SERIES: The Book of Romans
Respecting One Another’s Lifestyle Choices
Introduction: One of the greatest arguments for the validity of Christianity has always been its ability to bring together people from segments of society that would normally be estranged from one another. In Christ (the New Testament teaches), social, cultural, economic, and gender barriers are broken down.
The tangible evidence of this is the local church, which operates on the basis of mutual love between those whose only common denominator may be their relationship to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. In reality, however, it doesn’t always work that way, for while in theory the walls of partition have been broken down, in practice the walls have a nasty habit of being raised up again.
Our text today discusses for us what a believer’s attitude should be when he finds that other members of the Body of Christ make different lifestyle choices than his. It asks, “What happens when our consciences aren’t all activated by the same issues? Can we still love and respect one another, or do we judge one another and hold one another in contempt?” I warn you in advance that we will spend two weeks on this subject and you need to hear both weeks in order to get a balanced picture. If you really like today’s message, you need to come back, because you probably won’t like next week’s. If you get upset today, I think I can win you back next week. Probably no one will like both. Turn with me in your Bible and we will read Romans 14:1-12.
Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. {2} One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. {3} The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. {4} Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
{5} One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. {6} He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. {7} For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. {8} If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
{9} For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. {10} You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. {11} It is written:
“‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
‘every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.'”
{12} So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.
Our outline is relatively simple:
There are 3 classes of action.
There are 2 kinds of Christians.
There is 1 fundamental attitude required.
And there are 3 good reasons to adopt this attitude.
First, there are three classes of action:
Things that are right
Things that are wrong
Things that don’t matter
There are three classes of action:
There are some people who disagree with my first two classifications. They believe everything is relative, and they refuse to accept any moral absolutes. When one of my philosophy professors in graduate school at SMU stated forcefully in class that there are no moral absolutes, I asked him if he was absolutely sure. He was. On the other hand, there are some who have a very difficult time accepting my third classification. Everything is black and white to them and they have a hard time believing that any actions are morally neutral.
Those that question the first two categories tend to be very liberal; those that question the third category tend to be very conservative. I suspect that in this audience this morning we would have many more who struggle with the statement that there are things that don’t matter than that some things are right and other things are wrong. But that was true with Paul’s audience as well, and that’s why he addresses the issue. Now let’s look at each of these categories.
Things that are right. It’s right to love the Lord our God with all our heart and soul and mind and strength. It’s right to do our best at whatever we’re doing and to do it as unto the Lord. It’s right to love one’s wife, to respect one’s husband, and to rear one’s children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. It’s right to present our bodies as living sacrifices to God. And the list could go on and on. These actions are intrinsically right–always and for everybody.
Things that are wrong. It’s wrong to steal. It’s wrong to murder. It’s wrong to be selfish. It’s wrong to get drunk. It’s wrong to take revenge. It’s wrong to evade taxes. And this list too could be lengthened considerably. These things are intrinsically wrong–always and for everybody. But there’s a third class of actions which I have called …
Things that don’t matter. Perhaps that’s not the best term to use. Maybe “things that are morally neutral” or “doubtful things” would be better, because sometimes these things do matter in a sense, but my point is that they are not intrinsically right or intrinsically wrong, as were the two previous categories.
What are some examples of things that don’t matter? Paul mentions two in today’s Scripture text: diet and days of worship. To say that diet doesn’t matter is not strictly true, for we all know that diet affects a lot of other things, but we can say that diet is not a moral issue. Of course, sometimes we say regarding a luscious dessert, “This is sinful,” but we really don’t mean it. Paul says in Romans 14:14, “As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself.” And in 1 Timothy 4:4 he adds, “For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving.”
Now there’s no way Moses could have ever made such a statement. In OT times there were multitudinous restrictions on diet, and to ignore these restrictions was to violate the Law of God; it was sin. But when Jesus died on the Cross, He set believers free from the ceremonial and dietary restrictions of the Mosaic Law. Diet became a part of our third category: things that don’t matter morally. There are some cults which demand vegetarianism today, but there is no New Testament basis for such a demand.
