Rom 14:1-3 ESV (1) As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. (2) One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. (3) Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. (4) Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
Paul here speaks of the one weak in faith. The question that comes to my mind immediately is faith in what or who? I would say that this one would be weak in faith toward the theological idea of Jesus (hereafter Y'shua) as Messiah or King for everyone who believes.
If Y'shua is the King and he is letting you into the Kingdom what is the Kingdom? The Kingdom is the spiritual and eventually the physical Kingdom of Israel. Elsewhere Paul says as much that the Gentiles are being grafted into the olive branch and are to be received as Israelites with equal standing in the Kingdom with Jews who also have genuine faith.
Paul says elsewhere in his writings that just as Abraham gained entry into the proto or first covenant by faith so do all those who are true descendants of Abraham gain their entry. Paul says it is not by proselyte conversion and circumcision (a rabbinic ruling but not explicitly delineated in the Law or Torah) or by merely being born a Jew. While the Jews by ethnicity were chosen by G-D to keep and transfer HIS message and text, their acceptance by G-D is only by Faith in HIS Messiah.
Continuing then. Paul says to welcome this weak one and not so as to discuss opinions. Now, I'll get to the opinions issue momentarily. But first, the over-arching idea here is to welcome Jewish individuals into the believing fellowship meals and/or meetings who have not fully embraced the idea of salvation by faith in Messiah Y'shua. These are Jewish seekers to whom Paul says the reader should defer for Christ's (hereafter Messiah's) sake.
Paul says that quarreling should not be over opinions. But, most assuredly Paul is not saying that opinions are things which are clearly delineated in the Text of scripture. Opinions are the rabbinic rulings that have been derived from the Torah but are not explicitly given in the Torah.
For example, the Torah clearly indicates that should one touch something dead they would be made unclean. But the sages had derived that if even your shadow fell upon the grave of someone dead, you were considered to have been made unclean and unfit for temple worship.
Another example is that of Gentiles who were considered unclean because of their pagan practices in general. This meant that even meat which would have been considered kosher according to the strict statutes of the Torah, if handled by an idol-worshiping Gentile, would be considered unclean.
I believe that the weak in faith Jews were those that were not completely convinced of the gentiles being included in Israel by their faith in Messiah Y'shua alone. They were having a hard time accepting this change of what they had known as the only accepted way of entry into the people of G-D as derived by the sages - that of a proselyte service (otherwise called works of the Law). This was called salvation or entry by the works of the Torah.
I think this explains why Paul says that some are vegetarians. The argument isn't over whether the believers are to eat kosher or not - that was clearly delineated in Torah and not up for debate or opinion. Kosher does not equate to vegetarianism. The question is whether the observant Jewish person who is weak in his faith regarding Y'shua should be marginalized by the observant Jewish person who believes and fellowships with believing observant Gentiles.
Apparently the strong in faith Jews were judging the weak in faith Jews for not eating foods handled or served by observant believing Gentiles. And the weak in faith Jews were judging the strong in faith for eating.
Paul, in my opinion, is not trying to start a new religion free from the observance or submission to the Torah as it is written. But rather he is trying to reform the rabbinic rulings and derivations from the Text which would hinder fellowship and love and ultimately the Gospel of Y'shua the Messiah
He demonstrates this reformed thinking by the final statement in the above passage. He says that G-D is our ultimate Master and we are HIS servants. One servant doesn't determine another servant's standing based on opinions, but the Master determines his standing.
Rom 14:5-6 ESV (5) One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. (6) The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.
Next Paul launches into a discussion about days. Again, he can certainly not be discussing which day is the day of worship as clearly delineated in the Torah (Exodus 20:9-10). The reason he cannot be standing up for a Sunday versus Saturday argument is at least three-fold. First because Adonai explicitly says that his people should not listen to any prophet (truth teller) who does miracles but would lead them away from HIS commandments (Deut. 13:1-8).
Secondly, the debate about what day to worship was a much later phenomenon according to historians. Most historians believe, and the Apostolic Scriptures affirm, that the believers (Jewish and Gentile believers) were attending Synagogues in the first century. They say this because that was the only place where one could hear the Text being read (Acts15:21). There weren't copies readily available for anyone and everyone to read and use. It demonstrates the question: What wasn't around for 1st Century New Testament Church? Answer: Neither the New Testament nor the Church.
And third, the textual context is that of eating. After mentioning the issue of days, Paul continues with issues of eating. The question of whether to observe certain days is sandwiched between the issues of eating.
So, what is Paul speaking of with regard to these days? I believe that he is referring to a matter in the 1st century of fast days held by the more strict sects of Judaism. Depending on your sect of 1st century Judaism, you derived different days of the normal work week as set apart or holy for fasting (Mk. 2:18). This position also ties in nicely to the topic at hand for Paul - eating.
Paul is saying don't judge another's Kingdom status or "salvation" by opinions. Paul is not supporting Christian Relativism which says, "As long as you thank G-D for whatever you do, it doesn't matter if you obey his Torah or not" or some say "Our freedom in Christ is freedom from the Torah".
If anything we should realize from the testimony of the Torah that the freedom HaShem or G-D offers is freedom to obey HIS Word or Torah.
The picture of salvation for Israel from Egypt is instructive: 1) G-D delivers Israel (by HIS sovereign hand) out of their slavery to "the enemy" and 2) G-D draws HIS people to himself to give them HIS commands thereby making them HIS. He frees them to obey HIM (Romans 6:15-18).
What is sad to me, is that in the Christian mindset this passage is often used to say that those who seek to be obedient to G-D's Torah are the weak in their faith! While those the exercise their freedom in Christ realize that their deeds are inconsequential and therefore unnecessary. Never mind the call throughout the Apostolic Scriptures to live Godly (Matt.5). If you are striving to live Godly, some Christians theorize, you are somehow trying to earn your salvation.
The two things are separate by equal and one is the result of the other. No one is righteous. That is by his deeds without faith in the one who is to come. We are brought into the covenant of Abraham by our faith in the seed of Abraham. We are then sanctified as we obey the Text by faith and with the empowering of the Holy Spirit (Ruach HaKodesh).
Bless His Wonderful Name!
No comments:
Post a Comment