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.
- 2132 views
Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
A thorough treatment of that text is vitally important.
If you want to talk about Romans 14:14, I'll mention something that pops to my mind. The word "unclean" brings the idea of prohibitions to my mind. Certain foods were proclaimed by God to be unclean in the OT and those foods were prohibited. Touching a dead body was prohibited and doing so made a person unclean. Unclean people were prohibited from participating in temple rituals and from engaging in certain aspects of every day life.
We see from the disagreements regarding foodstuffs, that some people were prohibiting foodstuffs and others were eating the things that the first group prohibited. Perhaps we should look at the "days" conflict with an eye toward prohibitions. Perhaps the people who considered all days alike were saying that no Old Testament prohibitions applied to a person's activities during any day, while the ones who considered one day above another were claiming that certain prohibitions were still in effect. In this case, we don't even have to deal with commands to worship on a certain day, since there were no prohibitions against worshipping on any day.
No, Romans 14 is not about such things. Such discussions are very popular and have been engaged in ad nauseam.
Dr. Minnick thought it included such things. And so does just about everyone I know. If you regard a day differently, what does that prevent you from doing? You have to say what “regard above” actually requires. You can’t just punt.
If you want to “combat the misuse of Romans 14 as supposed support for views about worship music that Romans 14 (or any other part of Scripture) in actuality does not support at all,” why not address it? Why not stop distracting and avoiding?
Paul commanded the churches of Galatia (1 Cor. 16:1-2) and the church of Corinth to do the same thing on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1-2). Those commands considered along with who Paul was and the apostolic authority that he had to command people to do what he did provide more than enough apostolic basis for us to know that we are commanded to worship God corporately on the first day of the week.
“The same thing” they were to do was to put aside an offering for the saints on teh first day of the week. There is nothing of a gathering in that text. And I asked you a bunch of questions about it earlier and you haven’t answered them. Why not?
If this text is authoritative, then we need to answer some questions about it.
I suppose the really bold question for you Rajesh, is this: Does the text and what it says actually matter to you?
It doesn’t seem like it at times. You won’t address what the text actually says and doesn’t say. That seems odd to me.
Paul's example is applicable to all believers at all times? This is why I asked you about Paul preaching until midnight. You told me "His example did show to them that it was acceptable to do so sometimes." So what is your biblical basis for holding that one example is for all believers to do at all times and a another example is acceptable to do sometimes? After all, those two examples from Paul, meeting on the first day and preaching until midnight, are both in the very same verse.
I already explained this point by saying:
Unless you have biblical basis to hold that something about Paul's example is not applicable to all believers at all times in corporate worship, you must follow his example concerning corporate worship.
Again, comparing Scripture with Scripture is vital. The NT does not just have Paul's example about preaching; it also has commands about preaching that do not specify that every preacher must preach until midnight every time he preaches.
If you regard a day differently, what does that prevent you from doing? You have to say what “regard above” actually requires. You can’t just punt.
No, I do not. The Holy Spirit did not do so in Romans 14.
Those who want to discuss such things are free to do so. There is no NT command that anyone who discusses Romans 14 must do so. According to your approach to the Christian life, anything that is not directly and explicitly commanded in Scripture is not required. Yet you comment in this thread as if there were a direct and explicit divine command in Scripture about how Romans 14 must be discussed.
If you want to “combat the misuse of Romans 14 as supposed support for views about worship music that Romans 14 (or any other part of Scripture) in actuality does not support at all,” why not address it? Why not stop distracting and avoiding?
I am progressively treating the parts of the passage that have been misused to that end. When I have presented all that I believe needs to be presented, I will address in detail the misuse of Romans 14 to support certain music positions that are not supported by Scripture.
Again, comparing Scripture with Scripture is vital. The NT does not just have Paul's example about preaching; it also has commands about preaching that do not specify that every preacher must preach until midnight every time he preaches.
So now you're saying that we don't have to look at Paul's example but we have to look for specific commands to see if a particular activity has to be done.
Why don't you use this principle for worship on the first day of the week? Where are the commands to hold services on the first day of the week? You've been assuming that a command to gather an offering on the first day of the week is a command to assemble together on the first day, but the command to gather the offering does not actually specify that meeting together has to take place every first day. We have examples of the church meeting multiple days of the week, but the command to assemble together does not specify a time frame any more than the command to preach specifies a time frame.
If you regard a day differently, what does that prevent you from doing?
I'll present a possibility, Larry. Exodus 35:2 says, Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.
The next verse says they couldn't even light a fire on the holy day. These Sabbath restrictions were ingrained into the society of the Israelites. It wouldn't surprise me at all if many Israelite Christians would have their conscience bothered if they were attending church with people who worked or lit fires on the Sabbath.
According to your approach to the Christian life, anything that is not directly and explicitly commanded in Scripture is not required.
No.
Yet you comment in this thread as if there were a direct and explicit divine command in Scripture about how Romans 14 must be discussed.
No. I am saying that if you want to convince people of your position, you need to actually discuss the passage and its implications.
I am progressively treating the parts of the passage that have been misused to that end.
There doesn’t seem to be any progress at all here. You haven’t moved past your original post much in spite of many and repeated requests to do so.
So now you're saying that we don't have to look at Paul's example but we have to look for specific commands to see if a particular activity has to be done.
No, I am not saying that. We have to look at all the applicable content throughout the Bible. When we have both Pauline example and Pauline (or other apostolic) command, we have to base what we believe and practice on both his example and his (or other apostolic) command.
Discussion