Days of worship is a second issue which the Apostle claims to be non-moral. In verse 5 he says, “One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” There is no way Moses could have said such a thing, for Sabbath observance was a central feature of the OT Law. No longer, says Paul. The issue of what day we worship is no longer regulated by God. Regular worship is an issue (Heb. 10:25), but the day of worship is not. A number of large churches in our country have added Saturday night services in recent years, and some have added Friday night or Monday night services. That’s OK.
I have a friend who was seeking ordination in another evangelical denomination here in St. Louis some years back. He was rejected twice by his examining council because he refused to say he wouldn’t go to a Cardinal baseball game on Sunday afternoon. That violated their concept of the appropriate use of the Lord’s Day. I believe they were importing OT law into the church and were ignoring Romans 14:5.
Now don’t misunderstand me. I believe the principle of one day of rest in seven goes all the way back to Creation and we violate that to our own detriment, but the demand that it be a certain day or that it be observed in a certain way is not in keeping with the NT. For the vast majority of us, Sunday is the best time to worship corporately, but there is no fault to be laid on those churches that have Saturday night services, or any other night, for the convenience of their members.
A quick glance at another passage informs us of some other “things that don’t matter.” Col. 2:16 reads, “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” Here two new items are added to the list of “things that don’t matter:” drink and holidays. Some people get terribly exercised over what a Christian can or cannot drink; others find great bones of contention over the observance of Christmas, Easter, or Halloween. Paul says these are shadow issues. They generally don’t deserve the attention some people give them.
We have a few families in our church who don’t observe Christmas as a gift-giving holiday and don’t put up a Christmas tree. They have personal convictions regarding the origin of these traditions and the value of observing them for their children. That’s OK. But if they began criticizing the church for having a Christmas tree up here on the platform, or if they began to lobby other families to abandon the practice of giving gifts from St. Nick, that would be inappropriate. “Don’t let anyone judge you in regard to a religious festival,” says Paul. Now friends, don’t take this too far. If the festival itself is pagan in practice, like Mardi Gras, I doubt if Paul would apply these exhortations. But the average family’s Christmas observance is far from that.
It’s amazing, isn’t it, how often Christians have been divided over this category of “things that don’t matter”? Once in a while churches split over things that are right or things that are wrong—but I think it happens even more often over things that don’t matter. One of the tragedies of the evangelical church in the U.S. is that we have the luxury of fighting over petty, nitpicking things because we feel so secure. The church in China doesn’t get exercised over things that don’t matter—they’re just trying to survive. They don’t argue over what day to worship—they’re glad to worship any day of the week or any time of the day. But here where there are few real enemies trying to take over our churches, we tend to consider anyone suspect who differs from us on some petty issue.
I know whereof I speak. I grew up in the IFCA, an association of Bible churches and independent Baptist churches which had the tendency to feel they were the only ones standing true to the faith. Among the things for which you could fall out of good graces in those churches back in the 50’s were: playing cards, going to the cinema, smoking, using any alcoholic beverage, reading the Revised Standard Version of the Bible in public, participating in sports on Sunday, mixed swimming, chewing tobacco, pop music, dancing, playing the saxaphone in church, and even reading the newspaper comics on Sunday.
Now none of these things is directly addressed in the Bible, and therefore one cannot with any dogmatism label them as “things that are wrong.” But that didn’t stop some in our church from labeling them just that way and actually being quite dogmatic about it. A definition of legalism I once heard fit some of our group to a tee: “A legalist is someone who lives in mortal terror that someone, somewhere may be enjoying himself.” We even had a poem:
Believe as I believe,
No more, no less,
That I am right
And no one else, confess.
Feel as I feel
Think only as I think,
Eat what I eat
And drink but what I drink
Look only as I look
Do always as I do,
Then and only then
I’ll fellowship with you.
Now don’t misunderstand me, there were a lot of good people in those churches. I will be forever grateful for the way I learned to honor the Scriptures, but they weren’t always interpreted correctly.
