Compared to earlier chapters of Paul’s letter that focus on accepting the differences between people before they become believers, this portion of his letter to the Romans focuses on accepting one another in spite of a certain kind of differences we have after we become Christians.
Read Romans 14:1-5. It is clear that this controversy was threatening the unity of the Christians in Rome. There are key issues and terminology that Paul addresses to describe the two groups.
Polytheistic worship was part of the nature of Greco-Roman society. Worshippers commonly offered animal sacrifices at the temples. Priests were allowed to keep most of the edible meat, which they sold at the temples (see 1 Corinthians 8:10) or to vendors at the city markets (see 1 Corinthians 10:25). People had no way of knowing where the meat had come from.
Was it permissible for Christians to eat meat that may have been sacrificed to idols? Two groups disagreed strongly on this:
Some felt the freedom to eat, because everything created by God is good, because their spiritual state was secure through Christ, and because there was nothing in scripture that forbade doing this; though there was Biblical instruction on worshiping idols, there was not anything about eating them meat that was sacrificed to those idols. Paul calls this group the "strong in faith" (15:1).
Others, probably those from a Jewish background, disagreed. They were afraid that by eating this meat, they would be participating somehow in idol worship and therefore would be spiritually contaminated. Therefore, they felt the only spiritually safe course was to solely eat vegetables. Paul calls this group the "weak in faith" because their faith was not sufficiently informed by God's Word to practice this freedom.
The same two groups evidently disagreed over another issue – whether a certain day of the week, probably the Sabbath, was intrinsically spiritual and had to be observed in certain ways. The "weak" believed it was; the "strong" disagreed.
Do you see any parallels? If you have been a Christian for any time at all, you know that Christians disagree about lots of issues like these:
Prescriptive examples: Days
Prohibitive examples: Meat
There are other valid reasons why Christians might restrict themselves in some of these areas:
We should obviously respect their decisions in these matters, but these are not "weak in faith" issues.
Who was right in this controversy?
There is no doubt that the "strong" were correct — and there is no doubt that Paul himself was one of the "strong." He tells us his position on eating this meat in Romans 14:14, as well as his stance on day-observance in Colossians 2:16-17.
Even in today’s time, many would take the “strong” position on these matters; however, there are also many brothers and sisters in faith, such as people in your neighborhoods, workplaces, and communities, that would take the other side.
But just because you are "strong" does not mean that you are spiritually mature. The "strong" in Rome and Corinth proved this in those days. Paul challenges us in this passage to be mature as well as "strong"and tells us how to demonstrate this by how we relate to the "weak." In this passage, as well as the parallels in 1 Corinthians 8,10, Paul gives us four principles:
Read Romans 14:1,3,6-8, and 10. The "strong" should welcome them as sincere followers of Christ, rather than judging them as unspiritual. In fact, Paul says in Romans 14:9-12 that we should leave the final determination of one another's spirituality to the Lord Himself.
Why does Paul stress this? I have never had to look beyond myself in the mirror to know the answer to this question. It is so easy for me to conclude that they know better, and are therefore deliberately legalistic, self-righteous Pharisees who are just trying to imprison everyone else. Now, there are such people but this passage does not apply to them. There are also many sincere, committed Christians who for a variety of reasons — spiritual youth, lack of access to good teaching, religious upbringing, etc. — are "weak."
Every time I attend Christian conferences, I have to deal with this issue; I feel as though I experience culture shock. They often make a big deal about Sunday worship, dressing formally, praying before meals, and so on that I cannot talk about the latest secular movie I enjoyed, or invite them to have a beer. It is so easy for me to view them as Pharisees; while some of them are, if I actually take time to get to know many of them, I find that they are just as committed, maybe even more so, to Christ than I am! We may disagree about some of these things, but we can share our enthusiasm about knowing Christ, reaching others for Christ, and helping other Christians grow in Christ.
What does it mean if you cannot respect, enjoy fellowship with, and speak well of Christians like this?
It means that you are immature, because you have a carnal standard for evaluating other Christians — they must with your own personal freedoms rather than common love for Christ and His cause. Therefore, judging "weak" says more about you than it does about them.
Of course, the "weak" should not judge the "strong" (see Romans 14:3b,10). If you do this, you are also immature, and you can become a Pharisee.
I stress this principle because some Christians misinterpret verses like Romans 14:21 or 1 Corinthians 8:13 as a command to permanently give up these freedoms because there may be some "weak" in the area who will be bothered by them.
