Can't We All Just Get Along Pt. 1: Rom. 14:1-9

Over the next couple of weeks we are going to enter a mini-series within our greater Romans series entitled—“Can’t we all just get along?!” This pointed question is often asked in moments of exasperation at the unrest, discord, and infighting that we witness in interpersonal relationships or even in our culture. However, we are going to apply this question to a different context over the next month or so—the context that Paul seems concerned about as he rounds the corner in Romans 14—the church. Surely the church—the body of Christ, those who have tasted the love of God and have been saved by Jesus—can answer “yes” when asked “Can’t we all just get along?” However, if you have spent any length of time in most churches, you might wonder if this kind of unity really is attainable.

And yet, Paul teaches that such unity and peace is achievable and provides a compelling prescription to this end. In Romans 14 and in the beginning of chapter 15, Paul is going to describe how respect, righteous judgment, service, and acceptance pave the way toward unity. However, today, we are going to focus on the first of these. In Romans 14:1-9 we are going to observe two different scenarios in which respect for our brothers and sisters in Christ is required for good fellowship.

SCENARIO #1: Various Levels of Allowance-14:1-4

As Paul continues to present his practical applications in the second half of Romans, he continues with his theme of promoting unity and blessing within the body of Christ. Such promotion is necessary as the church is and has always been comprised of all kinds of people. “Christians are not clones, identical in all respects” (Morris, Romans, 476). There are rich and poor Christians, old and young Christians, and blue collar and whitecollar Christians. There are also Christians from all kinds of nations, ethnicities, backgrounds, and shapes and sizes. However, this variety that was intended to be an expression of wonderous diversity within a group of like-minded people often became/becomes a hotbed for division and conflict. This was the same for the church in Rome.

In addition to race, socio-economic status, background, etc. Paul recognizes another distinction within the body of Christ—what he refers to as “strong and weak brothers.” Paul begins chapter 14 by saying, “Now accept the one who is weak in faith,…” (14:1). This assumes that there are others who are “strong” in faith. But what does that mean? As the discussion unfolds, it becomes clear that “weak” does not mean that someone’s faith in Christ is lacking. Instead, to say that someone has “weak” faith implies that such a person may not fully understand or appreciate the freedom that comes from faith—“His faith is weak in that it cannot sustain him in certain kinds of conduct. He does not understand that when the meaning of justification by faith is grasped” certain actions are no longer of any consequence.

This interpretation of what Paul calls “weakness” is evidenced by the encouragements that follow. “The main issue that surfaced [in this passage] was how Jewish and Gentile Christians could enjoy table fellowship together since they differed on which foods were permissible” (Schreiner, Romans, 708). How could they relate to each other and do life together if members of the church (from varying religious backgrounds) couldn’t share in fellowship? Some Jews who became Christians still felt compelled to abstain from eating swine and other ceremonially unclean animals and could not come to the potlucks that served pulled pork! Therefore, Paul appeals to the “strong” in verse 1 and says “Now accept the one who is weak in faith…”. This would imply that Gentiles, those who were strong enough in their faith to permit themselves to eat all kinds of food, should accept those who did not share that conviction and abstained from certain commodities.

Though it might sound weird to us, many examples exist today of people whose faith only allows them to do/behave in certain ways. Some, like the Amish/Mennonite, have a faith that only allows them to obtain certain luxuries and adorn certain clothes. Some more fundamental-leaning believers will not allow themselves to play cards (see John Macarthur). Some denominations use alcohol in their observance of the Lord’s supper while others don’t.

Believers who have a larger wardrobe, enjoy an occasional game of cards, or enjoy a glass of wine every now and then are to “accept” others who do not endorse these behaviors. The verb means “to allow to remain in the membership” and carries the connotation of friendship. Acceptance of other’s idiosyncrasies is a show of respect that is necessary for the life of any ministry. Paul knew this and we must remember this.

Paul places a check on this acceptance in the final part of verse 1 when he says, “but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions” (14:1b). In other words, the weaker brother’s actions and decisions on these matters ought not be used against them in a way that is discouraging. Stronger brothers are “not to pass judgment upon his scruples” (Moffatt). Instead, “The weak man should be accepted as the Christian brother he claims to be. One should not judge the thoughts which underlie his conduct” (F. Buchsel, TDNT, III, 950). Ultimately, Paul is admonishing the strong not to use their freedom to discourage the weak.

The underlining issue that probably plagued the church in Rome is revealed in verse 2—“One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only,…” (14:2). In this situation, those who are more liberal in their practices were tempted, perhaps to mock and ridicule those who chose to limit their diet. Perhaps they would call them superstitious or worse, misinformed. Still another accusation often raised by the strong against the weak is “do you think you are holier than me by this or that action?” or put more passively, “you probably think I’m a heathen for eating this.” These means of “passing judgment” have no place in the body of Christ and do nothing to promote the respect that Paul encourages here within the church.

However, on the flipside, neither are the “weak” to judge the “strong” for their exercise of freedom on issues. Paul continues in verse 3 and says, “The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted Him,” (14:3). The admonition cuts both ways. The strong tend to ridicule the weak for their sensitivities. The weak tend to pass judgment on the strong for doing things that make them feel uncomfortable.

Paul must have caught wind of this tendency in his interactions with the church in Rome and many recognize the same tension today. I’m guilty myself of raising an eyebrow at certain behaviors that I choose not to do that I see others doing—behaviors that, upon closer inspection, are not forbidden in the Scriptures. I’m sure some of the older members of our congregation can remember the first time they saw a woman wear pants to church! Yikes! Heaven forbid 😊. Such judgment and/or ridicule is not the proper way to promote respect in the church.