Well, in summary of this first point, I would simply say that it would be an immense help to all of us if we would recognize that some things are right, some things are wrong, and some things don’t matter.
There are two kinds of Christians relative to “things that don’t matter.”
There are those who are “weak in the faith.” Look again at verses 1 & 2: “Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. {2} One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables.” This speaks of one whose “faith is weak,” but the original Greek actually speaks of one who is “weak in the faith.” This person has a doctrinal and theological problem—he hasn’t yet come to grips that with the fact that at the death of Christ the believer was released from bondage to the Mosaic Law. He’s weak in that his conscience still bothers him when he eats meat or fails to observe the Sabbath or drinks certain beverages, etc. He’s weak in that he is still in slavery to the shadows and hasn’t experienced the glorious freedom which comes through Jesus Christ. He’s weak in that he hasn’t yet fully liberated himself from a belief in the efficacy of works. He still thinks more of what he can do for God than of what God has done for him. His general approach is, “If the Bible hasn’t specifically approved something, then it’s probably wrong.” That’s the weak brother.
There are those who are “strong in the faith.” On the other hand, there is the strong brother. His general approach is different: “If the Bible hasn’t specifically forbidden something, then it’s probably within my rights to do it.” He enjoys his freedom in Christ and doesn’t find his conscience inhibiting him in regard to many of the “things that don’t matter.” He knows experientially what John 8:31-32 means, as Jesus says, “If you hold to my teaching, you really are my disciples. Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.” That’s the strong brother.
The curious thing here, and I want you to catch this, is that these labels have largely been reversed in the conservative church today. The legalistic believer who has a list of don’ts a mile long; who has appointed himself as the spiritual watchdog of the church; who is the first to throw up his hands in holy terror if he sees a fellow believer drinking a beer; who automatically writes someone off from leadership in the church if he or she has suffered a divorce, no matter what the cause, is often considered, and certainly considers himself, the strong brother.
After all, he’s the one who is fighting to maintain high moral standards. He’s the one who is trying to keep the spiritual bars from being lowered. He’s the one who is standing up for God and country and motherhood. But, says the Apostle, he is not the strong brother. He is actually the brother who is weak in the faith.
The strong brother, on the other hand, often gets accused of being weak. He’s considered a compromiser because he’s not sufficiently separated from worldly activities. He’s viewed as a potentially bad influence on young people because he won’t demand that everyone totally abstain from this or that. The fact of the matter is that he may actually be stronger in the faith and be more biblical (though we must wait until next Sunday to see what his attitude is toward the liberty he enjoys).
If we don’t accomplish anything else this morning, I hope we at least come to realize that the one whose list of scruples and inhibitions is long and rigid is the weak brother, while the one who refuses to add to the NT’s list of do’s and don’t’s is the strong brother.
If I may chase down a philosophical rabbit trail for a moment, I believe a very interesting thing has developed in the evangelical church over the past several decades, and that is that quite a number of Christians tend to make the automatic assumption that the conservative position is always the right position and the more liberal position is always the wrong position. And they tend to forget that we evangelicals are supposed to get our viewpoints out of the Bible, and it shouldn’t matter whether it seems liberal or conservative by popular evangelical standards.
Let me give you a case in point. Fools rush in, you know. Let’s take the issue of divorce and remarriage. If a poll were taken in the average fundamental or evangelical church as to which leaders have taken the strongest position on divorce, probably the names most frequently mentioned would be Gothard, Ryrie, Pentecost, and Laney, because they have books in print that teach that there is no legitimate basis for divorce and no legitimate basis for remarriage for anyone who has been divorced. Now that’s certainly a conservative position, and it’s a strong position in the sense of being rigid and absolute. But friends, it is a very weak position biblically, for the Bible allows for divorce in certain very restrictive circumstances and allows for remarriage when a person has been biblically divorced.
