Romans 14:2

[john313]

Peace,
"For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables." - Romans 14:2

why does being a vegetarian make one weak of faith? especially since part of the nazarite oath to separate oneself to the Lord (numbers 6) is being a vegetarian.
it seems contradictory to me, but i may be misunderstanding it. thanks for the input.

 

[Bishka]

Peace,
"For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables." - Romans 14:2

why does being a vegetarian make one weak of faith? especially since part of the nazarite oath to separate oneself to the Lord (numbers 6) is being a vegetarian.
it seems contradictory to me, but i may be misunderstanding it. thanks for the input.

Interesting, I never came across that in the scriptures, I'll have to ask my husband (he's taking a New Testament class at school and his teacher was formerly a Jew, maybe he'll know something). I was a vegetarian once.

 

[Steve]

Peace,
"For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables." - Romans 14:2

why does being a vegetarian make one weak of faith? especially since part of the nazarite oath to separate oneself to the Lord (numbers 6) is being a vegetarian.
it seems contradictory to me, but i may be misunderstanding it. thanks for the input.

From my understanding it is talking about someone who still isnt sure if its ok to eat all meat. So their faith still isnt strong in this regard, its saying dont judge this person accept them as they are. People may get hung up on different formalitys etc but its not for us to judge them, this letter was written to Christians in Rome, those who had accepted the Atonement Christ made for them - God knows each persons heart and how they regard his Son and the sacrifice he made for them.

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. Romans 14:1-4
​

 

[James the Persian]

From my understanding it is talking about someone who still isnt sure if its ok to eat all meat. So their faith still isnt strong in this regard, its saying dont judge this person accept them as they are. People may get hung up on different formalitys etc but its not for us to judge them, this letter was written to Christians in Rome, those who had accepted the Atonement Christ made for them - God knows each persons heart and how they regard his Son and the sacrifice he made for them.

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. Romans 14:1-4


​

Good post. I think that you are absolutely right. There's actually an old Church canon, not really applied nowadays, that would have the effect of banning being a vegetarian. This is because refusing to eat certain foods, except as part of a religious fast is tantamount to doubting that all food is clean for a Christian. Of course, as we have a large number of fast days, I spend much of the year as a tea-total vegan, but when I'm not fasting all foods are certainly open to me.

James

 

[spacemonkey]

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. Romans 14:1-4

To me, the refrences to diet are a metaphor whose message is that that we should not look down upon nor condemn someone elses practices just because they are not the same as yours.

 

[phatcatholic]

a few catholic commentaries will help here:

Navarre Commentary:

• 1-3. In the Roman Church there were some Christians who were influenced by Judaism to abstain from te types of food forbidden by the Old Law. Others, however, who were "strong" in the faith, knew that Christ had freed them from Mosaic observances such as avoidance of certain kinds of food, and from keeping to the Jewish calendar--sabbaths, full moons and other festivals. This second group were confirmed in their practice by the decrees of the Council of Jerusalem (cf. Acts 15:28-29). They regarded the others, who were fewer in number, as "weak" because they were tied down by the Mosaic precepts: they fasted on certain days, abstained from meat, did not drink wine, etc. (cf. Col 2:16, 20-22).
  
  In themselves there was nothing wrong with those practices; for example, Eusebius the historian (Ecclesiastical History, 23, 5) tells us that James the Less, the bishop of Jerusalem, himself abstained from wine, spirits and meat , as a personal mortification (cf. also the rules for Nazirites: Lk 1:15). However, the "weak" were scandalized by the freedom of spirit of the others, and regarded them as sinners. And the "strong", for their part, looked down on the "weak" and did not mind causing them scandal. Both sets of Christians were sinning against charity. St Paul addresses them both ina fatherly way, exhorting the weak not to falsely judge the strong, and appealing to the strong not to despise the weak. In theory, the strong had right on their side, but in practic the main thing was not to give scandal (cf. v. 21 and 1 Cor 8:7-13).

Ignatius Study Bible:

• 14:1--15:13 Paul's final instructions are directed oward two groups in the Roman Church, called the weak (14:1) and the strong (15:1). The weak are mainly Jewish Christians; the strong are mainly Gentile Christians. Apparently the strong have a condescending attitude toward the weak that needs correcting.
  
  14:1 weak in faith: A Jewish Christian minority who maintain a distinctive vegetarian diet (14:2), observe the liturgical feast days of Israel (14:5-6), and may adhere to the food laws of the Torah (14:14).
  
