romans 14 the day, the herbs, the unclean

8/14/2019 Romans 14 the Day, The Herbs, The Unclean

1/4

Romans 14The Day, The Herbs, The Unclean

The themes of Romans 14 are respect and conscientiousness.

In regard to respect, we ought to give those we differ from us the benefit of thedoubt in regard to their spirituality. We are not their judges. And the one that istheir Judge also desires to justify them.

In regard to conscientiousness, each man will be judged based on what he knows tobe true. A man may sin against the Lord by doing something that he doubts to beallowable even if that activity would otherwise be innocent.

These moral lessons and timeless principles have the utmost value and are useful inany congregation today.

But some confusion exists regarding the examples that Paul uses to flesh out his

teachings on respect and conscientiousness.

In short, the scenario that illustrates the principles involves two classes ofChristians. One class that is weaker in the faith also tends to dispute on doubtfulquestions. They make a case for eating herbs while the other class believes it ispermissible to eat all things.

The herb eaters also esteems one day above another.

Generic or Specific?Some understand the example scenario as being highly generic. Any one who eatsherbs as a religious conviction, anyone who honors one day (as Sabbath) above

others, would in this view be viewed as those weaker Christians that ought to berespected.

Others understand the example scenario as being specific in nature. A real andidentifiable class of Christians were advocating a doubtful and identifiable positionand causing arguments. In this view the chapter takes an important stand on thespecific topic of the keep-the-law-of-Moses error.

A little Bible information that was known to all in Pauls day and known to few in ourown could settle the question of whether the chapter should be understood asgeneric or as specific.

The New Testament IssueChristians from Jerusalem differed from Paul on the question of the Law of Moses.This is the reality that forms the background for much of the New Testament. Thisargument was eventually settled by the counsel in Acts 15. Paul had been right.

What was the position of his opposers?

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying,That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the


2/4

law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider ofthis matter. And when there had been much disputing . . . Ac 15:5-7

From this passage it is apparent that there was enough confusion to cause a lot ofarguing.

Galatia, Colossi, Ephesus, RomeThe confused ones had at one time included the apostles. In Galatians 2 the apostlePeter had been influenced by such persons from Jerusalem to feign a fear ofbecoming unclean by eating with Gentiles. Gal. 2:12.

And, in fact, the entire church of Galatia had been confused by this same class.They had accepted another gospel that relied on a covenant of works and wasrepresented by Jerusalem which now is. Galatians 3:1-3; 4:25.

The men of the Colossian church had similar trouble. The law of Moses includedvarious washings and ceremonies of respect for holy days. Men were judging non-conformists. Col. 2:14-16.

The Ephesian church had similar trouble. Paul reminded them that the gospel hadbroken down the middle wall between them, as Gentiles, and the Jews of Jerusalem.And how did it break down the wall? By taking away the law of commandmentscontained in ordinances. Eph 2:15.

What do we know about these troublers of the churches? For one thing, they arguedwith Paul and Barnabas. For another, they traveled from the heart of Israel to reachthe areas with gentile churches.

And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, andsaid, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be

saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension anddisputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certainother of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders aboutthis question. Ac 15:1-2.

The audience of Romans included them that know the law (Ro 7:1). When we findthat immediately after the introduction Paul addresses the religious sin problems ofthose who claim to be circumcised Jews and who boast in the law (2:12-3:4), weunderstand that the plague doctrine mentioned in almost all of Pauls epistles hadmade it to Rome also.

The Confusing PartThe Christians who advocated keeping the Mosaic law had one confusing fact attheir disposal. It seemed that Jesus had authorized Christians to keep Passover.When Jesus last kept it he had bidden his disciples to commemorate the event.

But how would a Christian keep Passover? The original directions involved theeating of bitter herbs and a sacrificed lamb and unleavened bread. Exodus 12:8.And if a man was not clean he could not partake until a later date when he wouldbe clean. Numbers 9:7-11. It was a highly esteemed day by keepers of the feast.


3/4

And it was not at all esteemed by those who understood Pauls message that therites and rituals under Moses had been replaced by a different class of rituals(baptism and the Lords Supper) under the gospel.

This issue was big in Rome. It was the date of Passover, in fact, that divided the

church in Rome from that in Constantinople hundreds of years later.

Romans 14So when persons who understand this Bible history and background come toRomans 14 the chapter does not seem so difficult to understand.

There is only one Bible topic that combines the elements of Romans 14.

1. A topic that was doubtful and a source of arguable in the churches likeRome

2. A topic that involved the question of eating herbs3. A topic that involved the honoring/not honoring of a certain day.

4. A topic that involved the esteeming of things/persons as clean/unclean.

And that topic is that of the keeping of Passover, and by extrapolation, keeping theother feasts.

In the early chapters the book of Romans clearly addressed the question of the 10Commandments and concluded that they are enforced by faith (Romans 3:31), thatcommandment keepers will be justified in the judgment (Rom 2:12-16), that we areobligated to keep the 10 Commandments (Romans 13) and that it is by knowing thisspiritual and holy law that we can know what sin is (Roman 7:7, 12, 14).

In short, Paul taught in Romans, as in Galatians and Colossians and Ephesians and

as the apostles did in Acts 15, that while we are to obey Gods commandments, weare no longer to follow the symbolic ceremonies. Understood this way, Romans fitsin with the rest of the New Testament.

What if someone were to urge this as a reason for being careless in diet andheedless of the Commandment that begins remember? They would be pitting Paulagainst himself. Even if that were inadvertent, it would be unfortunate. The blessingthat comes with obedience to Gods Law is countered by the warning that mensdoctrines, and praise from disobedient persons, can make worship vain.

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me withtheir lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me,teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Matthew 15:8-9.

Conclusion:

Some men were esteeming Passover and the week-long feast of unleavened bread.Others felt that there was nothing special or holy about these days. The formerclass celebrated by avoiding defilement so they could be ceremonially clean. And


4/4

they ate the bitter herbs that went with the rituals (and not the lamb becausesacrifices ended at the cross).

Paul urged patience with these conscientious persons, but did not encourageanyone to allow them to start arguments that might promote their mistaken views.And never did Paul expect that anyone would think that he was speaking about

Sabbath or healthy living. Everyone knew what the issues were. And to them,Romans 14 was tactful, yet easy to understand.

Why does it confuse us? We know more about human teachings than aboutscripture facts.

----

Additional Facts

If there was a point of jealous regard for law among the Jews, it was the Sabbath.Jesus was routinely accused of breaking the Sabbath. (And he responded to those

charges by teaching that it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath. See Matthew 12:1-12.) And Jesus defended his relation to the wall by saying think not that I am cometo destroy the law, but to keep it. For truly I say to you that till heaven and earthpass away not one particle of the law would pass away. Matthew 5:17-18.

But the Jews that opposed the Christians and Paul though-out the book of Acts,though they repeatedly brought up the question of circumcision, never did thereaddress the issue of Sabbath. This is significant evidence of a secondary type thatSabbath was kept by the Gentile believers.

And when Gentiles read the gospel of John they encountered Sabbath with noword of explanation. (John 5:9, 10, 16, 18; 7:22-23; 9:14, 16; 19:31). But the feasts

and festivals were introduced as being particularly Jewish. (See John 7:2). ThePassover itself was introduced this way three times before it was included as afamiliar part of the narrative. The latter of these three also alludes to thepurification rituals connected with Passover.

Joh 2:13 And the Jews passover was at hand, and Jesus went up toJerusalem,Joh 6:4 And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.Joh 11:55 And the Jews passover was nigh at hand: and many went out ofthe country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves.

romans 14 the day, the herbs, the unclean

Documents