Acceptable: A Survey of Romans 14:1-23

Author’s note: This blog post is part of an ongoing series about the book of Romans. To see other Romans resources, click here.

Romans 14 follows in the pattern of the previous two chapters: it is an outflowing of the paradigm for worship that introduced this section. Paul is explaining how we live lives of worship to God. Because the truth that we believe unites us in theory, we ought to also worship God and be united in service to him. But how do we interact with Christians who disagree with us?

Using a controversy over food and feast days, Paul illustrates how we can get along with other believers who see things differently. His purpose is not to resolve conflicts among believers, but to show a path to peaceful living despite ongoing differences.

Romans 14 is a challenging chapter, since it raises many questions. We sometimes hear about ‘Romans 14 issues,’ topics that Christians disagree about, and which are addressed by this chapter. At this point we run into a thorny problem: what is a Romans 14 issue? Before looking at the chapter, it’s helpful to make a few observations about such issues. In general, Romans 14 issues are (1) matters that are not central to the Christian faith, (2) matters in which both sides have developed different approaches due to a sincere desire to serve the Lord, and (3) matters in which neither side is accusing the other side of being ‘outside the pale’ of the Christian faith. In the exposition below, we will delve into these requirements more.

The Controversy over Conscience (14:1-3)

Paul addresses a specific topic that was causing disunity in the Roman church: the issue of whether certain foods are ritually impure and therefore unacceptable for Christians to eat (the ‘food fight’ as my seminary professor, Thor Madsen, affectionately labelled this chapter!). He also mentions, secondarily, questions about whether certain days of the year are more holy than other days.

This was a difficulty in the Roman church, since Jewish believers had a background in the Mosaic law, and while they may have known about their freedom in Christ to eat all foods, they still felt a sense of obligation to avoid the foods that the Jewish law prohibited. Even if they knew that it was morally acceptable, they may have felt fearful to actually eat the foods, or may have felt that they were compromising their Jewish identity by partaking. Another possibility is that they believed that while foods were acceptable, it was a higher level of Christianity to avoid partaking. Gentiles, not coming from such a background, lived without such strictures. Paul addresses these two groups as the strong (those who willingly eat anything, normally the gentile camp) and the weak (those who hesitate to eat certain foods, normally the Jews).

The initial instruction is to ‘welcome’ the one who is weak in faith and not exclude someone because they have more narrow convictions. But such welcoming comes with a caveat: it is not to happen in order to ‘quarrel over opinions.’ This is a command that goes both ways: the weak should not abuse the hospitality afforded them to constantly bring up their own convictional issues, and the strong should not offer hospitality only as a way to bring up the issue and try to ‘fix’ the weak believer. The issue does not need to be a focus of controversy between the two groups.

Then Paul gives specific instructions for the two groups. The one who eats is not to ‘despise’ the one who abstains. This refers to looking down on a brother because his convictions are not fully informed by the truth of Christ and the freedom which Christ gives. It is easy for the weak to see these other believers as less developed, but Paul prevents this. The one who does not eat, similarly, is to not to ‘pass judgment’ on the one who eats. This refers to considering such a person to be a less spiritual individual because they do not hold to the same standards and convictions.

In the rest of the chapter, Paul will address each group separately. Verses 4-12 are primarily directed to the weak believers, although there is important application for the strong. We must not judge others (or look down/despise them). Verses 13-23 are addressed specifically to the strong believers: they must use their freedom in a way that will be beneficial, not detrimental, to the body.

Exhortation to the Weak: Do Not Judge (14:4-12)

The main temptation that weak believers face is that they can ‘judge’ the strong. The strong also face this temptation, and so these words are useful for both groups. We need to be clear what is meant by ‘judging’ another. Paul uses this term to refer to those who look at other believers and consider them to be on a lower spiritual plane because of their convictions and standards (or lack thereof). What this judging is emphatically not referring to is when a believer looks at another believer as considers them to be unregenerate because of their position.

This is an important distinction, because it lies at the heart of what is meant by a ‘Romans 14 issue.’ Believers can disagree on certain topics and still maintain fellowship. But any time that one side or the other believes that the issue is a salvation issue (meaning, the other side is not Christians because of their practice), then the issue changes. If one side believes that the other side is performing a practice that negates their Christian faith, we are dealing with either antinomianism or legalism. In other words, if the ‘weak’ side of the argument is accusing the ‘strong’ side of being outside the pale of the faith, this is not a Romans 14 issue.

Rather, such controversies will result in one of two options, both of which Paul deals with in other places. It is possible that the strong are accepting practices which are absolutely forbidden for Christians. In such a case, the strong are guilty of antinomianism, and Paul addresses this in Romans 6. On the other hand, it is possible that the weak could be insisting on a certain standard which they are adding to the work of Christ for salvation. In this case, the weak are guilty of legalism, and Paul addresses this in Galatians 3.

What Paul is discussing is different. Each side is convinced of their view, and they see the other as practicing a lower form of Christianity, less faithful to Christ, and failing to work out the implications of their theology, but still within the fold of the church.

Paul’s answer to this is that we are all the servants of Christ, and we should recognize that in each other. You don’t give annual evaluations to the employees of random businesses, so why are you passing out evaluations to other Christians – they are not your servants!

