A call to love one another filled thirteen verses; material on the question of church and state, seven verses; right conduct in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ, seven verses more. But now his discussion of how Christians are to accept and support other Christians when they do not think or behave as we think they should fills all of chapter 14 and the first half of chapter 15, a total of thirty-five verses. Moreover, this is the last major subject Paul discusses, since following this he begins to talk about his own future plans and sends his final greetings. Apparently, this is the matter he wants to leave before our minds in closing.
There are two main parts to this section: (1) how people with tender consciences are to be treated (14:1–12), and (2) how the “strong” are to use their liberty (14:13–15:13). This is written for the “strong.” So if you think you are a strong Christian, both these parts are for you.
What Is the Issue?
The first verse of chapter 14 is a thematic statement. In the New International Version it reads: “Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.” Some people will know it better in the King James Version: “Him that is weak in the faith, receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.” Phillips paraphrases, “Welcome a man whose faith is weak, but not with the idea of arguing over his scruples.”
There has been a great deal of debate over what Paul is specifically concerned about in this verse and those following. He is talking about people who are “weak” versus those who are “strong.” But who are these weak and strong people? Paul does not spell out exactly who they are, nor why the views of the one party are weak or weaker than the other.
Later on in this section Paul mentions two specific matters: (1) the idea that a Christian is free to eat anything versus the idea that he should eat only vegetables, and (2) the keeping of special “holy” days. This makes us think of other passages in Paul’s writings in which these matters are mentioned, but there are differences that make it hard to use those passages to explain what Paul is concerned about here.
F or instance, in 1 Corinthians 8:1–13 and 10:23–33 Paul also uses the word weak while speaking of those who had reservations about eating meat from animals that had been sacrificed to one of the pagan gods or goddesses. But nothing in Romans mentions idols, and a concern for a vegetarian diet is not an issue in 1 Corinthians. There are similarities, but there is no reason to assume that the two situations were the same.
Again, Paul is concerned with the observance of special “holy” days in Galatians and Colossians. Galatians 4:10–11 says, “You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.” In Colossians 2:16–17 he warns his readers about those who would impose the observance of such days upon them: “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” Obviously, these are similar texts. But what is most noticeable about them is that Paul takes an entirely different approach in Galatians and Colossians from what he does in Romans. In the shorter Epistles he tells his readers not to become entangled in such things. In Romans he says that none of this matters.
Is Paul being inconsistent, then? Has his mind changed? No! He is merely dealing with different things. John Murray explains it like this:
In Galatians Paul is dealing with the Judaizers who were perverting the gospel at its center. They were the propagandists of a legalism which maintained that the observance of days and seasons was necessary to justification and acceptance with God. This … was “a different gospel which is not another.” … In Romans 14 there is no evidence that those esteeming one day above another were involved in any respect in this fatal error. They were not propagandists for a ceremonialism that was aimed at the heart of the gospel. Hence Paul’s tolerance and restraint.
A bit further on in this section, in chapter 15, Paul also speaks of differences between Jews and Gentiles, but he is not specific there, either. That is, he does not link the eating of meat or the observance of special days, or their opposites, to either group. So it is not a Jewish asceticism in food versus a Gentile laxity or indulgence that he has in mind.
When we put this together we are probably right to conclude that Paul is not thinking of any one area of action or belief specifically, though he throws out suggestions, but rather that he is intentionally being quite general. To use our common expression, the problem is that Christians are always dumping on one another. Instead of getting on with living their own lives as best they can to the glory of God or, which is also necessary, living so as to win nonbelievers to Christ, they are wasting their time trying to find fault with one another. They do not trust what God is doing in the other Christian.
We have to stop that behavior, Paul says. We must accept and support one another if we are to hear and heed what Paul is saying in this last major section of the letter.
Today’s Issues, Not Yesterday’s
Another matter we need to think about as we begin to get into this section is that when we are thinking about accepting other Christians as they are we need to grapple with the issues that are dividing believers today and not those that troubled Christians yesterday.
I can think of several behavioral issues that years ago caused Christians to look down on other Christians and judge them and their conduct unfavorably: drinking, smoking, dancing, and going to movies. I did not spend much time in excessively narrow or legalistic church circles while I was growing up, but if I had, the list might have been expanded to include such things as the length of a boy’s hair or the length of a girl’s skirt.
In my youth those were the issues that would have fallen into the category Paul is writing about in Romans 14 and 15. And one of the sad things about those years is that what Paul wrote about in these chapters was not heeded. That is, the older generation made such a watershed issue of these things that many young people were turned off to religion, or at least to evangelical or fundamentalist religion, rather than conform to what they understood quite rightly to be other than the essence of the gospel.
