Romans 14 question

[Frankenfurter]

I find Romans 14 to be incredibly empowering as Paul tells us that our sins are really anything that we do that lacks faith in God’s love. I find this to be so much a better understanding of sin than a long list of bad things not to do.

But my question is in regards to what he meant when he described causing your brother to sin because of what you eat. I suppose he is trying to make an example based on something they all understood about their customs, but I really don’t understand how I could make someone else sin because of what I chose to eat. Any help with deciphering this would be great since I really love this passage and would like to penetrate it more.

 

[steveb1]

I find Romans 14 to be incredibly empowering as Paul tells us that our sins are really anything that we do that lacks faith in God’s love. I find this to be so much a better understanding of sin than a long list of bad things not to do.

But my question is in regards to what he meant when he described causing your brother to sin because of what you eat. I suppose he is trying to make an example based on something they all understood about their customs, but I really don’t understand how I could make someone else sin because of what I chose to eat. Any help with deciphering this would be great since I really love this passage and would like to penetrate it more.

Only a guess: Paul is speaking of Christian vegetarians, whom he calls “weak brethren”. Since those Christians felt that meat eating was sinful - whereas Paul taught his congregations that all but idol-meat was “kosher” - then eating meat when dining with them might be a cause of scandal. And for those non-cradle vegetarians, who had perhaps reluctantly given up meat eating, seeing fellow diners eating meat might tempt them to “sin” by violating their vegetarian code. Again, just a guess.

 

[po18guy]

Paul, was raised a Pharisee (Acts 23:6) and once he was converted, worked among Jews, Gentiles and pagans in his ministry. He often encountered those who ate foods which were declared “unclean” for Jews to eat by the Law of Moses (Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14). Unclean food was that which had been sacrificed to idols, or strangled, or was in any of the other prohibited classes (shellfish, predatory animals, birds, etc.). It was a rapidly changing world that Paul lived and preached in, with pagan cultures clashing with both Jewish and Christian. Many of the religions of that time had food that was either considered unclean for themselves, or for Jews. But, Jesus gives us a hint that this was all to change when He sent the 72 (70) forth, saying, “Eat whatever is placed before you” (Luke 10:8), as well as “It is not what goes into a man which makes him unclean” (Mark 7:14-19). The making of all foods clean was revealed directly to Peter by the vision he received in Acts 10:9-16. Thus, when you sat down to eat, it was an offense to some to either offer or be offered “unclean” food.

 

[William_Pitts]

I find Romans 14 to be incredibly empowering as Paul tells us that our sins are really anything that we do that lacks faith in God’s love. I find this to be so much a better understanding of sin than a long list of bad things not to do.

But my question is in regards to what he meant when he described causing your brother to sin because of what you eat. I suppose he is trying to make an example based on something they all understood about their customs, but I really don’t understand how I could make someone else sin because of what I chose to eat. Any help with deciphering this would be great since I really love this passage and would like to penetrate it more.

Can I make a suggestion. I have a program on my computer called E-sword it is free. You can download electronic versions of Bibles, commentaries, Bible dictionaries and other materials such as the early Church fathers. There are Catholic modules for the program from e-snips. I have the following Catholic versions of the scriptures: NJB, NRSV-CE (which I did have to buy), NAB, Vulgate, Douay-Rheims, RSVA, GNB plus Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Spanish, KJV, KJV with Apocrypha, and many other versions. All in al I have 31 versions of the Bible, 21 Commentaries and 23 Dictionaries. I have the Catechism with index, All of the Popes, early heresies, saints,Catholic prayers and so much more. If you really want to get deep into the Bible and the early church fathers this is the way to do it.

You can search on the forums for e-sword and e-snips and find a lot of information.

e-sword.net/

esnips.com/web/CatholicApolegetics

Bless you.

 

[PLeeD]

I think Paul’s point in Romans 14 is that we should tolerate differences in other Christians in matters that are not essential to the Gospel. Some Christians may feel perfectly comfortable engaging in activities that other Christians find objectionable. Paul says that both types of Christians should tolerate the other.