This applies to the eating of food, and also to the observation of certain days. Just as ritual foods were significant in Judaism, so were ritual days. Paul certainly has in mind the Sabbath as the primary example (Colossians 2:16), but also all other holy days in the Jewish calendar.

The key principle is that ‘each one should be fully convinced in his own mind’ (verse 5). Paul is willing to accept a wide variety of opinions and practices, so long as those who engage in them have come that viewpoint with certainty, convinced that they are serving Christ in their practice. This also rules out certain positions from being ‘Romans 14 issues.’

The significance of this is that Romans 14 is not always teaching that the more ‘liberal’ or ‘less strict’ view is always the better one. In cases where both sides have examined the issue and come to a viewpoint that they see as Christ-honoring, Paul permits both to exist in harmony. But this does not mean that both are equal. In verse 14 he sides with the ‘strong’ whose standards are more lax. But in 1 Corinthians 6, Paul castigates those who might identify as ‘strong’ because they use their freedom for their own benefit rather than doing what they do for the glory of Christ. In short, Romans 14 teaches us how to maintain relationships with other believers, but it does not indicate that the liberal or lax side is always superior to the conservative or strict side.

Underlying the prohibition of judging is the principle stated in verse 7. We are all the servants of Christ. This means that we are not our own; our decisions ought to be (and we can assume of other believers that they are), guided by what pleases our master. This is so profoundly true of the Christian that Paul can say it extends even to our deaths: whether we are in the process of living or dying, we are God’s servants and we are doing it for him. Christ died for this purpose: to ransom us to be his people (verse 9).

There is no reason, then, to judge or look down on those who take different standards, since everyone will have to give account of their standards before their Lord personally. We should instead focus on making sure that we are ready to give account for our own standards! Paul reinforces this with a reference to Isaiah 45:23, proving that a day of judgment will come on all people, including believers, when they will give account for what they did.

Exhortation to the Strong: Do Not Cause to Stumble (14:13-23)

In verse 13, Paul shifts to the strong, focusing his remaining exhortation on them. Paul uses a play on words. Rather than judging one another, we should focus on judging how to avoid putting stumbling blocks before other believers. The same Greek word is used in both cases. Wright, quoted in Schreiner (703), gives a paraphrase that captures this wordplay: “If you are so keen on judging things, here is something to judge—how not to trip each other up!”

What is a stumbling block? Paul later goes on to describe a brother who is grieved (verse 15), destroyed (verse 15), torn down (verse 20), doubting (verse 23), and sinning (verse 23). This means that a stumbling block is something that causes real spiritual harm to another believer. We cannot label a practice as a stumbling block simply because we are annoyed by it, dislike it, or have a feeling of ‘being offended’ by the practice.

Paul personally agrees with the group in Rome that is more ‘liberal’ in their view, for he has been thoroughly convinced by Christ that all foods are acceptable for Christians. Yet the way in which Paul makes his case is instructive. He does not force this view on others. He states his case and his conviction, but he is in no rush to force other Christians to adopt his viewpoint.

The apostle goes on to warn the strong about the way in which they can wield their ‘freedom’ to cause lasting spiritual harm to their brothers in Christ. If freedom is used without love, it leads to deep spiritual grief, and can even result in an individual leaving the faith because of the spiritual harm that is perpetrated.

The likely situation that Paul is referring to is the effect that the strong might have on their weak Jewish brothers. A Jew who has strong convictions about not eating kosher meat could observe gentiles who are eating it with a clear conscience. Temporarily emboldened by their example, the Jew joins with them in eating. But then, in a moment of reflection, he is overcome with a deep and bitter remorse. He believes that he has betrayed his Jewish identity, done something that he does not think is acceptable for him to do, and acted outside of what he is convinced God wants him to do. Tormented by guilt and wracked with conviction, such a Jew could even abandon his faith in the Jewish messiah and return to the synagogue, so overcome is he with a sense of needing to ‘right’ the wrong that he did by eating. Such a serious case could all be avoided if the strong use their freedom with love.

In short, Christians need to attach the proper priorities to the different aspects of life. Is my freedom to eat a piece of bacon really on the same level as my brother’s eternal soul? This passage challenges us to rightly prioritize, realizing that Christ’s kingdom is not about insisting on certain standards (verse 17), but on ‘righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.’ Such a mindset results in both social and spiritual good-will (verse 18). This goes so far that we should be willing to completely set aside our freedom for the sake of others (verse 21).

Paul says that the person who can think this way has received a blessing from God. The ritual requirements of the law are not the standards of Christian living. We are not meant to live with a checklist mentality, as Romans 7 explains. Nonetheless, not all Christians have come to this realization, and that is alright.

The chapter concludes with a stunning principle. “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” This does not mean that every single action of the Christian life requires the exercise of faith – as one man points out, it doesn’t require faith to brush your teeth! What this does mean is that everything that the Christian does must be done within the realm of faith, for the purpose of honoring Christ, and with him in view. As soon as we step outside that realm, acting against what we believe to honor Christ, we are in sin.

In place of comments, I would love to hear from you personally. Please reach out to me via the Contact Page to share your thoughts and perspectives on this post!

Enjoying this content? Subscribe to receive it directly in your email, once a week.