What Does Romans 14 Teach about Foods, Days, and Worship Music?
I have been studying Romans 14 a lot lately. In this thread, I am interested in intensively exegetical and theological discussion about what Romans 14 teaches about foods, days, and worship music.
Paul begins his teaching by saying the following:
Romans 14:1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. 2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
Paul speaks of some who believe that they may "eat all things," but others who are "weak in the faith" eat herbs. A sound handling of this teaching requires careful, thorough, biblical probing of this teaching.
When Paul says that some believe that they may eat all things, what is Paul actually teaching? To begin to answer this question properly, it is necessary to point out what Paul is not teaching.
When Paul says that some believe that may eat all things, he is not teaching that those who are not weak in the faith believe that they may eat all plant and animal substances whatever they may be, including even things that are known to be poisonous or otherwise unfit for human consumption as foods.
The teaching of Romans 14:1-2 does not show that Christians who do not eat plant and animal substances that are poisonous, etc. for human consumption are weak in the faith. Being strong "in the faith" does not entail that you believe that you may partake even of poisonous berries, mushrooms, etc.
- 179 views
The word asthenounta means "the one who is weak" or "the one who is unable."
Its antonym, dunatoi means "we who are strong" or "we who are able."
These are used in lots of ways because there are lots of inabilities.
Physical inability (John 11:3)
Financial inability (Acts 20:35)
Practical inability (Acts 4:16) The Rulers/Elders said, "καὶ οὐ δυνάμεθα ἀρνεῖσθαι" (literally, "and we are not strong to deny it").
Duty-guilt inability (Acts 4:20) Peter/John answer, "οὐ δυνάμεθα... μὴ λαλεῖν" (literally, "Not we are strong... not to speak."
Indeed, "Ability to drink poison" would be another possible way for astheneo or dunatos to be used. But I think we all agree that Romans 14 didn't teach inability or ability regarding toxic substances.
I think the inability of Romans 14 is very akin to the inability of Acts 4:20. They were unable to be silent because they would feel guilty if they didn't preach.
(Dan wrote)The word asthenounta means "the one who is weak" or "the one who is unable."
Its antonym, dunatoi means "we who are strong" or "we who are able."
I know I'm interacting with you one the other Romans 14 thread, but how does "inability" apply to eating only herbs and not meat? If we were talking only about physical attributes, then a lack of teeth would cause an inability to eat meat, but Romans 14:2 points out "belief" as the cause of one person being able to eat meat and the other person only eating herbs. So wouldn't the "inability" be due to one's theological belief? Wouldn't the rightness or wrongness of that theological belief be playing a role their inability to eat meat? It seems to me we come down to rightness and wrongness anyway even if we say the word means inability, since the inability would be due to a wrong belief.
When Paul says that some believe that may eat all things, he is not teaching that those who are not weak in the faith believe that they may eat all plant and animal substances whatever they may be, including even things that are known to be poisonous or otherwise unfit for human consumption as foods.
No, Paul doesn't say it Romans 14, but Mark does record Jesus saying it in Mark 16:17-18, And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”
So if we are going to discuss drinking poison as a possible Romans 14 activity, then we do have biblical support for an understanding that some people were able to drink poison without it harming them. That doesn't mean i would want to try it myself in our current time period, but there could have been people in Paul's time who truly believed they could eat ALL things, even poison.
The promise to survive snake bites relates to survive-ability.
but Romans 14:2 points out "belief" as the cause of one person being able to eat meat and the other person only eating herbs. So wouldn't the "inability" be due to one's theological belief? Wouldn't the rightness or wrongness of that theological belief be playing a role their inability to eat meat?
I definitely agree that “belief” is the cause of their inability.
Both R14 and 1Cor8-10 deal with inability to act without self-condemnation. In other words, conscience-inability. Or “his conscience is unable.” Those passages don’t discuss inability to eat and physically survive.
Both R14 and 1Cor8-10 deal with inability to act without self-condemnation. In other words, conscience-inability. Or “his conscience is unable.” Those passages don’t discuss inability to eat and physically survive.
So why would a weak person's conscience be unable to eat meat? Wouldn't it be because he thinks eating it is a sin when it's not? Therefore, wouldn't the weak person also be the person who is wrong?
So why would a weak person's conscience be unable to eat meat?
Before I answer, I'm wondering what Rajesh was hoping to do with this thread.