Look at the last couple of verses; Do you have faith? Keep it to yourself before God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But whoever doubts stands condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith, and everything that is not from faith is sin.

Those verses describe avoidance of being a “stumbling block” for your neighbor. You might personally be OK with some activity, and that’s OK unless it offends your neighbor. If it does you should not engage in the activity in front of them. Otherwise they might engage in the same activity even though their conscience tells them not to.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking Paul’s teaching only applies to food. He also uses observance of special days as an example of the same principle. He also says this in verse 21; *It is a noble thing not to eat meat, or drink wine, **or do anything *that makes your brother stumble.

 

[po18guy]

Eating and other practices amongst the Romans was the biggest stumbling block between those early Christians (whom Paul had not yet evangelized). According to Kenneth Baker, S.J. author of Inside the Bible (which I highly recommend), the final chapters are an exhortation to the early Roman Christians to keep the commandments, to avoid the sin and scandal of others and above all, to practice a universal charity. It is clear that the faith of some members was weak, but those of greater faith were called upon to build them up, rather than tear them down. As to food, Paul and the other Apostles constantly battled the Judaizers, who sought to maintain the Law of Moses in matters of food and the other requirements of the law. Paul rightly confronted Peter when Peter fell into this early practice, and separated himself from the gentiles.

 

[Frankenfurter]

All helpful answers. Thanks

po18guy, you really gave a great response and it makes a whole lot of sense. Thanks kindly for that.

I have friends who are Adventist, and once when I was going to make them some food while they dealt with a family crisis, I asked them if there was anything they don’t eat, and they told me that they don’t eat pork. So I guess these ‘new’ rules do take some time to sink in. I suppose that if I eat pork at home it is no problem, but I shouldn’t show up at their house with a big plate of ribs, if it causes them to eat it (because they smell so good) and then they feel like they have done an offense to God.

 

[po18guy]

All helpful answers. Thanks

po18guy, you really gave a great response and it makes a whole lot of sense. Thanks kindly for that.

I have friends who are Adventist, and once when I was going to make them some food while they dealt with a family crisis, I asked them if there was anything they don’t eat, and they told me that they don’t eat pork. So I guess these ‘new’ rules do take some time to sink in. I suppose that if I eat pork at home it is no problem, but I shouldn’t show up at their house with a big plate of ribs, if it causes them to eat it (because they smell so good) and then they feel like they have done an offense to God.

Oh, yes. I know the Adventists well. My Chaplain at work was Adventist, and so I did a little research. While they are fringe, they are validly baptized, yet have some very odd views. Many of them are vegetarian, due to the teaching of their “prophetess” Ellen Gould White. They seem to pick and choose from the Mosaic covenant laws to observe, and do not celebrate Easter, since it is on a Sunday, and their sabbath remains the Jewish observance. This is just plain odd.

 

[po18guy]

I think Paul’s point in Romans 14 is that we should tolerate differences in other Christians in matters that are not essential to the Gospel. Some Christians may feel perfectly comfortable engaging in activities that other Christians find objectionable. Paul says that both types of Christians should tolerate the other.

Look at the last couple of verses; Do you have faith? Keep it to yourself before God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But whoever doubts stands condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith, and everything that is not from faith is sin.

Those verses describe avoidance of being a “stumbling block” for your neighbor. You might personally be OK with some activity, and that’s OK unless it offends your neighbor. If it does you should not engage in the activity in front of them. Otherwise they might engage in the same activity even though their conscience tells them not to.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking Paul’s teaching only applies to food. He also uses observance of special days as an example of the same principle. He also says this in verse 21; *It is a noble thing not to eat meat, or drink wine, **or do anything ***that makes your brother stumble.

Thanks for your response. You made me do a little digging.

 

[thistle]

I find Romans 14 to be incredibly empowering as Paul tells us that our sins are really anything that we do that lacks faith in God’s love. I find this to be so much a better understanding of sin than a long list of bad things not to do.

