Romans 14:13–23 (ESV)✞: Do Not Cause Another to Stumble
In the last passage Paul talked about the fact that there are facets of Christianity that aren’t cut and dried—e.g., should a Jewish Christian follow the dietary laws, or the special Jewish days, or not?—and that we shouldn’t judge one another based on differences of opinion on these matters. One of the points I pulled out from that passage is that it’s more important to get along than it is to agree with one another (let alone convince others that we’re “right” on a particular matter), but in this passage Paul goes even further: we aren’t just to get along with one another, but always do what’s best for the other person – even if it means giving up our own “rights.”
Or, as he states it here:
Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.
Paul starts with an example he touched on in the previous passage: what Christians are “allowed” to eat. For Paul, that question, in and of itself, is answered:
4 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself…
As far as Paul is concerned, and according to the teaching of Jesus Himself (e.g., Mark 7:14–23✞), there actually is an answer to this: all foods are “acceptable” for a Christian to eat. So… end of story, right? Not so fast:
… but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.
We knew Paul wouldn’t be offering simple answers, right?
If you want to know whether Christians are allowed to eat certain foods, you can go to the Gospels and here in Romans and maybe other places and see that there aren’t any restrictions. It’s not sinful to eat anything, in and of itself. However, if you, for whatever reason, are not comfortable with that answer—or, more specifically, if you’re not comfortable eating certain foods—and you decide to eat them anyway even though you’re not comfortable with it, then that is sinful. Maybe you haven’t read those passages; maybe you have, but are sure you must be missing something because that doesn’t sound right to you. Whatever the reason, if you think it’s sinful but do it anyway you’re sinning.
In Paul’s day he was mainly thinking of Jewish Christians, who, in most cases, would have spent their entire lives being forbidden to eat certain foods; in today’s world, in addition to Jewish Christians we might also think of Muslim or Hindu Christians, who would have grown up with similar dietary restrictions, and I’m sure there are others as well. If such a person reads the Bible, sees that foods are no longer restricted for the Christian, feels comfortable with it, and starts eating those foods, that person is not displeasing God. If the same person comes to the same conclusion, believes fully in their heart that all foods are now clean, and still decides not to eat the foods that used to be restricted that’s ok too – the Bible isn’t forcing us to eat certain foods!
But if that person just can’t get over their discomfort with eating certain foods then they should continue to avoid them. This isn’t just about food and drink, if there’s anything you think is a sin and you go ahead and do it anyway, then you’ve made a choice to disobey what you think God’s will is. Even if it would turn out, in retrospect, that that thing wasn’t sinful—or, in this case, if it turned out that eating certain foods is no longer forbidden—you still made a choice that you thought was going against God’s will. Regardless of your actions, there was sin in your heart.
The focus of this passage, however, isn’t about the person who’s uncomfortable with certain foods; it’s about the person who has no problem eating anything:
15 For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love.
Regardless of what is or isn’t allowed—and regardless of what one believes is allowed or disallowed—there are times when a Christian should abstain from certain things for the sake of other Christians with “weaker” faith. (He used this word in the last passage, for this exact situation.) Paul is using the example of food here but it’s a larger point; another common example we could think of is that of alcohol, which isn’t forbidden by the Bible, but even if you’re convinced of that fact there will be times when you should refrain from drinking for the sake of other Christians.
Given the fact that I live in North America, which is highly individualistic, I’m sure there are people who would chafe at this admonition from Paul. “Wait,” they’re thinking, “you’re saying I’m not allowed to do something just because someone else’s faith is weak? Why should I have to suffer for their weakness?” And I believe Paul’s answer—it’s definitely my answer—would be yes, we are saying you aren’t “allowed” to do certain things under certain circumstances, and the reason you’re to abstain is out of love for that person.
By no means is Paul saying you can never eat or drink or do whatever the thing in question is; he’s talking about cases “if your [fellow Christian] is grieved by what you eat.” If you’re inviting someone over for dinner and you know she’s a former Hindu then maybe don’t serve beef, just in case she’s not going to be comfortable with it. Maybe she’ll be totally fine with it and beef would have been ok with her; maybe she’d be scandalised and you’d be hurting her faith; maybe she’s right in the middle on this issue, struggling to figure it out, and you’re just adding to her confusion.
Is it ok to ask her ahead of time, and have that conversation? Sure! My point—and I’m pretty sure Paul’s too—is not to set out a series of rules to follow, it’s to set out a general principle: do whatever you’re doing out of love for the other person.
This is why you seldom see alcohol at church events in North America: you just never know who’s going to have a problem with it. In theory there would be nothing wrong with serving alcohol at the church’s Christmas party, but there’s a high enough likelihood that people would have an issue with it that it’s better to refrain from it than to potentially harm some of the members of the congregation.
