Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

As we work through this chapter of Romans, we will find ourselves reinforcing the same principle over and over— love your brother, while keeping the big deals big, the middle deals middle, and the small deals small. Keep a sense of proportion—and as you monitor these things, look to your own sense of proportion first . . . not the other guy’s.

The Text

“One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s” (Rom. 14:5-8).

Summary of the Text

Paul’s first example was dietary, and he now moves to calendar observance. One man thinks one day is more important than another, and another man doesn’t (v. 5). Each one should be fully persuaded. The man who observes the day, does so before the Lord, and the one who doesn’t is rendering his non-offering to the Lord (v. 6). Paul hearkens back to his point about eating, and makes the same point. One man says grace over what he eats, and the other man gives thanks for what he does not eat (v. 6). We are not individuals; we are interdividuals (v. 7). If we don’t live or die to ourselves, then we don’t mark a day or set a table to ourselves. Note the phrase “to himself,” contrasted with the earlier (and later) phrase “unto the Lord.”If we live, it is unto the Lord (v. 8). If we die, it is unto the Lord (v. 8). And therefore, whether we live or die, or do anything in between, we belong to the Lord (v. 8).

Fully Persuaded

Let us reiterate the principle by coming at it from another angle. If you are loving your brother, and are grateful to God, then you have the right to be fully persuaded in your own mind about “whatever it is”—whether homebirthing, cancer treatments, biblical diets, “green” concerns, or whatever will be the hot item two years from now. If you are not loving your brother, and are not giving a life of gratitude, then you do not have the right to be fully persuaded in your own mind. Any lack of charity and a lack of thanksgiving means that you have forfeited your right to your own opinion. If you reel it in again, then you do. Go ahead, read that book, or visit that web site.

You love your brother by not judging or despising him (as we saw in vv. 1-4), and you render thanks to God in deep contentment, as we see here. Opinions, of whatever stripe, must be built on the foundation of love for those who differ, and gratitude to God for all things. In contrast, faddists ride roughshod over those who differ, and are driven by discontent with what they are rejecting more than gratitude for what they are receiving.

Every Day Alike

Paul gives us another example from the first century, which is that of honoring one day over another. The apostle clearly teaches that (if the central principles are observed) one man has the right to esteem one day over another. He teaches just as plainly that another man has the right not to. Now in the first century, this would have meant Judaic calendar observance, with some Christians not honoring Yom Kippur and others doing so. Some would not have marked Passover, and others would have. Let it ride, Paul argues, and love each other.

20 centuries later, we would have an analogous situation with the observation of Christmas, Easter, Ascension, and Pentecost. The Bible does not require these days to be observed, and neither may we. The Old Testament festivals were God-ordained, but this was a time of transition. Other festivals were not demanded by the law (like Purim), but were God-honoring anyway. Neither may a man who does not observe Christmas demand that another man cease. If the law of love is remembered, then But remember the human heart—the farther we get away from Scripture, the more likely it is that we may be neglecting the law of gratitude and love. The Church should therefore not establish any festival honoring the death of St. Frideswide’s house cat.

But what about the Lord’s Day? Does that fall under Paul’s stricture here—is it okay for a man to consider all seven days exactly the same? Yes and no. To the extent that the sabbath was part and parcel with the old covenant calendar (seventh day observance and one of the days of Israel’s convocation), that obligation (and the particular manner of its observance) has now ceased (Lev. 23:1-3). The law, and this part of the law was nailed to the cross (Col. 2:14). The weekly sabbath died. But when something dies in this way, in God’s economy, it rises again (Heb. 4:9-10). This is why a sabbath-rest remains for God’s people today. The Lord’s Day is made new, just as all things have been made new. Mark the first day of the week in gospel rest; this is a glorified, resurrected sabbath. So do not retreat to Pharisaical corruptions of what was designed to be the lesser glory.

To Himself or to the Lord

We are not individuals; we are interdividuals. We are connected to one another, and we are connected to one another precisely because we are connected to the Head, in whom we are being knit together (Col. 2:19). If we look to the Head, we are going to be coordinated one with another. If we look to ourselves, and our own opinions, however right we insist they must be, we are living to ourselves. But a part of the body that lives to itself is a part of the body that is seeking to make the body spastic. Love gives the body of Christ hand/eye coordination. Self- absorption makes the body gangly and spastic, and is the source of one dispute after another. So do not let health diets, or homebirthing, or vitamin therapy, or partisan politics, or anything else you found on the Internet become a basis for judging. And if you see somebody in the church not heeding that exhortation, don’t you despise them.

Read Full Article

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

We are the beta test for the new humanity, but this might require some explanation. Jesus Christ is the perfect man, but we are not yet grown up into that perfect man (Eph. 4: 13). So, as far as we go, we are the working prototype of what God is up to. There are some bugs to work out yet, mostly having to do with our lack of love for one another. So let’s work on that.