But my question is in regards to what he meant when he described causing your brother to sin because of what you eat. I suppose he is trying to make an example based on something they all understood about their customs, but I really don’t understand how I could make someone else sin because of what I chose to eat. Any help with deciphering this would be great since I really love this passage and would like to penetrate it more.

D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

haydock1859.tripod.com/id158.html

 

[PLeeD]

Thanks for your response. You made me do a little digging.

You are welcome. Did your digging confirm or contradict my understanding of Paul in this chapter? Romans 14 is one of my favorite chapters of the bible, so I’m interested to hear what you think.

 

[po18guy]

You are welcome. Did your digging confirm or contradict my understanding of Paul in this chapter? Romans 14 is one of my favorite chapters of the bible, so I’m interested to hear what you think.

Well, in a stroke of luck, it confirmed both/and. Paul was preaching charity toward those whose faith was weak, and whose practices revealed that weakness. It appears that the physical actions which most commonly revealed that weakness were in their eating practices. It also appears that some of the Christians with stronger faith were openly critical and demeaning toward their weaker brethren - and so Paul sought to correct this by emphasizing charity and encouragement, exhorting the strong believers to set the higher standard while avoiding the errors of pride in their own faith.

 

[PLeeD]

Agreed. But, I think it’s also important to recognize that Romans 14 is a two way street. The chapter is about far more than the “stumbling block” issue. Both the weak and the strong are instructed to be tolerant of each other.

*…and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them.
*

I think far too many Christians use their own personal perceptions of what is or isn’t sin to judge other Christians. You see it all the time on questions like whether tattoos are OK, or whether women should wear pants. Plenty of Christians would condemn anyone who would answer ‘yes’ to either of those questions, then quote Deuteronomy or Leviticus to justify their opinion. I’ve seen it right here on CAF lots of times.

 

[po18guy]

Agreed. But, I think it’s also important to recognize that Romans 14 is a two way street. The chapter is about far more than the “stumbling block” issue. Both the weak and the strong are instructed to be tolerant of each other.

*…and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them.
*

I think far too many Christians use their own personal perceptions of what is or isn’t sin to judge other Christians. You see it all the time on questions like whether tattoos are OK, or whether women should wear pants. Plenty of Christians would condemn anyone who would answer ‘yes’ to either of those questions, then quote Deuteronomy or Leviticus to justify their opinion. I’ve seen it right here on CAF lots of times.

With 1.2 billion members, you are going to receive plenty of different answers from Catholics. We are all on a journey, which is life-long, toward our God. We are all in differing stages and at different points along that path. You will not see absolute unity in belief - although this is the ideal. Conversely, absolute unity within religion can be a danger sign, the mark of a cult in which programming has occurred. We are not cookie cutter souls - each being different, as Paul points out. He was fighting the factionalism that appeared rampant in the early Church - but which, in fact, is much worse today.

What we should focus on is that which the Church teaches as a universal standard. For Catholics, that is the Catechism - yet, there are many ways in which catechetical standards can be met by the individual. Then, we are called to struggle toward that standard, realizing that we will fail, while seeking to be reconciled with God when we do fall. However, all criticism is not judging, but needs to be put forth as brotherly correction. But, correction must come from a divinely revealed standard. Paul taught that the standard is love. But, read also his other letters (e.g Galatians), as he was very strong in condemning certain beliefs and actions of other Christians. All must be read and accepted in context.

 

[ryanoneil]

But my question is in regards to what he meant when he described causing your brother to sin because of what you eat. I suppose he is trying to make an example based on something they all understood about their customs, but I really don’t understand how I could make someone else sin because of what I chose to eat. Any help with deciphering this would be great since I really love this passage and would like to penetrate it more.

The RSV I’m reading says “Do not let what you eat cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died.” (Rom 14:15) In this sense, it would be as case where the weak person is scandalized and comes to despise the entire gospel. So I think the “sin” in question is really that the stumbling block (Rom 14:13) causes them to stumble right out of the faith. The sin of leaving the faith is alot more significant than someone who just goes against their coscience and eats something. Maybe I’m wrong.