Many unbelievers must have been turned off or at least confused by this as well. Many of them undoubtedly got the impression that being a Christian essentially meant giving up these so-called worldly vices, rather than trusting Jesus Christ as one’s personal Savior and Lord.
But here is the problem. If that is all Paul is writing about in Romans 14 and 15, then he really doesn’t have much to say to our generation. This is because ours is an antinomian, liberal, all-accepting generation, and except for a few narrow circles that most of us have little or no contact with, most Christians are all too accepting of what used to be called worldly conduct. We don’t care whether people smoke or drink or play cards or so forth. That may be good in some ways, though I would argue that it is also bad in others. But that is not the point here. The question here is this: Is this all that Paul is talking about in these chapters; and if it is, shouldn’t we just skip ahead to Romans 15:14 and congratulate ourselves on having already mastered this teaching?
I hope we know that this isn’t right. The specifics may have changed, but the problem is with us somewhere, and it is probably greater in us than with others, especially if we do not think we have a problem. Let me suggest a few areas where we can apply this today.
- When another Christian is going through hard times. I suppose this is the area in which I see the failure of the self-styled “strong” toward the “weak” brother or sister most often. Christians go through hard times. Sometimes it is in the family. A husband is deserted by his wife, or a wife is abandoned by her husband. Sometimes a Christian loses his job and, if the individual is a husband, may come to a point where he is unable to support his family. Sometimes there is sickness or an accident that brings a person to the very edge of life.
When Christians go through such difficult periods, their fellow believers should rally around them, support and encourage them, and help them financially. But instead, what often happens is that those who ought to help sit in judgment. They say, or at least they think, “That person must be out of the will of God, or this wouldn’t have happened to her.” Or a man loses his job and another Christian accuses him of failing to support his family, noting cruelly—he has a verse for the occasion—“If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim. 5:8). When a person has a serious car accident or falls or is struck with a serious disease, someone will say smugly, “God must be trying to get your attention.”
What a terrible situation! Such “friends” speak like Job’s counselors, and they do not even sit down and empathize with the struggling believer first, as those shallow but at least empathetic men did. Unfortunately, many Christians today lack empathy.
- Variations in individual piety. A second area where Christians continue to judge one another is personal piety. Do you have a “quiet time” every morning? How long per day do you pray? Are you reading good Christian books? How often do you witness?
Don’t get me wrong. I think a daily (or at least a regular) quiet time is important. It is essential that we pray, and none of us prays as much as would be profitable. I am constantly saying, “Turn off the television and read a worthwhile Christian book.” We are commanded to witness. The problem is that we judge other Christians by whether they measure up to what we ourselves do, forgetting that we are probably not very good models in these areas ourselves, at least if we are to measure our performance by the saints of a past era, and that the other Christian may be excelling in areas with which we are not even familiar.
One very common form of this is the way a “spiritual” wife will judge a husband who does not read the Bible or Christian books as much as she does. He is not thinking about spiritual things all the time; he has his work to think about, and when he comes home he may be tired and perhaps only wants to watch the ball game on television. The wife, if she does not work outside the home and does not have her time entirely taken up with raising young children, has time to read and think. When her husband gets home she wants to talk about what she has been thinking about that day. If he doesn’t, she thinks it is because he is not very spiritual or is “not right with God.”
It may well be that the husband is not spiritual, of course. But whether he is or not, the attitude that judges him for what he is not doing and fails to appreciate him for what he is doing is wrong. And it is also wrong when the husband dismisses his wife and her concerns. In this case, it does not matter who is “weak” or who is “strong.” What matters is that we accept the other Christian as a believer and trust God for what he is doing in that person’s life.
Donald Grey Barnhouse told of being at a luncheon with a group of ministers where someone spoke disparagingly about the clergy in another denomination. They didn’t seem to accomplish anything, he said. Barnhouse entered the conversation by telling about one of those ministers whom he had known personally. The man had gone through seminary and had been ordained. But he seldom preached, never went to prayer meetings, and often failed to attend church for weeks at a time. Worse than that, he spent all his time in his library and indulged in habits that others felt were intemperate and un-Christian. He lived this way for more than twenty years. The ministers concluded that a man like that was no credit to the ministry and perhaps was not even a Christian.
Later in the luncheon Barnhouse turned the conversation to the subject of Bible study helps and asked what the others thought was the best Bible concordance. They said that the best was Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, which contains Hebrew and Greek word lists and comparative helps. Barnhouse then pointed out that the minister he had described earlier, of whom they had all disapproved, was James Strong, the author of this invaluable volume.