  The behavior of the weak, especially their abstinence from meat and wine (14:21), is probably a conscious imitation of biblical heroes who avoided Gentile foods while living in Gentile lands. Among those who maintained this type of Diaspora diet were Tobit, Judith, Esther, and Daniel (Tob 1:10-11; Jud 10:5; 12:2; Esther 14:17; Dan 1:8; 10:3).
  
  14:3 pass judgment: To inflate difference of opinion is to cause division and strife. The strong should accommodate the weak without gloating over their Christian freedom or looking with contempt on them. In this case, preserving peace is a higher priority than the exercise of liberty. The weak and the strong are answerable to God, not to each other (14:10-12).

Jerome Biblical Commentary:

• 1. welcome the man who is weak in faith: Paul thinks of a scrupulous Christian whose judgments are based on an insufficiently enlightened faith. Such a man has not fully grasped what is meant by uprightness through faith and immaturely seeks to justify himself by additional practices that are only a form of fringe Christianity. and yet, even he belongs to the Christian community.
  
  without debating minor points [with him]: Lit., "not for the purpose of quarrels about opinions." The scrupulous brother should be welcomed as God would welcome him; he should not be subjected to idle disputes, for such debate undermines confidence on all sides.
  
  2. [only] vegetables: Paul's first example involves a food-taboo. While the "strong" eat of everything, the "weak" eat only vegetables, perhaps because of their pre-Christian background (cf. Dn 1; Jdt 8:6; 1 Cor 8-10). But once it is seen that such an issue is not bound up with the essentials of faith, the obligation of mutual charity becomes clear. Each must accept the other as God would.
  
  4. to criticize someone else's servant: The "weak" Christian is addressed; he is warned that the person he would regard as lax is actually a member of God's household. God alone, as that man's master, will judge his failure or success. From God comes both the acceptance of the "weak" and the status of the "strong."

i will provide the commentary from Fr. William G. Most in a subsequent post

pax christi,
phatcatholic

 

[phatcatholic]

Fr. William G Most, Commentary on the Pauline Epistles, Chapter 8: "Letter to the Romans"

• Summary of Romans, Chapter 14
  
  He asks them to treat as brothers or sisters those who are weak in faith. He advises not to try to reason them into a sensible position. For some have faith such that they think everything is all right to eat -- there are no unclean foods. But the weak one thinks only vegetables are permitted. Again, the one who understands that everything is all right to eat must not scorn the other. God accepts the other. Really, who are we to condemn someone else's servant [God's]? It is the judgment of the Lord that counts for that weak one. The Lord will make him stand.
  
  Some judge that there are certain days when they must make certain observances -- but others, we, judge every day is proper.
  
  It is essential that each one not act against his conscience. For the one who does unnecessarily observe certain days, does it thinking the Lord so wills. Again, we who eat all things do so for the Lord, and give thanks to God. But the one who limits his diet does so thinking the Lord wills it, and gives thanks to God. No one of us lives for self or dies for self. Whether living or dying, we belong to the Lord. Christ died and came back to life so He can be the Lord of both the dead and the living.
  
  So who are we to condemn another brother, or scorn him? All of us must stand before the divine tribunal. As God said through Isaiah: "As I live, says the Lord, every knee will bend to me, every tongue will report to God." So then each of us will have to give that account. Hence we should not keep on judging/condemning others, but instead, decide not to cause scandal to them. We know we are certain in the Lord Jesus that no food is unclean in itself. But if someone considers it unclean, it would be wrong for him to eat it. So if we scandalize a brother by food, we are no longer living according to love. We must not for the sake of food destroy a soul for whom Christ died. We must not let our Christian freedom be ill-spoken of because it results in scandal. The kingdom of God does not depend on freedom in regard to food and drink -- what does count is righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. The one who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God, and people approve him.
  
  So we should cultivate the things that pertain to peace, and to spiritual help to one another. We must not destroy God's handiwork for the sake of food. Yes, all things are clean, but can be evil to one who eats them in scandal. It is right not to eat meat or drink wine, or do anything at all which scandalizes a brother.
  
  So this knowledge that we have about foods and similar things we must use for ourselves and before God. But we must not flaunt it before others in such a way as to scandalize them.
  
  Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself for a thing he has decided to do. But if someone acts in doubt about the morality of what he is doing, if he eats in that state of doubt, then he is condemned, even though there was nothing wrong about the eating in itself. But because he acted in bad faith, he is condemned. Anything that is done in bad faith is a sin.
  
