Friday DIVE – July 4, 2025 – Romans 14

The Weak and the Strong

¹ Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things.  

• Rom.14:1 (NLT)  … ¹ Accept other believers who are weak in faith, and don’t argue with them about what they think is right or wrong.  
• How do you understand the word  receive?
  • Note other words used in other translations
• Whom do you think were the weak in the church?
  • spiritually immature … strict … legalistic
  • What are some things that would cause Christians to be “weak” in the faith?
    • They may be a babes in Christ (babies are weak).
    • They may be sick or diseased (by legalism).
    • They may be malnourished (by lack of good teaching).
    • They may lack exercise (needing exhortation).
• What does doubtful things refer to?
  • debatable issues … non-essential beliefs
  • What are some examples of “doubtful things” when it comes to matters of faith?
    • the day of the week that Christ died
    • the day of the week He rose
    • the scope of the Atonement
    • what was accomplished by the Atonement
    • the return of Christ … pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, pre-millennium, post-millenium
    • which day is the christian sabbath

According to William Barclay …

Romans 14:1 …   RESPECT FOR SCRUPLES   

Welcome the man who is weak in the faith, but not with a view to passing judgmenton his scruples.

In this chapter, Paul is dealing with what may have been a temporary and local problem in the Roman Church, but is also one continually confronting the Church and always demanding solution. In the Church at Rome there were apparently two lines of thought. There were some who believed that in Christian liberty the old tabus were gone; they believed that the old food laws were now irrelevant; they believed that Christianity did not consist in the special observance of any one day or days. Paul makes it clear that this in fact is the standpoint of real Christian faith. On the other hand, there were those who were full of scruples; they believed that it was wrong to eat meat; they believed in the rigid observance of the Sabbath tyranny. Paul calls the ultra-scrupulous man the man who is weak in the faith. What does he mean by that?

Such a man is weak in the faith for two reasons.

(i) He has not yet discovered the meaning of Christian freedom; he is at heart still a legalist and sees Christianity as a thing of rules and regulations.

(ii) He has not yet liberated himself from a belief in the efficacy of works.  In his heart he believes that he can gain God’s favour by doing certain things and abstaining from others. Basically he is still trying to earn a right relationship with God, and has not yet accepted the way of grace, still thinking more of what he can do for God than of what God has done for him.

Paul bids the stronger brethren to welcome such a person and not to besiege him with continual criticisms.

This problem is not confined to the days of Paul. To this day in the Church there are two points of view. There is the more liberal which sees no harm in many things and is well content that many an innocent pleasure should go on within the Church. And there is the narrower point of view, which is offended at many things in which the liberal person sees no harm.

Paul’s sympathies are all with the broader point of view; but, at the same time, he says that when one of these weaker brethren comes into the Church he must be received with brotherly sympathy. When we are confronted with someone who holds the narrower view there are three attitudes we must avoid.

(i) We must avoid irritation. An impatient annoyance with such a person gets us nowhere. However much we may disagree, we must try to see the other person’s point of view and to understand it.

(ii) We must avoid ridicule. No man remains unwounded when that which he thinks precious is laughed at. It is no small sin to laugh at another man’s beliefs. They may seem prejudices rather than beliefs; but no man has a right to laugh at what some other holds sacred. In any event, laughter will never woo the other man to a wider view; it will only make him withdraw still more determinedly into his rigidity.

(iii) We must avoid contempt.  It is very wrong to regard the narrower person as an old-fashioned fool whose views may be treated with contempt. A man’s views are his own and must be treated with respect. It is not even possible to win a man over to our position unless we have a genuine respect for his. Of all attitudes towards our fellow man the most unchristian is contempt.

Before we leave this verse, it should be noted that there is another perfectly possible translation. “Welcome the man who is weak in the faith, but do not introduce him straight away to the discussion of questions which can only raise doubts.”  There are some people whose faith is so strong that no amount of debate and questioning will really shake it. But there are others who have a simple faith which is only needlessly disturbed by clever discussion.

It may well be that our own age is overfond of discussion for discussion’s sake. It is fatal to give the impression that Christianity consists of nothing but a series of questions under debate. “We have found,” said G. K. Chesterton, “all the questions that can be found. It is time we stopped looking for questions and started looking for answers.” “Tell me of your certainties,” said Goethe, “I have doubts enough of my own.” There is one good rule which should guide the progress of any discussion, even if it has been a bewildered discussion, and even if it has been discussing questions to which there is no real answer, it should always finish with an affirmation. There may be many questions left unanswered, but there must be some certainty left unshaken.

