Romans 14

I'm writing a series of articles on the book of Romans, which, as you know, is one of the more difficult and controversial books of the New Testament. This is not going to be a verse-by-verse analysis by any means, but I hope to write a lengthy article about each chapter of this sixteen chapter book. I hope that you find this helpful.

If you were to ask the average Christian, "What is the most controversial chapter in the book of Romans?" they would probably answer, "Romans 14!" For many in the religious world, there is no difficulty here: it is understood to be saying that we shouldn't make a fuss over doctrinal differences...just get along. But for the members of churches of Christ, this is a very controversial chapter indeed.

Here is the issue: is Romans 14 addressing matters of law and doctrine, or is Paul here addressing issues of liberty? In other words, if someone teaches or practices error, should we overlook that and maintain fellowship per Romans 14? I would answer, NO! The New Testament repeatedly affirms that we should not tolerate doctrinal error...

1. In Matthew 16:6, 12, Jesus warned His disciples to beware of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
2. In John 4, when Jesus talked with the Samaritan woman at the well, she asked him who was right, the Jews or the Samaritans, when it came to the place of worship. Jesus told her plainly that the Samaritans were wrong and the Jews, right, for salvation was of the Jews (vv. 22). Jesus didn't say, "it doesn't matter, because we're all going to heaven anyways!"
3. Acts 15:1-2 says, "And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, 'Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.' Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissention and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question." Did Paul tolerate this false teaching, or did he boldly conront it? With boldness and zeal, he debated these Judaizing teachers!
4. We're told to "note those who cause divisions...contrary to the doctrine" (Rom. 16:17).
5. Sin was not to be tolerated in the Corinthian church (1 Cor. 5). There are many commands in the New Testament to withdraw from those who are walking disorderly (2 Thess. 3:6).
6. Those who preach a different gospel are accursed (Gal. 1:6-10).
7. Paul doesn't say that there are many faiths, but "one faith" (Eph. 4:5).
8. Timothy was told to "charge some that they teach no other doctrine" (1 Tim. 1:3-4).
9. We are to withdraw from those who teach things contrary to Christ's gospel (1 Tim. 6:3-6).
10. "And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some" (2 Tim. 2:17-18).
11. While we are to "avoid foolish and ignorant disputes" we are to correct "those who are in opposition" (2 Tim. 2:24-25).
12. "Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son" (2 Jn. 9).

Many other verses could be considered, but I'm sure you get the point. We are to stand up for what is right. We are to defend the faith. We are not to tolerate doctrinal error. When someone teaches falsehood, we need to confront them.

Now, I'm not saying that we should emotionally abuse those people who teach error, nor am I saying that we should be rude and sarcastic. Our ultimate motive should be love, and our first approach should be one of gentleness and humility (1 Pet. 3:15). But one cannot read these verses and miss the point: we are to demand truth...nothing more and nothing less.

How does all of this relate to Romans 14? The point here is that we need to harmonize Romans 14 with the rest of scripture. In other words, Romans 14 is not going to urge us to tolerate doctrinal error while the rest of scripture urges us to refute it. Romans 14 is addressing matters of liberty and conscience, not matters of faith and doctrine!

But really, the wording of the chapter is fairly straightforward if you ask me. Sure, it helps to notice all of these other verses in an effort to set forth what the passage isn't saying, but the passage itself is not unclear. Let's examine it...

Romans 14:1 says, "Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things." There are three points here that we need to consider. First of all, Paul is talking about weak and strong brethren. Second, the stronger brethren are encouraged to accept the weaker ones, and third, the dividing issues concern "doubtful things." The word doubtful is from the Greek word diakrisis which basically means judgment. These are matters of personal judgment or opinion...that divide weak and strong brethren.

In verses 2-6, Paul uses two examples to illustrate the point: the eating of meat and the observance of certain days. Verse two says, "For one believeshe may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables." Both are not weak; just one is weak. The brother who eats only vegetables (because the eating of meat violates his conscience) is weak. He is unlearned and immature in the faith. In 1 Corinthians 8:4, the apostle says, "Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one," but then in verse seven he says, "However, there is not in everyone that knowledge." Again, we are talking about weak and strong brethren.

In Romans 14:5-6, Paul talks about the observance of days. Some observe a certain day while others do not. Now, the apostle is not talking about the religious observance of religious days, but rather the physical observance of days. In other words, if a person converts from Judaism and they cannot in good conscience work on the Sabbaath...that's fine. Don't make a big fuss over it. There's nothing sinful about not working on a particular day.

In both cases, Paul is, without a doubt, addressing matters of liberty and opinion. There is nothing in the New Testament that mandates the eating of meat, nor is there any command that one MUST work on the Sabbath day (even though the Sabbath day is no longer mandatory). These are personal issues, and we as Christians need to exercise love and tolerance in these areas. Do not be judgmental (vv. 4).

Romans 14:19 says, "Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another," and in verse 20, "Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense." Must we stand up for the truth and oppose false doctrine? Yes! But must we be as adament when it comes to matters of personal opinion and judgment? No. Instead, we must be patient and tolerant.

Much more could be said about this chapter, but I've covered the main points and I've established the meaning of the text. Paul is not preaching ecumenicalism here. He is not saying that we should tolerate doctrinal differences and "agree to disagree" when it comes to matters of faith and doctrine. This whole, "believe what you want to believe" mentality is completely contrary to scripture. But when it comes to issues of personal opinion, don't be so pushy.

That wasn't too hard, was it?