  Comments On Chapter 14
  
  We are not able to determine precisely what sort of problem persons Paul has in view here, though we can know some things about them. And we can know the principles involved clearly. They are "weak in faith." Really, one who has strong faith, who believes in the protection of Christ on His Church, will have no trouble accepting the decisions of the Church that no food is wrong to eat in itself, and that there are no days on which by their nature we must carry out certain rituals. If people were really logical, and then accepted most teachings of the Church, but rejected a few, we could and would say: It must be something other than faith that leads them to accept the things they accept. But as it really is, people are not always consistent and logical. And so in one sense we can say these people lack faith (on the assumption that they are being logical), and in another sense (viewing them more realistically) we would not say that. Paul here is talking in the same pattern as that we see in the Epistle of James 2:10: "Whoever keeps the whole law, but offends on one point, is guilty of [violating] the whole law."
  
  So, speaking abstractly, Paul can say these persons are weak in faith, but he also knows that concretely they are not logical, are in the grip of past habituations, and so he says that God is willing to accept them. He does not mean that God is objectively pleased with their errors, but it does mean that as long as they do not act in bad faith, He will accept them.
  
  The psychology involved is the same as that which we saw in First Corinthians, in Paul's long discussion of foods sacrificed to idols. There he said that an idol is nothing; nothing changes nothing; so in itself it is all right to eat such food. But he sees a danger of scandal: suppose you are invited out to dinner, and at table someone says that the meat has come from a temple sacrifice. At once Paul says: Do not eat it. We might think he would give instruction: "Tell them Paul says it is all right to eat." But no, he knows that at least in general, they will not be able to internalize that idea. They have grown up with the belief that food is changed by being offered in the temples of idols. If by social pressure we would force them to eat it in bad faith, that is, in the belief it is sinful, then there would be a sin, not because the food was wrong, but because it is wrong to do what one believes is contrary to morality.
  
  At the end of this chapter Paul goes even farther. He says that if someone acts in doubt as to whether a food is licit, for example, then he will sin by eating it, because he is willing to violate the law by doing something that at least is likely to be a violation.
  
  May we turn this around and say: "As long as I think it is all right, it is all right, even if the Church says otherwise?" Not at all. We are obliged to form our conscience according to the teaching of the Church. So objectively we would be wrong in going against the Church. We say objectively, because in a time of immense confusion, with false teachers so often found, even priests, telling people that contraception, for example, is permitted -- in such a confusion someone, while objectively wrong, may yet be subjectively in good faith.
  
  To give scandal is to do something that either is sinful, or looks sinful in such a situation that it will likely lead another into doing what is sinful, or what he is convinced is sinful. In First Corinthians, Paul pleaded eloquently and at length. He does so more briefly here, but still uses the most telling argument: Are you going to eat meat in a situation where that will lead another soul into spiritual ruin? Christ died for that soul! Can you not give up meat on some particular occasion?
  
  The persons Paul has in mind here are not the same as Judaizers, for although they thought some foods were unclean, they did not go so far as to reject all kinds of meat.
  
  We note further: Paul here is dealing with a concrete situation in which some cannot form their consciences rightly in regard to foods and days of observance. He would not have any objection to giving up food, or praying on the Lord's day when one does it not as a result of an unfortunate mentality, but as a result of the commands of the Church, and the command of Christ for penance. Paul himself fasted often, as we see in 2 Corinthians 11:27. And we know historically, e.g., from the Didache, that the early Christians did fast much.

i hope that helps

pax christi,
phatcatholic

 

[Scuba Pete]

This is simple stuff folks...

Acts 10:9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13 Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."

14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." 16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven. NIV

Here we are RELEASED from all dietary laws. We were actually released from this on the cross, but the Apostles just didn't "get it".

Acts 15:19 "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath." NIV

Here we are a scant five chapters later, and it is apparent that the apostles are STILL hung up on dietary laws.

I Corinthians 8:1 Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. 2 The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know. 3But the man who loves God is known by God.

4 So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

7 But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. 9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if anyone with a weak conscience sees you who have this knowledge eating in an idol's temple, won't he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? 11 So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12 When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall. NIV

Now, the REAL teaching is making it through. Meat sacrificed to idols means NOTHING. But not everyone understands that. Can you see how the Apostles have GROWN in their faith? They went from FORBIDDING something to encouraging disciples to participate. Wow!

I Corinthians 10:23 "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive. 24 Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.

25 Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, 26 for, "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it."

27 If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. 28 But if anyone says to you, "This has been offered in sacrifice," then do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake— 29 the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience? 30 If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for? 31 So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32 Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God— 33 even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved. NIV

Now we have some very VALUABLE background for Romans 14. There was a reason they mistakenly saw that those who ate meat were more spiritual. They took the teaching and sorta kinda missed the point. But all of us are GROWING in our understanding of God. Even the Apostles.

