Romans 14:1-13

 In my journey through Romans, which I will probably retravel very soon, I come to the so-called "practical chapters" at the end. I am not sure they are so practical. One, because there is a lot of doctrine and world view transformation here. Second, if practical means "ways we can live," these are very difficult to apply. That's how I see 14:1-13, although it could be said of everything from 12:1 on. This section is not just some good advice. These are principles and truths we need to struggle with and through. 

14:1-13 states, 

Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2 For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. 3 Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 4 Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand.

5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; [a]and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. 9 For to this end Christ died [b]and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. 10 But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of [c]Christ. 11 For it is written:

“As I live, says the Lord,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”

12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Therefore let us not judge one another [d]anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.

I have pasted this in from Bible Gateway, thus the different font and spacing, but it gives the Scripture its due. Having been in the church for fifty plus years, the first verse reminds me of all the times someone starts to attend a church, usually a small one, and not long after, starts to push their hobby horse. They have something they believe is amiss with the body of Christ, doctrinal or lifestyle-wise, and they are going to bring it up whenever they get a chance. They are going to go to the pastor about it and tell him (or I suppose her) why it needs preached on and taken care of. It could be something about prophecy, Calvinism, the way women dress, homeschooling v. public school, women in ministry, how the young people are acting, etc., and today probably, politics (i.e., Donald Trump). These are disputes over doubtful things--maybe, or maybe not. 

The example given here is about vegetarianism--well, not really the way we think about it, as some sort of moral question of whether we should eat something with a face. Meat at that time, in a city like Rome, was readily available from pagan temple sacrifices.  Paul seems to take a liberal attitude here in not so much dismissing but diminishing the importance of these kinds of "doubtful things." If a person from a pagan background cannot let himself eat mutton from a pagan sacrifice that is sold half price at the market, leave him alone. Don't tell him he has to get over it. If someone, Jewish or pagan, has no problem eating that food, leave him alone and do not judge him. 

To address the former Jews, Paul turns to the issue of esteeming one day above another.  The Jews had a lot of holy days. They were under no obligation to observe them any longer, but if they wanted to, it was between them and God. They were not to be judged for that, and they were not to impose it on others. Both of those courses of action are putting a stumbling block in another's way. Both are getting away from the supremacy of the gospel of Christ, to whom we will all bow. 

While Paul's words seem liberal, they are also strong and somewhat scolding. Why are you judging and showing contempt for your brother? There is a wonderful short video of R.C.Sproul asking, "What is wrong with you people?" and I hear that in Paul's words. Why are you all, who are under the persecution of the Roman empire, fussing over this stuff? Get this straightened out by letting people live as God directs them on these things. "Therefore let us not judge one another [d]anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.

HOWEVER, 

The hard part is, where do we draw the line? Where does eating meat and observing Succoth turn into something else? When the person of the Godhead and the cross and gospel get involved, I believe. In the body, those should be the focal point; anything else brought into the dealings and fellowship of the body is likely to make us tribal and divisive. And we see that today. 

There are dozens, probably hundreds of jokes about how Baptists don't get along with themselves or anyone, are self-righteous, or think they are the only right ones doctrinally. I know many of them. What's the difference between a Baptist and Episcopalian? The Episcopalian will say hi to you in the liquor store, and so on. Some of these are about drinking alcohol. Is that past the line of Romans 14? For some, yes; for some, not at all. Nothing good can come from drinking alcohol, many of us would say, and really, that's hard not to understand. Drinking in moderation is acceptable, others say. Leave each other alone. I don't know. Each person's past experience with alcohol figures into the decision.

What about prophetic interpretations? Pre-mill, rapture, post-mill, no mill, don't know? What many do not understand is that prophetic interpretations go deeper than what's going to happen around the second coming. They relate to God's real purposes in creation and of course, Israel. 

So, it's not that simple, but the one area where I think we've had the most trouble since the 1970s and '80s is American politics, only exacerbated since 2015. 

Is politics "disputes over doubtful things?" Yes and no. Yes, in that they are disputes that cause divisions that can become explosive and devastating to fellowship and the gospel. Too many today have joined the cult of personality; long before that, church members chose to never speak to each other because of political party. But are they in the same category of "doubtful things" like food or holiday celebrations. They are definitely subjects that a church should not make public pronouncements or endorsements about, even though it's "legal" now as far as the IRS is concerned.

I don't think one's politics is a doubtful thing. And that's the problem. None of the pastors at the church I attend have made comments about voting beyond that it is a responsibility. If they did endorse a candidate, I would be very uncomfortable; if it were Donald Trump, I would have to leave. But one of the reason I am so loyal to my church is that the pastors have more sense than that. 

I say all this to say that I pray the church in the U.S. will repent of its love of power and money (and sins of sex) and return to the first love, which I interpret as the "priority" love. Politics, as a sort of power, can destroy a fellowship. It is disputatious but not doubtful, however. I do not support Trump because he violates so many laws, constitutional principles, norms, and morals. On the other hand, I do not support Medicare for all because I believe in small government and that dependence on the federal government sucks all that is good out of us as a people (yet I do bank my SS check, so I'm a hypocrite there, and honestly, I am totally nonimpressed with Medicare since I retired). 

Because it is so complicated, politics does not fit in Romans 14, except to say that it should not separate us as a fellowship. I wish it were.