Understanding The Weak

Romans 14; 13:8; 15:1-7

Romans 14 is a challenging passage for us to tackle, because it can present problems to our understanding of Scripture. How can we have peace when the actions we take are different? How can those different choices, all made with conviction (eating vs. Not eating, observing a day or not, etc.), both be “to the Lord”? This chapter also goes against the typical “MY way is right” mindset that most take with religious issues. We also must contend with the question, “am I weak?”

The most important aspect of Romans 14 is that we need to have a CONVERSATION. A conversation between primarily GOD and US (whereby we determine and put in practice what he has commanded), and then conversations with each other (whereby we determine and put in practice what will be best for each other as we continue our work together). If we are able to have healthy conversations and healthy relationships, we will be better prepared to have the right kind of relationships with unbelievers.

We need to consider the proper context of what Paul writes here. We are in the realm of judgment issues, and application of truth. That might work out in complex ways. Even though it is difficult, there is plenty said in this chapter to show us what the right attitude and mindset should be.

The Context

Romans 13:8 “Owe no one anything, except to love each other...”

Expressed as: “...You shall love your neighbor as yourself."(13:9)

The opposing concept: “make [...] provision for the flesh” (13:14)

Application: Deal properly with your brother when an issue of difference arises. Do not “despise” him, do not judge him, do not cause him to stumble, etc.

The basis: Not to please ourselves. Romans 15:1 We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves.

The result: Romans 15:7 Therefore welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God.

What it Teaches

The People Involved

The “weak” in faith (imperfect knowledge, unnecessarily restrictive)

The “strong” (has knowledge, is able to eat meat)

God regards these matters with indifference (accepts BOTH “weak” and “strong” responses to meat-eating and observing days; “has welcomed” the meat-eater)

The Actions Involved

“Weak” judges (condemns) the meat eater.

“Strong” despises (treats contemptuously) the herb-eater

Both are forbidden their individual responses, because neither is the “master” of the other!

In v. 4-12, “we must all give an account to God”; we “stand or fall” unto God; we observe or abstain “unto the Lord”, etc.

God “receives” both with reference to their conduct, claims right to judge and cause them to “stand”, condemns both judging and despising.

The Issues Involved

“Eating meat vs. herbs”

NOTE: The EXACT nature of this issue is not found elsewhere. The eating of meat sacrificed to idols is considered in 1 Cor 8, 10, but is not specified as the ground for abstinence here.

Other places involve PARTIAL abstinence, this involves TOTAL abstinence.

“Esteeming one day above another vs. esteeming every day alike” is also not found precisely in this form.

Evidently a form of “observing days” was considered a return to “the weak and beggarly elements”, involved observing the Jewish “days, months, times, and years”, and was condemned by Paul (Gal 4:9,10).

Nothing specifically connects the action of Rom 14 with this practice. These issues were of concern to the church at Rome, and the teaching would be well understood from their experience and actions.

The benefit to us is to know of the category of things into which this falls, exercise our individual judgment when similar things befall us.

What Romans 14 Does NOT Do:

Give instruction on disciplining worldly, lukewarm brethren. 1 Cor. 12:21-22

The “weak” brother is not someone who is living in sin. He is devout, dedicated to obeying God, but lacking in knowledge.

The “strong” brother is the same way, except for a better understanding of God’s will. He has knowledge, and acts upon it.

The point being made is that the “weak” and the “strong” brethren are actually on the same level, even though one may understand things better.

1 Corinthians 12:21-22 The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." (22) On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable,

Tell us WHAT is important or unimportant about our actions, except for brotherly love. Acts 15:28, 29

We could assume a number of things from the passage itself, but other than specific examples, and our own way to understand where that translates, no teaching is given about specifically what is to be done or not done.

Other first century issues were identified as a matter of indifference to God (circumcision – Acts 16:1; Gal. 2:4, 5; Gal 5:6; Jewish customs –Acts 15:28, 29 – “these NECESSARY things”).

Place acceptance above truth. Acts 15:1-2

Acts 15:1-2 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." (2) And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.

There is no ban on mutual study and discussion, even brotherly disagreement.

The requirement is that in the midst of THESE differences we continue to allow one another the individual freedom to act without banishment, and await the final judgment of God.

Offer instruction on collective issues, or ways to deal with actual sins that might arise. Eph. 5:11; 2 John 9

When a true “right and wrong” is involved, God does NOT welcome the one who does wrong.

Ephesians 5:11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

2 John 9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

To include actual sins in this instruction is to have God “welcome” those who are engaged in CONTINUOUS practice of wrongdoing.

We are meant to “welcome” those who differ in the ways the chapter deals with, on a CONTINUOUS basis, and without the sort of discussion which will lead to separation. We are to “receive” such, as “Christ has received us” (15:7)

If the issues involve a number of people, it would not be possible for one to “hold his faith to himself before God” (14:22)

Our conclusion therefore is that if we “receive” brethren in areas of discernment, it does not mean we can “receive” in matters of sin.

The Offenses

NOT in observing or not observing the action under study

As far as God is concerned, one could choose either course of action, and still “stand”.

IN “despising”, or “judging”, as the case may be..

IN putting a STUMBLINGBLOCK, or an occasion to fall, in the brother’s way.

This can happen in both directions!

The “strong”, who have the liberty to partake of meat, might do so in a way to influence the “weak”, who have reservations as to the propriety of it, and by being led to partake, commit the sin of eating “not of faith”.

The “strong” who believes he has the liberty of not wearing a mask and believes that there is little or no data to prove that it affects anything, can push for the “weak” to remove their masks before they are ready to do so. If the “weak” believes that masking/vaccination is morally good and that to not do it would be wrong, the “strong” need to recognize that and work with the “weak” essentially forever in order to handle this. There should be no force either way. God has accepted both.

IN being “weak” in faith (in knowledge, AND conviction), partake of meat while in doubt as to whether he ought to do.

Romans 14:23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

Questions:

1. IF matters of SIN were included, who would be the “strong” one (the one who has knowledge) with reference to the practice under consideration?

2. IF the strong one KNEW it was a sin, would he be allowed to KEEP ON SINNING so long as he did not put a stumblingblock before the one who was “weak”?

3. IF the “weak” one committed the sin with absolute CONVICTION, would God “receive” him?

4. Despite God’s teaching that we should “reprove” the unfruitful works of darkness, are there some sins of which we must not overly concern ourselves, and refrain from making an effort to correct brethren who have fallen into them?

5. Why would God “make one stand” (through, I presume, giving time to grow, etc.), when the matter is individual, and refrain from it when the matter is collective?

6. Is there a time limit on the dealing with the “sins” which would be included in the Romans 14 treatment of them?

7. If not, what sort of “sin” can we be comfortable with our brother committing, without an ongoing effort to lead him back to the truth?