Romans 14:2-4  NKJV

² For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats  only  vegetables.  ³ Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for  God has received him. 

⁴ Who are you to judge another’s servant?  To his own master he stands or falls.  Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand.  

• Rom.14:2-4 (NLT) … ² For instance, one person believes it’s all right to eat anything.  But another believer with a sensitive conscience will eat only vegetables.  ³ Those who feel free to eat anything must not look down on those who don’t.  And those who don’t eat certain foods must not condemn those who do, for God has accepted them.  
• ⁴ Who are you to condemn someone else’s servants?  Their own master will judge whether they stand or fall.  And with the Lord’s help, they will stand and receive his approval.  

• What’s included in all things?  Is anything excluded?
  • Everything.  No.
• Whom do you think were the ones eating all things?  Why do you think they would?
  • The spiritually mature … and most of the Gentiles
• Whom do you think were eating only vegetables?  Why do you think they would?
  • The Jews, mostly  … because of baggage from having kept the Law of Moses
  • Some spiritually immature Gentiles … because of doubts about eating meat offered to idols.  (1 Corinthians 8)
• In verse 3 (Rom.14:3), who is the one doing the despising … and who is the one doing the judging?
  • The more mature …
• What does God has received him mean to you?
  • God has accepted him … given that he has been justified
• What does the phrase “to his own master he stands or falls” mean to you? 
  • See NLT rendition of verse 14b
• In verse 4 (Rom.14:4), what does the phrase “he will be  made  to stand” mean to you?
  • He will be victorious in the end.
• What will make him stand?
  • It’s NOT what, but who … Romans 14:4c … God is able to make him stand …
  • God will enable him …
  • Jude 1:24  …  Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy …. 

According to William Barclay …

Rom. 14:2-4 …  TOLERANCE FOR ANOTHER’S POINT OF VIEW   

One man has enough faith to believe that he can eat anything; but he who is weak in the faith eats vegetables. Let not him who eats contemptuously despise him who does not eat; and let not him who does not eat pass censorious judgment on him who does eat, for God has received him. Who are you to judge another man’s servant? It is in his own master’s judgment that he stands or falls–and he will stand, for the Master is able to make him stand.

Here emerges one of the definite points of debate in the Roman Church. There were those who observed no special food laws and tabus at all, and who ate anything; and there were those who conscientiously abstained from meat, and ate only vegetables.  There were many sects and religions in the ancient world which observed the strictest food laws. The Jews themselves did. Lev.11 gives its lists of the creatures which may and which may not be eaten. One of the strictest sects of the Jews was the Essenes. They had communal meals for which they bathed and wore special clothes. The meals had to be specially prepared by priests or they would not eat them. The Pythagoreans had their distinctive food laws. Pythagoras taught that the soul of man was a fallen deity confined to the body as to a tomb. He believed in reincarnation through which the soul might dwell in a man, an animal, or a plant in an endless chain of being. Release from this chain of being was found through absolute purity and discipline; and this discipline included silence, study, self-examination and abstention from all flesh. In almost any Christian congregation there would be those who observed special food laws and tabus.

It is the same problem. Within the Church there was a narrower party and there was a more liberal party.  Paul unerringly pinpoints the danger that was likely to arise.  Almost certainly the more liberal party would despise the scruples of the narrower party; and, still more certainly, the narrower party would pass censorious judgment on what they believed to be the laxity of the more liberal party. That situation is just as real and perilous in the Church today as it was in the time of Paul.

To meet it Paul lays down a great principle. No man has any right to criticize another man’s servant. The servant is answerable to his master alone. Now all men are the servants of God. It is not open to us to criticize them, still less to condemn them. That right belongs to God alone. It is not in our judgment that a man stands or falls but in his. And, Paul goes on, if a man is honestly living out his principles as he sees them, God can make him able to stand.

Many a congregation of the Church is torn in two because those who hold broader views are angrily contemptuous of those whom they regard as die-hard conservatives; and because those who are stricter in their outlook are censorious of those who wish the right to do things which they think are wrong. It is not open to us to condemn each other. “I beseech you by the bowels of Christ,” said Cromwell to the rigid Scots of his day, “think it possible that you may be mistaken.” We must banish both censoriousness and contempt from the fellowship of the Church. We must leave the judgment of others to God, and seek only to sympathize and to understand.