After all, as Paul wonders, “Who are you to judge the servant of another?...” (14:4). As Paul has said in verse 3, “God has accepted him” (and the aorist tense betrays that such acceptance is not-in progress, but is complete). It is God’s verdict that counts. This is especially true given the imagery that Paul employs here in verse 4—that of a servant and Master. Servants belong to the Master and therefore, they are accountable to Him. “If a servant is acceptable (see verse 3) to his master, it does not matter what his fellow servants think” (Morris, Romans, 479). Therefore, the “weak” ought not judge the “strong” for their presumed indulgences because in spite of what they presume, God has accepted them.

Paul concludes this first discussion of weak and strong brothers with the following summative statement, “to his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand” (14:4b). Though this statement is probably directed to the weak in their contempt or the strong, it applies both ways. God alone makes people stand (makes people saved), and weak/strong brothers ought not try to ridicule/judge people into their own brand of the sanctified life, for in so doing, they take the place of the Lord. 

Your fellow congregates’ spiritual life is ultimately, between them and God. Remembering this goes a long way as we develop the respect that is required of us in the context of the church.

Scenario #2: Differing views on Peripheral Issues-14:5-9

Food and fellowship was not the only issue debated in the life of the church in Rome. There was also the issue of the observance or nonobservance of certain special days—“one person regards one day above another, another regard every day alike,…” (14:5a). Though some might be inclined to assume that Paul is talking about which day would serve as the Sabbath (Saturday as determined by the Jews or Sunday as chosen by the Christians), what is probably nearer to Paul’s concern are other days interspersed throughout the calendar that groups of people believed were worth celebrating—i.e. festivals, feasts, etc. Some, it seems, were inclined to celebrate specific events and reserved days to that end. Others lived their lives in such a way that every day was very much the same. Regardless of the exact nature of the debate concerning these “days,” one thing is certain—this was a peripheral issue that did not directly related to the gospel message in general and justification by faith in particular.

In Paul’s day, “days of observance” were peripheral matters that fomented hot debates. However, more recently, eschatological views, Calvinism vs. Armenianism, administration of the Lord’s Supper, church government, and other issues have divided churches and even created new denominations. However, every issue cited above is not a hill that I am willing to die on because it is not a salvation matter. News flash! Both pre and amillennials can be saved. We will find both Calvinists and armenianists in heaven. Yes, EVEN Methodists can be right with God 😊. Such distinctions, views, etc. are peripheral and as such these are hills that don’t deserve to be converted into fierce battlefields.

One can see reflections of this in Paul’s encouragement to Timothy when he says “As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith” (1 Tim. 1:3-4). 

Concerning peripheral issues, Paul says, “each person must be fully convinced in his own mind” (4:5b). The verb means to completely fulfill and in this context suggests that people understand why and to what end they do/choose something. “To go along with what others do simply because they do it and without being convinced for oneself can be a dangerous practice” (Morris, Romans, 481). Such a practice is condemned by Paul here in Romans 14. What Paul is trying to direct people’s attention to is not necessarily the view one has on peripheral matters, but the heart behind such a view. This becomes clearer in verses 6-9.

 “He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God, and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God,…” (14:6). As with so many things, it is the heart of a person that is of bigger concern to the Lord. Motivations matter most to God and these ought to be directed heavenward. Remember what Paul says in Colossians 3:17—“whatever you do in word or in deed, do all to the glory of God.”

Not only should members of the church direct their actions to the Lord, Paul reminds his audience that a life that is prepared to respect those of varying maturity levels and differing views on peripheral issues is not selfish or self-serving. He says “For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself” (14:7).

As a result, our very lives, not just our actions and motivations, ought to be lived as an offering to God—“For if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord, therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lords.” Don’t forget how this whole section of Paul’s letter to the Romans began in Romans 12:1—"Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God-this is your true and proper worship.” Recall also what Philippians 1:21 says—“for to me to live is Christ and to die is gain.” Why is Christ our Master? Why do we belong to Him? Why must we get over ourselves and under Christ?

Paul’s answer is simple—“For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living” (i.e. those who died in Christ and those still living in Christ). Christ died for you, purchasing you out of slavery of sin. Christ rose again so that he might pick you up and take you to your new home one day in heaven with Him. This is why Christians ought to devote their lives, their activities, and their motivations to the Lord and strive to keep the main thing the main thing in order to foster respect between brothers and sisters in Christ.

What is the “main thing?” Paul has just identified it in this last verse—Christ (divine Jesus) died (came as a man and was crucified) and lived again (rose bodily from the grave) that He might be Lord of your life (providing salvation). Other issues not directly related to this need not be causes of division and disrespect in the church.

So What?

Getting along within the church is made complicated in part by the varying levels of allowance people grant themselves in the freedom that they have in Christ and by the differing views on peripheral issues they endorse. However, Paul demands the church that in spite of these issues, respect must remain in the brethren if she is be sustained and successful in her mission. All of this is made possible when individuals within the church remember to keep the main thing the main thing—the deity, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ—"For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him” (Col. 1:16). He is the purchaser of His people, the acceptor of the saved, and as such is the master whom we ought to be most concerned about pleasing.

Are you respectful of those around you in the context of this church? Or do your raised eyebrows and hidden gossip betray that you are ridiculing and/or judging your brothers and sisters? Are you keeping the main thing the main thing? Or do you major on the minor and allow peripheral matters to get in the way of your fellowship?