The point was obvious. God has given his servants diverse talents, and he uses them in ways that please him. How we feel about them is irrelevant, since they answer to God rather than to us. Our part is to accept these others as fellow believers and support them and pray for their work.
- Denominational affiliation. Church affiliations also often wrongly divide believers and produce judgmental attitudes. I am not saying that we have to consider other denominations to be right in their distinctives, any more than we have to consider other Christians as always right when they differ from us. But just as we are to accept other Christians as Christians, so must we accept other denominations as true elements of the one body of Christ—if they acknowledge him as Lord and confess the gospel as the one way of salvation.
- Personality differences. What about personality differences? Does every Christian have to be grim like an undertaker, or always smiling like a stand-up comedian? Charles Spurgeon was the greatest preacher of his age, but he was frequently criticized for being funny. When one woman objected to the humor he inserted into his sermons Spurgeon told her, “Madam, you would think a great deal better of me if you knew the funny things I kept out.”
Spurgeon was a character. A young man asked what he should do about a box of cigars he had been given. Spurgeon solved his problem. “Give them to me,” he said, “and I will smoke them to the glory of God.”
On another occasion Spurgeon was criticized for traveling to meetings in a first class railway carriage. His antagonist said, “Mr. Spurgeon, what are you doing up here? I am riding back there in the third class carriage taking care of the Lord’s money.” Spurgeon replied, “And I am up here in the first class carriage taking care of the Lord’s servant.”
Let’s stop dumping on one another, and let’s allow God to deal with each of his servants how, when, and as kindly as he will. And while we are at it, let’s be thankful that he has dealt as kindly as he has with us. If he had not, we would all be in deep trouble.
What Does Paul Advise?
We are only at the beginning of this important section of Romans, of course. There is much more to come. But we should notice clearly even here that Paul has two initial points of advice. In fact, what he says is stronger than advice—these are commands, and the whole sentence is made up of them: “Accept him whose faith is weak” and “Do not pass judgment in disputable matters.”
- Accept him whose faith is weak. This means that we are to accept other Christians as Christians and that, as John Murray says, “There is to be no discrimination in respect of confidence, esteem, and affection.”
Accept is a strong term, because it is used of God’s acceptance of us in verse 3 and of Christ’s acceptance of us in 15:7. Verse 3 says, “The man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him.” The other verse says, “Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you.” If God has accepted the other person, who are you not to accept him?
- Do not pass judgment in disputable matters. Recognize that some standards of right conduct are unclear and that other matters really do not matter. In those areas, let the matter drop and get on with things that do matter. Above all, accept the other believer for what he or she has to offer to the whole body of Christ. And do your own part too! Tell someone about Jesus. Certainly you have better things to do than to hunt out the speck in the eye of your fellow Christian while overlooking the plank in your own.
Francis Schaeffer used to talk about “the chasm.” He said that we put it in the wrong place, dividing ourselves from other Christians. It shouldn’t be there. True, there is a chasm between those who know Jesus Christ and those who do not, between Christians and the world, and it is a deep one. But that is where it lies, between Christians and the world, not between Christians and Christians. All who know Jesus Christ are on this side of the chasm, and we must stand with them for Christ’s kingdom.[13]
[1] Patterson, P. (2017). Salvation in the Old Testament. In E. A. Blum & T. Wax (Eds.), CSB Study Bible: Notes (p. 1802). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.
[2] Sproul, R. C. (Ed.). (2005). The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (p. 1637). Orlando, FL; Lake Mary, FL: Ligonier Ministries.
[3] Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Ro 14:1). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
[4] Crossway Bibles. (2008). The ESV Study Bible (p. 2180). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.
[5] MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (2006). The MacArthur study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Ro 14:1). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
[6] MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer’s Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (p. 1735). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
[7] Utley, R. J. (1998). The Gospel according to Paul: Romans (Vol. Volume 5, Ro 14:1). Marshall, Texas: Bible Lessons International.
[8] Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953–2001). Exposition of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Vol. 12–13, pp. 455–456). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.
[9] Stott, J. R. W. (2001). The message of Romans: God’s good news for the world (pp. 359–360). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
[10] Barclay, W. (2002). The Letter to the Romans (3rd ed. fully rev. & updated, pp. 211–214). Louisville, KY; London: Westminster John Knox Press.
[11] Edwards, J. R. (2011). Romans (pp. 319–320). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
[12] Moo, D. J. (2018). The Letter to the Romans. (N. B. Stonehouse, F. F. Bruce, G. D. Fee, & J. B. Green, Eds.) (Second Edition, pp. 851–854). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
[13] Boice, J. M. (1991–). Romans: The New Humanity (Vol. 4, pp. 1723–1729). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.
Like this:
Like Loading...