 

[may]

For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU...Acts 15;28-29...... yes i agree with the last post , only the necessary things are the things to abstain from. things sacrificed to idols. blood, things strangled which havent had the blood drained out, and fornication in a litral or a spiritual way. so if we fancy a nice big rump steak with chips enjoy

 

[Scuba Pete]

So May... do you just throw out I Corinthians 8 & 10, where they tell us eating that is alright? The Apostles and their teachings were not perfect. If we continue our reading into I Corinthians 11, we are WARNED how we should imitate them:

I Corinthians 11:1 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ. NIV

That means that we don't need to follow their example if they deviate from Christ's example! You see, by this time the Apostles are finally starting to realise that EVERYTHING hangs on two principles:

1) Love God

2) Love everyone else.

It's just that blindingly simple, but we want a stinking rule book. Check out how MOST Christians react to wine. The born again side sees it as "evil". IT WAS JESUS' FIRST MIRACLE! How can it be evil? Sure, we can abuse it, but in and of itself: it is not evil. Paul tells Timothy to drink some wine to calm him down. How radical, when you think about it. WHY??? Paul thinks he can be more effective in loving others if he is a bit calmer. It all gets back to love.

You want to know if something is a sin? Give it the 1-2 test. Does it love God? Does it love others? Yes to either makes it cool. Everything else is, well YOU figure it out!

We are all growing into the knowledge of Christ:

II Corinthians 3;16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit. NIV

II Peter 1:5 For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6 and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. 8For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. NIV

 

[may]

So May... do you just throw out I Corinthians 8 & 10, where they tell us eating that is alright? The Apostles and their teachings were not perfect. If we continue our reading into I Corinthians 11, we are WARNED how we should imitate them:

I Corinthians 11:1 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ. NIV

That means that we don't need to follow their example if they deviate from Christ's example! You see, by this time the Apostles are finally starting to realise that EVERYTHING hangs on two principles:

1) Love God

2) Love everyone else.

It's just that blindingly simple, but we want a stinking rule book. Check out how MOST Christians react to wine. The born again side sees it as "evil". IT WAS JESUS' FIRST MIRACLE! How can it be evil? Sure, we can abuse it, but in and of itself: it is not evil. Paul tells Timothy to drink some wine to calm him down. How radical, when you think about it. WHY??? Paul thinks he can be more effective in loving others if he is a bit calmer. It all gets back to love.

You want to know if something is a sin? Give it the 1-2 test. Does it love God? Does it love others? Yes to either makes it cool. Everything else is, well YOU figure it out!

We are all growing into the knowledge of Christ:

II Corinthians 3;16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit. NIV

II Peter 1:5 For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6 and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. 8For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. NIV

as long as it does not offend God it is ok to eat and drink ,but if it offends God and a person eats and drinks anyway ,this would stumble someone with little faith, and they could then think it was ok to do things that offend God . so as long as christians stick to nessasery things mentioned in Acts 15;28-29 they cant go wrong in the eyes of God or man. because those older men that made those nessasery things know were directed by holy spirit to make it known

 

[NoName]

as long as it does not offend God it is ok to eat and drink ,but if it offends God and a person eats and drinks anyway ,this would stumble someone with little faith, and they could then think it was ok to do things that offend God .

But even if it doesn't offend God but it offends your brother, you shouldn't do it. Where's that scripture? It goes something like this: Don't worry about eating stuff sacrificed to idols. All is clean to me. But if it offends your brother to see you eat, don't eat. They can go wrong in the eyes of God if they are offending their brother, even if they aren't offending God, per se.

 

[may]

But even if it doesn't offend God but it offends your brother, you shouldn't do it. Where's that scripture? It goes something like this: Don't worry about eating stuff sacrificed to idols. All is clean to me. But if it offends your brother to see you eat, don't eat. They can go wrong in the eyes of God if they are offending their brother, even if they aren't offending God, per se.

yes i do see what you mean, but when it comes to christian worship true christians should act in complete unison
Now I exhort YOU, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that YOU should all speak in agreement, and that there should not be divisions among YOU, but that YOU may be fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought. ....(1 corinthians 1;10)

 

[Scuba Pete]

I guess you don't see the progression in the Apostle's understanding (and teaching) then.

God is pleased with WHATEVER we eat. He told us that in Peter's vision. Sometimes it takes some time to understand the freedom we actually DO HAVE in Jesus.

God abhors rules... he has really only given us two to follow. All else comes from those two. Rules only have an appearance of Godliness: they are not in themselves Godly.

 

[may]

I guess you don't see the progression in the Apostle's understanding (and teaching) then.