But this is not what Paul is saying, as reading these texts in context clearly indicates. In the very next verse (see Romans 14:22), Paul makes it clear that he does not want the "strong" to abandon their freedoms. And 1 Corinthians 10:25-30 makes it clear that Paul wanted them to abstain from their freedom to eat meat sacrificed to idols only in the presence of certain "weak" Christians. Otherwise, they were free to eat it.
Every Friday night, I meet with a half dozen young Christian guys. We sit around a table for a couple hours, studying the Bible and praying together. Afterward, we eat pizza and drink soda or beer. No one has ever gotten close to drunk, and no beer-drinker has ever made fun of a soda drinker.
Some of my sweetest fellowship happens in this context, and over the years, I have seen dozens of men inspired and equipped to become Christian workers through this setting. I am also aware that there are many Christians, both "weak" and “Pharisees”, who would have trouble believing that I could be an authentic Christian leader and allow, let alone participate in this activity. Should we stop this fruitful practice because some Christians would be offended if they knew about it? Should their weakness deprive us of our freedom in this area?
The answer is not for the "strong" to become "weak", rather, it is just the opposite. However, if you are so fixated on enjoying your freedoms that you cannot sacrifice them for the good of a "weaker" brother when necessary, then you have a problem.
Read Romans 14:13-15 and 20-23. The main point of these verses is perfectly clear: Do not cause the "weak" to stumble by practicing your freedom selfishly. Before we can practice this principle, we have to properly understand what it means to cause someone to stumble.
Not long ago, I heard an older Christian rebuking a younger Christian for going to bars and ordering beer in that setting. He said, "What you are doing stumbles me, and Paul says you should not stumble your brother!" I had to intervene because he was applying this passage wrongly.
To stumble someone means to influence a weaker, and usually younger, Christian to violate his or her own conscience and join you in your freedom.
That is not what was happening with this man. He was an older Christian, and he was not feeling tempted to go to a bar and have a beer. He was misapplying this passage and judging the younger Christian; there is a difference between “weak” and “pharisee” that is crucial to be aware of.
Why is this so wrong, if the freedom you are trying to influence them to exercise is not in fact morally wrong? Why does Paul say this can "hurt," "destroy," "tear down" (see Romans 14:15 and 20)? The issue is the role of conscience (see 1 Corinthians 8:9-12).
Our conscience is a God-instilled moral warning system that renders verdicts on our behavior by "going off" when we violate its standards. Because we are fallen people in a sinful world, it does not work perfectly. The "weak" have an overly sensitive conscience. But since God guides us morally through our consciences, He never wants us to violate its warnings. If we start doing this, even over non-moral issues, we may "sear" our conscience and disregard it over issues that are morally destructive.
Rather, God wants to train our consciences to conform to His moral will for our lives — sensitizing some numb areas and desensitizing other areas — and the way He trains our consciences is through learning His Word.
Until a "weak" Christian has his or her conscience strengthened by biblically informed convictions, our efforts to influence them toward legitimate freedoms will harm their walk with Christ. Instead, Paul argues, we should be willing to "bear the weaknesses of those without strength, and not just please ourselves" (see Romans 15:1).
This means that we should not shame or ridicule him for restricting himself in these areas, but instead express respect for his conscience.
This means that, when necessary, we should even be willing to sacrifice the exercise of our freedom in his presence if we think this will stumble him; an example of this might be abstaining from drinking alcohol while in the presence of a person newly converted from Islam to Christianity.
Are you unwilling to make these sacrifices to help your weaker brothers and sisters in the faith? Then you may be "strong," but you are not necessarily mature!
There is no value in remaining "weak" in faith. Paul wanted all of his converts to learn and enjoy their freedom in Christ to the fullest responsible extent (see Galatians 5:1), and he defended his "strong" young converts from Pharisees. I conclude from this that, when possible, we have a responsibility to sensitively help "weak" Christians become "strong." Perhaps this is what Paul means in Romans 14:16-19. As we accept "weak" Christians and respect their consciences, we should also help them discover from God's Word the basis for our freedom and theirs.
This is not only because personal freedom in Christ is an intrinsic good. It is also because "strong" Christians are usually more effective in reaching people for Christ. This was clearly Paul's preference for himself and those under his leadership (see 1 Corinthians 9:19-21). If we want to win pagans to Christ, we should not impose any needless ethical or cultural obstacles.
This really focuses on the issues for many believers, not: "are you willing to give up all recreation and join a subculture?" but "do you want to receive the gift of God's complete forgiveness and a life-changing relationship with Christ?" It is hard enough to bow to Christ and admit your need for this; we should not make it any harder by adding a bunch of man-made rules and restrictions.