Dan Miller said:
Indeed, "Ability to drink poison" would be another possible way for astheneo or dunatos to be used. But I think we all agree that Romans 14 didn't teach inability or ability regarding toxic substances.
I think the inability of Romans 14 is very akin to the inability of Acts 4:20. They were unable to be silent because they would feel guilty if they didn't preach.
I am not sure that we really are in agreement. My point is that Romans 14 does not teach that for a believer to be strong he must believe that he may eat anything and everything that is of plant or animal origin regardless of any and all other considerations.
1. Believers who do not eat all berries whatsoever those berries may be--whether known or unknown--and wherever those berries may be found are not believers who are weak in the faith.
2. Believers who have gluten intolerances and therefore do not eat foods with gluten are not weak in the faith.
3. Believers who have peanut allergies such that eating anything that has even a small amount of peanut residue on it would lead to life-threatening consequences for them are not weak in the faith.
Do you agree that Romans 14 does not teach that such believers are weak in the faith?
Do you agree that Romans 14 does not teach that such believers are weak in the faith?
I understood this was the question. I agree--but since I have never encountered this before, I do want to be very careful.
Allergens.
My wife is allergic to peanuts. If she ate them and couldn't get medical care, she would die. So obviously she "can't eat peanuts." Paul's language for "can't" is weak. So Paul would say, "She is weak to eat peanuts," or, "She is not strong to eat peanuts."
BUT that is NOT the sort of inability Paul was talking about in R14 and 1Cor8-10. Those were about an inability arising out of a sense that to eat it would be to participate in idolatry.
The only way I would say my wife is R14-weak to eat peanuts is that for her to eat peanuts it would be basically to attempt suicide. And that is wrong. So, it's something that she morally can't do. My definition of weak is "unable to do some act without self-condemnation." I guess, in a sense, she "can't" attempt suicide without self-condemnation, but that would be an unusual use of the word.
Wow. I am sorry to learn of your wife's very serious problems with her allergy to peanuts.
I understood this was the question. I agree--but since I have never encountered this before, I do want to be very careful.
I commend you for wanting to be very careful. God wants us to be very careful about what we espouse and commend to others.
BUT that is NOT the sort of inability Paul was talking about in R14 and 1Cor8-10. Those were about an inability arising out of a sense that to eat it would be to participate in idolatry.
I am grateful that we concur about what Paul is not talking about in Romans 14, at least in the respect that we have talked about so far.
The view that Romans 14 is talking about meat offered to idols has never commended itself to me. Regardless, my focus is on probing what Romans 14:2 (as well as the rest of the passage) actually establishes and what it does not.
To further probe the teaching of Romans 14 concerning those who eat "all things" as being strong believers, examining what Scripture reveals about honey provides a biblical basis for establishing some relevant considerations.
A. Divinely provided use of honey as a foodstuff
Deut. 32:13 He made him ride on the high places of the earth, that he might eat the increase of the fields; and he made him to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock;
Ps. 81:16 He should have fed them also with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee.
B. Divinely approved use of honey as a foodstuff
Prov. 24:13 My son, eat thou honey, because it is good; and the honeycomb, which is sweet to thy taste:
Prov. 25:16 Hast thou found honey? eat so much as is sufficient for thee, lest thou be filled therewith, and vomit it.
Isa. 7:15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
C. Prohibited consumption of honey as a foodstuff
Jdg. 14:8 And after a time he returned to take her, and he turned aside to see the carcase of the lion: and, behold, there was a swarm of bees and honey in the carcase of the lion.
Jdg. 14:9 And he took thereof in his hands, and went on eating, and came to his father and mother, and he gave them, and they did eat: but he told not them that he had taken the honey out of the carcase of the lion.
D. Divine revelation warning against intemperate consumption of honey as a foodstuff
Prov. 25:16 Hast thou found honey? eat so much as is sufficient for thee, lest thou be filled therewith, and vomit it.
Prov. 25:27 It is not good to eat much honey: so for men to search their own glory is not glory.
E. Divinely prohibited use of honey in worship
Lev. 2:11 No meat offering, which ye shall bring unto the LORD, shall be made with leaven: for ye shall burn no leaven, nor any honey, in any offering of the LORD made by fire.
F. Sinful use of honey in idolatrous worship
Ezek. 16:19 My meat also which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou hast even set it before them for a sweet savour: and thus it was, saith the Lord GOD.
How do these biblical points about honey inform our understanding of what Romans 14 teaches about strong believers being the ones who eat "all things"?
Discussion