Let me use another example. About a year ago there was an older woman attending our church for a few months whose name I do not recall, but she had a penchant for the KJV. One day she called me up to find out why I didn’t preach from the KJV. I told her it was because I didn’t think it was as accurate a translation as the NIV or the NASB. Suddenly I got an earful about how the KJV is the inspired Word of God and all these new-fangled Bibles are tools of Satan, and it went downhill from there. Well, her position is certainly conservative, but it’s terribly weak on the facts. I have a great appreciation for the beauty of the KJV, but when history and vocabulary and grammar and textual criticism are all taken into consideration, there is simply no way the KJV can be held up as a superior translation. It simply isn’t so.
Friends, the only really strong position is the one that corresponds to truth, and I for one am willing to stand on God’s Word even if it means that the whole of fundamentalism and half of evangelicalism think I’m a “liberal,” or even if the other half of evangelicals and all the liberals think I’m a “knee-jerk conservative.”
There’s something very curious about Paul’s use of the terms “strong” and “weak” here in Romans 14. It has nothing to do with how long you’ve been a Christian or how much Scripture you have memorized or how many Sunday School classes you’ve taught. In fact, there are many veteran preachers who are weak brothers in the sense Paul is using that term here, and there are brand new converts who are strong brothers or sisters in the sense of Rom. 14. The issue is simply, “Do you recognize that Christ has given you freedom regarding the ‘things that don’t really matter?’”
Our third point today builds directly upon the other two.
There is one attitude God requires of both weak and strong Christians in this area of “things that don’t matter”: ACCEPT ONE ANOTHER.
What has often been the attitude of these two groups in the Church to one another? Well, the weak call the strong wishy-washy compromisers and berate them for not standing in the gap to stem the tide toward liberalism. On the other hand, the strong refer to the weak as hair-brained nitpickers or old-fashioned fools who, when they can’t find sins to attack just make up some new ones. That’s the way it’s been too often.
The Scripture before us today screams loudly, “These things ought not so to be.” Look at the very beginning of the chapter. Paul says to the strong brother, “Accept him whose faith is weak.” You may disagree with him; in fact, he may be completely off base. But your job is not to change him, but to accept him as a brother (or her as a sister) in Christ. Accept him, don’t belittle him. Accept him, don’t make him feel like an oddball. Accept him, don’t hold him in contempt. And the weak brother is to return the favor to the strong brother. Accept him, don’t call him a compromiser. Accept him, don’t treat him with suspicion. Accept him, don’t judge him.
This mutual acceptance is conveyed further in verse 3: “The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does.” The same theme is reiterated in verse 10: “You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother?” There’s no basis for belittling one another or holding one another in contempt.
And lest we have any doubt about the message here, verse 13 summarizes and makes it crystal clear: “Therefore, let us stop passing judgment on one another.” Please understand the context here, because it’s easy to misapply these cautions. The context here is judging one another in areas that are neither clearly right nor clearly wrong, as judged by the Scriptures. It is not illegitimate to judge someone by saying, “Your adultery is a sin the eyes of God,” or “Your homosexual acts are an abomination to the Lord,” or Your pride or jealousy or greed are forbidden by the Scriptures.” These are issues clearly forbidden in Scripture. But regarding “things that don’t matter,” we should not be judging one another.
Now our final point is this:
There are three good reasons why this attitude of acceptance should be adopted:
Because both the strong brother and the weak brother have been accepted by the Lord. Verse 3: “The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him.” The Lord is willing to have both strong and weak brothers in the Body, so why shouldn’t we? The Lord doesn’t say to the weak brother whose conscience bothers him about lots of relatively insignificant issues, “You dummy! When you get over your nitpicking legalism, then you can serve in My church.” And he doesn’t say to the strong brother, “You left-leaning compromiser! You’d better be careful that you don’t enjoy life too much!”
No, the Lord says to both, “I accept you, and there’s room for both of you.” The strong brother, over a period of time, can help the weak brother understand what freedom in Christ is all about. But the weak brother can serve as a positive influence on the strong brother by warning him not to go to seed with his freedom and by reminding him that freedom is really slavery if it’s not exercised in love. I think an excellent argument could be made for the fact that the healthiest church is one that is made up of both strong brothers and sisters and weak brothers and sisters who have learned to live in harmony. At any rate, there is not a word in the NT that justifies breaking fellowship with other believers over secondary issues, over “things that don’t matter.”
