Commentary - Romans 14:1-4

Bird's-eye view

In Romans 14, Paul shifts from the grand architecture of justification by faith to the interior decorating. Having established that we are saved by grace alone, he now addresses the practical matter of how saints, justified but still lumpy, are to live together in the household of God. The issue at hand is what he calls "debatable matters" or "disputable things." These are not issues of first-order doctrine, like the deity of Christ or the authority of Scripture. Rather, they are matters of conscience, where sincere believers might land on different practices. The specific examples he uses are dietary laws and the observance of special days, both hot-button issues in a church composed of Jews and Gentiles.

The apostle lays down a foundational principle: Christian love requires us to receive one another, despite our differing scruples, and to refrain from judging or despising one another. He identifies two groups, the "strong" and the "weak." The weak brother is the one with an overactive conscience, who refrains from certain liberties (like eating meat) out of fear of sinning. The strong brother understands his freedom in Christ but is tempted to look down on the weaker brother's fussiness. Paul's instruction cuts both ways. The strong must not despise the weak, and the weak must not judge the strong. The basis for this mutual acceptance is glorious: God has accepted them. Who are we to reject someone whom God has received into His family?

Outline

Context In Romans

Having laid out the glorious doctrines of sin, justification, and sanctification in the first eleven chapters, Paul turns a sharp corner in chapter 12. The "therefore" of Romans 12:1 is the hinge of the entire letter. Because of God's immense mercies, we are to present our bodies as living sacrifices. This is the foundation of all Christian ethics. Chapters 12 and 13 deal with how this sacrificial life looks in relation to the church, the world, and the civil magistrate. Chapter 14 flows directly from this. It is a specific application of the law of love. How does a "living sacrifice" treat a brother who thinks it is a sin to eat a bacon cheeseburger?

This chapter addresses the inevitable friction that arises when a diverse group of people, saved out of different backgrounds (in this case, Jewish and Gentile), are brought together into one body. The old covenant had strict dietary laws; the new covenant abolishes them. But you cannot just flip a switch in a man's conscience. The transition from the shadows of the Mosaic law to the blazing sun of gospel liberty was bound to cause some growing pains. Paul is not writing a treatise on abstract ethics; he is providing pastoral triage for a real-world church struggling with how to love one another in the messiness of sanctification.

Key Issues

Clause-by-Clause Commentary

v. 1 Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on opinions.

The command is direct: "accept" or "receive" the one who is weak in faith. This is not a suggestion. The church is not to be an exclusive club for the spiritually robust. We are to welcome those whose faith is still wobbly, whose consciences are tender and perhaps a bit misinformed. The word for "weak" here is astheneo, the same root used for physical illness. This brother is not in rebellion; he is spiritually fragile. And how are we to receive him? Not to straighten him out. Not to win an argument. The ESV says "not to quarrel over opinions," while the LSB has "not for the purpose of passing judgment on opinions." The Greek is diakriseis dialogismon, which gets at the idea of sitting in judgment over his inner reasonings and doubts. We are not to welcome him into the fellowship only to put him in the dock and cross-examine his scruples. Love receives a brother, full stop. The debate club can meet on Tuesday.

v. 2 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only.

Here Paul gives the first concrete example. One man, the strong brother, understands his liberty in Christ. He knows that all foods are clean (cf. Mark 7:19) and that an idol is nothing, so meat offered to an idol is just meat. His faith allows him to eat "all things." But another man, "he who is weak," restricts his diet. In this case, he is a vegetarian. This is not because he has an ethical objection to eating animals, but because he has dietary scruples, likely rooted in the Old Testament law or a fear of inadvertently eating meat sacrificed to idols. Paul does not mince words; he identifies the vegetarian in this dispute as the "weak" one. There is a right and wrong answer on the theological question of food. But being right about the meat does not give the strong brother a license to be wrong about his brother.

v. 3 The one who eats must not view the one who does not eat with contempt, and the one who does not eat must not judge the one who eats, for God accepted him.

Paul now addresses both parties directly, and he uses two different verbs. The one who eats, the strong brother, is forbidden to "view with contempt" or "despise" the weak brother. The temptation for the strong is arrogance. He sees the weak brother tangled up in unnecessary rules and thinks, "What a simpleton. When will he grow up?" This despising breaks the law of love. On the other side, the one who does not eat is forbidden to "judge" the one who eats. The temptation for the weak is self-righteousness. He sees the strong brother eating a pork chop and thinks, "What a libertine. He is compromising with the world." This judging erects his own made-up standards as the law of God. Both attitudes, contempt and judgment, are forms of rejecting a brother. And the reason both are forbidden is the same, and it is glorious: "for God accepted him." God has welcomed this person into His family. If God's standards for admission were met at the cross, it is the height of presumption for us to set up a checkpoint at the potluck line.

v. 4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

Paul drives the point home with a sharp, rhetorical question. "Who are you?" What right do you have to pass sentence on someone who is not your servant? He belongs to another Master, the Lord Jesus Christ. It is before that Master, and that Master alone, that he will either stand or fall on the day of judgment. This is a crucial point. We are not the master of our brother's conscience. We are not his lord. We are fellow servants. And then Paul adds a wonderful word of assurance. "And he will stand." This is not a 50/50 proposition. Why will he stand? Not because his own strength is sufficient, or because his theological grasp of disputable matters is perfect. He will stand "for the Lord is able to make him stand." Our security, whether we are weak or strong, rests not in the strength of our faith, but in the strength of the one in whom we have faith. God does not just receive His children; He holds them fast. He is able to make them stand, and He will.

Application

The principles in this passage are perpetually relevant because Christians are perpetually prone to turning secondary matters into primary tests of fellowship. We may not argue about kosher laws, but we find plenty of other things to divide over: worship styles, schooling choices, political strategies, alcohol consumption, and a thousand other things. The apostolic command is to receive one another, not because we agree on everything, but because God in Christ has received us.

This requires two things. For the strong, it requires humility and patience. You may be right, but if you use your rightness to bludgeon a weaker brother, you are profoundly in the wrong. Your liberty is not a license to cause another to stumble. For the weak, it requires a different kind of humility. You must recognize that your conscience is not the king of the church. You must not judge your brother for exercising a freedom that Christ purchased for him. Both sides must remember that every believer is a servant of Christ, and will give an account to Him, not to the church caucus on dietary ethics. Our unity is not found in uniform practice in these disputable areas, but in our common Lord, the one who is able to make us all stand in the great day.