The Text

“Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand” (Rom. 14:1-4).

Summary of the Text

Paul has been explaining the gospel, that message which establishes a new race descended from the new Adam, designed by God to replace the corrupt mass of humanity wrought by the old Adam. We are living in a time of great transition, and so we in the church must live in a way that displays to the outside world how this is supposed to work. The first thing to understand is that the church is not an exclusive club for spiritually superior people. Receive the one who is weak in faith (v. 1), we are told, and we are not supposed to receive him in order to argue with him (v. 1). For example, one Christian believes he can eat anything, while a weaker brother with dietary scruples is a vegetarian (v. 2). Paul sets down the principle of love—do not despise or judge one another, and this is a principle that goes both ways. It goes from the strong to the weak and from the weak to the strong (v. 3). If God has received someone, don’t you try to get more exclusive than God (v. 3). It is bad to try to have higher standards than God does. It is not our place to judge the workmanship that is submitted to another (v. 4). To his own master a man stands or falls (v. 4). And for Paul’s money, he is going to stand—because God is able to make him stand (v. 4).

What Love Looks Like

Paul has already defined the bedrock of love for us, which is the law of God. Love does no harm to his neighbor, and this harm is defined by what God says harm is. We don’t get to define it. In this area—the tangled debates Christians get themselves into—Paul says that love receives a brother without engaging in doubtful disputations. Paul says that the stronger brother must take care not to despise the weaker brother, and the weaker brother must not judge the stronger. These are different verbs, but they both have to do with “not receiving.” The one who despises looks down on the one who tangles himself all up in unnecessary rules and complications, and thus his despising breaks the law of love. The one who judges does so according to his own made-up standards, substituting them in for God’s actual standards. This means he has to judge uphill, which makes him cranky. Both are forms of acting like a supervisor over people you weren’t given any authority over. Your brother stands or falls before somebody else, and the One before whom he stands or falls loves him more than you do, and is not nearly as eager as you are to see him mess up.

Christianity And

This means that love—as God defines it—trumps everything. It is to be the governing demeanor in all our discussions, disputes, and debates, and it is this attitude of love that prevents us from becoming “faddists for Jesus.” C.S. Lewis warned against the error of what he called “Christianity and . . .” Christianity and vitamins, Christianity and homebirthing, Christianity and no cheeseburgers, Christianity and the grunge aesthetic, and so on.

Now of course, we have to make our decisions in these other areas, but we must never do so in a way that links them to the faith in the wrong way. Neither may we leave them unlinked—that would leave our fads without any regulating authority, which would be terrible.

So we must link them up intelligently and in love. In these other areas, we need to be fully convinced in our own minds—we don’t float through life—our ands must be followed by something. But if we accept the duty to love others along with being fully convinced in our own minds, then we are protected against most forms of faddism. This is because fads are not very much fun without the added fun of recruiting for a movement. The substance of the fad is just the raw material. The real attraction lies in supervising people who don’t answer to you, which is what Paul prohibits.

Love Is Not Relativism

But Paul is no egalitarian. He does not say that any decision made by any Christian is just as good as any other. He most emphatically does not say that. In the first of his examples, he takes sides. The weaker brother is the vegetarian. But at the same time, if a modern day Pauline carnivore takes this verse, and beats a veggie-brother over the head with it—“it says weaker brother here, el stupido . . .” it is clear that the stronger brother is not the stronger brother at all. He is right about the meat, but wrong about everything else. He is right about the meat, except for the meat in his head.

Paul comes to other examples in this chapter, but he begins with the food. This is a perennial problem area for a certain religious type of man. Men have a deep desire to have God care about what they put in their mouths. The problem is that the triune God of Scripture doesn’t care—bacon is fine, as are oysters, and refined sugar, and processed stuff made out of what used to be corn, and beer, and tofu, and wheat germ, and dirt cookies, and alfalfa sprouts from the coop. God doesn’t care . . . about that.

No Imperialism

Within the church, the imperialist for “whatever fad it is” struggles with Paul’s acceptance of his option as a mere option. He doesn’t want to define love the way Paul does—in terms of leaving your brother alone—and instead wants to say that it is only because of his deep love that he is urging his brother to start taking these pills “for what ails ya,” $4.99 a bottle. Love is what makes a helpful sister tell a newly pregnant woman a bunch of hospital horror stories. Right. Love meddles, love bustles, love volunteers information, love won’t shut up. Love refuses to listen to Paul, which can’t be right somehow.

The Real Test

Love and wisdom go together. If everyone loves one another, disagreement is manageable—even when the consequences of being wrong can be significant. The less able you are to keep your crusade to yourself, in line with Paul’s instruction here, the more likely it is that your wisdom on that issue is not wisdom at all.

Read Full Article