Because both belong to the Lord. Verse 4: “Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.” Who would have the audacity to boss around someone else’s employee? Who would try to discipline someone else’s children? At the most one might report to the servant’s master or to the child’s parents that there is a performance gap. And I suppose the parallel might be that if you think a brother or sister of yours might be out to lunch in this area of doubtful things, tell the Lord about it, but don’t judge the person yourself in the arena of “things that don’t matter.”
The real issue is the Lordship of Christ. He is Lord of both the strong brother and the weak brother. Look at verses 6-9:
He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
Because both will be judged by the Lord. Verse 10b:
“For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. It is written:
‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
‘every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.’
So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.”
Do you get the point? Why should we accept one another and not judge one another? It is because we’ve got our hands full just dealing with our own judgment—the Judgment Seat of Christ where each of us will give account of ourselves to God. A careful study of this Judgment Seat in the NT will reveal that this is for believers only, and it is not a judgment to determine salvation but rather one to determine reward; it is not a judgment of sin (our sins have already been judged at the Cross), rather it is a judgment of our faithfulness (particularly the issue of whether we have built up the body of Christ with gold, silver, or precious stones or perhaps have wasted our talent on wood, hay, or stubble). This is a sufficiently serious matter that we have little leisure to spend judging our brothers and sisters.
Now I feel compelled to stress again that the judging God is concerned about here is judging over things that don’t really matter—things concerning which God has not said they are either right or wrong. Regarding genuine moral issues we have not only the right, but sometimes even the obligation, to judge one another. 1 Corinthians 5 lists such items as immorality, coveting, drunkenness, swindling, idolatry, and reviling as legitimate issues for judging a professing Christian, even on occasion excommunicating him from the Church. But food, drink, worship days, and card playing—these things just don’t fit the bill.
Now having said all that, the fact of the matter is that very few of us fit neatly into the category of a strong brother or a weak brother. All of us like to think of ourselves as strong and we like to think that we have rejected all legalism. But the fact of the matter is that if we’re really honest with ourselves we will admit that we’re generally quite inconsistent in this area.
The one who has a conscience against going to the movies will often watch them at home. The one who has freedom to enjoy an occasional glass of wine with supper wouldn’t get caught dead with a can of beer in his hand in public. The one who believes chewing tobacco is the devil’s bubble gum doesn’t hesitate to fill himself with coffee, refined sugar, sodium, and all sorts of other alleged poisons. The one who wouldn’t think of sitting at a blackjack table in Las Vegas will nevertheless gamble on a football pool at the office, or go to a bingo parlor, or even gamble on speculative stocks. If we will recognize and admit these inconsistencies, it will probably be a lot easier for us to accept our brothers and sisters in Christ when their lifestyle choices don’t happen to coincide with ours.
Conclusion: T. R. Glover once said, “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with all Thy might—but remember that someone thinks differently.”[i] That’s the beauty of the Church. “None of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.” May that be the attitude of every true believer here this morning. May the Lordship of Christ become more important than anything else.
Communion: We’ve been reminded this morning that a lot of the issues which we use to elevate ourselves above our brothers and sisters in Christ are bogus issues. When we come to the Cross we discover it has a great leveling effect, for it shows us that all of us are in desperate need of the grace of God. All believers are invited to the Lord’s Table–rich and poor, white collar and blue collar, male and female, strong and weak. Jesus died for all of us, and all of us will stand before Him one day. The great communion passage, 1 Corinthians 11, tells us that if we judge ourselves now, we will not be judged so severely later. Let’s come to the Lord’s Table.
DATE: December 3, 1995
Tags:
Legalism
Weak Christians
Strong Christians
Acceptance
[i] Quoted by William Barclay, The Letter to the Romans, 185.