Or, as Paul states it more strongly:
By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died.
“Destroy” is a harsh word – but Paul is a smart enough man that we can assume he chooses his words with care, so “destroy” is exactly what he meant!
We don’t know what the effects are going to be when we are more worried about our own “rights” than we are about loving others. If I go out to dinner with other Christians and I have a couple of drinks when some of them have an issue with alcohol—whether I know it or not—that could lead them to thinking through this issue once more, and deciding that, yes, God is ok with alcohol, so they don’t need to worry about it. Or it could lead them to having a drink themselves, to fit in, thinking that what they’re doing is sinful – and therefore making it sinful. Or they could secretly think that I’ve just committed a sin, while they’ve kept themselves “pure,” and therefore why should they listen to anything I say, since I, a sinner, have no moral authority?
Or they could get really messed up. The worst scenario I can think of is another Christian seeing me drinking, and thinking, “well, if he’s drinking, maybe I have this whole ‘sin’ thing wrong! Maybe we have more freedom than I thought! So… I can drink, and I can have sex outside of marriage, and I can …”
It’s totally good and right to have conversations with fellow Christians on these issues—a point I’ll come back to in a second—but in the meantime I should focus less on what I’m “allowed” to do and focus more on what would be the most loving way to act toward others, which, in some circumstances, will mean abstaining from things that otherwise would have been fine for me to do.
Paul’s next point is somewhat aligned with the scenarios I outlined above:
16 So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil.
He doesn’t mean that we’re supposed to argue with other Christians who “wrongly” call our actions evil, he means we’re not to do those things in the first place (in certain circumstances), to prevent those ideas before they start.
If I believe it’s ok to eat pork, and a fellow Christian who comes from a Muslim background is uncomfortable with pork, then, as outlined above, I don’t invite him to dinner and serve pork and then spend the rest of the night arguing that he’s wrong to be uncomfortable with it and telling him he has weak faith. (Incidentally, many of these issues are as much cultural as they are spiritual, so he might not even have weak faith – he might be completely convinced that it’s not sinful to eat pork but still be uncomfortable with it, which, as outlined in the previous passage, is between him and God, not me.)
This is as good a time as any to say that it is ok to have these conversations with our fellow Christians. It’s not Paul’s point here, but it’s a logical place to mention it. If we have a brother or sister who’s uncomfortable with certain foods or alcohol or whatever, we can talk to them about the freedom we have in Christ. But—and this is important—we don’t have to, either! As mentioned, if that person is uncomfortable with certain freedoms, and doesn’t exercise them, that’s between them and God, and the previous passage indicated that God is going to “uphold” them (regardless of what I think).
So, again, I have to ask myself: what would the most loving action be in this circumstance? Is this person open to this conversation? Then we can have it, and have it respectfully and lovingly, and if I don’t convince them that’s fine. If I think that person isn’t ready for the conversation then it would be more loving to set it aside and leave that person be. If it means I have to give up something, when I’m with them, then so be it!
Importantly—and I’m really straying from the point at hand, but it follows the previous thought—Paul calls some Christians “weak” for not being comfortable with some things, but I don’t recall a single admonition from him to “strong” Christians that it’s our job to convince them! Paul never says, “Ok, you ‘strong’ Christians, go talk some sense into the ‘weak’ ones!” Paul himself calls them weak, so they’ll read that in the Scriptures, and, again, I don’t see a problem with having those conversations (given the right circumstances and with a focus on love instead of “being right”), but neither am I commanded to do so.
What I can say, however, from this passage, is that the way to start those conversations (if at all) is never by forcing someone to do something they’re not comfortable with doing and then having the conversation, or saying, “you’re wrong about this whole alcohol thing so I’m going to drink a beer while I tell you so.”
And, in fact, “strong” Christians don’t need to educate “weak” Christians in order for us to be a strong Church:
17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.
More so in the previous passage than in this one Paul made the case that there are issues in the Church that are not cut and dried. His focus in this passage is to get us to see that it’s more important to love one another and pursue peace—even if it means there are times when I give up my own “rights” to do so—than it is to make someone understand something I think they’ve got wrong. If a brother is uncomfortable with alcohol then I’ll let him abstain from alcohol – and abstain myself when I’m around him, or in other circumstances where it might be problematic for him.
The last few verses serve as a summary for the whole passage:
20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.
For the most part it’s just a recap of what he’s already said, but verse 21 jumps out at me: “It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.” In the previous verse Paul states it the way we’d normally think of it: it’s wrong to make another stumble by what we eat. But he goes even further in verse 21: it’s not just wrong to do it, it’s right for us not to do it!
So, with that in mind, let’s do good – let’s love our brothers and sisters by always trying to do what’s right for them, valuing their own needs above our own.
No comments:
Post a Comment