God is pleased with WHATEVER we eat. He told us that in Peter's vision. Sometimes it takes some time to understand the freedom we actually DO HAVE in Jesus.

God abhors rules... he has really only given us two to follow. All else comes from those two. Rules only have an appearance of Godliness: they are not in themselves Godly.

i agree that the foods which were banned in the past are now quite alright to eat but as the men of old in the book of acts were telling the nessesary things still apply , at that time some were still thinking that they should get circumsised according to the old law but after the men of old got to geather in prayer and asked for the holyspirit to direct them they realized that circumcision was nolonger needed , but the nessesary things still applied , and do still apply now , those nesesary things in acts 15;28-29 are listed along with fornication, so just as fornication is a no no ,so blood, idolatry, meat strangled not drained , they are all no no if they were not important why did they list them ? it was because thats what Jehovah wanted
Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. ....Acts 15 19-20

(Acts 21:25) As for the believers from among the nations, we have sent out, rendering our decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication.

 

[Scuba Pete]

they are all no no if they were not important why did they list them ? it was because thats what Jehovah wanted

Acts 21:25 As for the believers from among the nations, we have sent out, rendering our decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication.

Its a great question, and the answer is right there in the text: this was NOT a command from God: it's how the apostles were developing their understanding of the "two laws". You have to realise that this concept of having JUST two laws (Love God, Love everyone else) was so radical that they crucified Jesus for it. It's not something that God handed out on a silver platter either. The more you internalise it the better you understand it. This was true for the Apostles as well.

We like to look on everything written in the New Testament as "cast in stone", and while some of it is, much of it is a historical document of what the first century church DID in their continual understanding of the "New Dispensation". Lets look a bit further in Romans 14...

Romans 14:13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16 Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. NIV

Let's also take a look at Colossians 2. You might want to start from verse 6 to get an idea of the FREEDOM that is ours in Christ...

Colossians 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. 18 Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions. 19 He has lost connection with the Head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow.
20 Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: 21 "Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!"? 22 These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. 23 Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence. NIV

When the Nation of Israel was created, they were treated as "kids" by God. "Do this" or "Don't do that" was the basic nature of God's relationship to them. God had to get them through the desert in one piece, so he made things black and white and used HUGE penalties to secure obedience. As we have matured as his people, he has helped us to understand the basic underlying principles of what really makes "right" and "wrong". In fact he made us a WONDERFUL promise: to write his "laws" on our hearts. Which laws did he write? Love God and love everyone else. That's it. In a nutshell, EVERYTHING hangs on these two laws. Everything.

 

[may]

Acts 21:25 As for the believers from among the nations, we have sent out, rendering our decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication.

Its a great question, and the answer is right there in the text: this was NOT a command from God: it's how the apostles were developing their understanding of the "two laws". You have to realise that this concept of having JUST two laws (Love God, Love everyone else) was so radical that they crucified Jesus for it. It's not something that God handed out on a silver platter either. The more you internalise it the better you understand it. This was true for the Apostles as well.

We like to look on everything written in the New Testament as "cast in stone", and while some of it is, much of it is a historical document of what the first century church DID in their continual understanding of the "New Dispensation". Lets look a bit further in Romans 14...

Romans 14:13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16 Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. NIV

Let's also take a look at Colossians 2. You might want to start from verse 6 to get an idea of the FREEDOM that is ours in Christ...

Colossians 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. 18 Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions. 19 He has lost connection with the Head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow.
20 Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: 21 "Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!"? 22 These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. 23 Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence. NIV

When the Nation of Israel was created, they were treated as "kids" by God. "Do this" or "Don't do that" was the basic nature of God's relationship to them. God had to get them through the desert in one piece, so he made things black and white and used HUGE penalties to secure obedience. As we have matured as his people, he has helped us to understand the basic underlying principles of what really makes "right" and "wrong". In fact he made us a WONDERFUL promise: to write his "laws" on our hearts. Which laws did he write? Love God and love everyone else. That's it. In a nutshell, EVERYTHING hangs on these two laws. Everything.

yes i agree love of God and neighbour are the most important things ,so if we love God and he was directing the apostles to make known what is right for the early congregations and they listened to that direction ,
That council sent their decision to all congregations: Christians need not keep the code given to Moses, but it is "necessary" for them to "keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled [unbled meat] and from fornication." (Acts 15:22-29) notice it says KEEP ABSTAININGThe apostles were not presenting a mere ritual or dietary ordinance. The decree set out fundamental ethical norms, which early Christians complied with. About a decade later they acknowledged that they should still "keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood . . . and from fornication."—Acts 21:25......so yes as you say the loads of decrees were not needed and we also dont need the manmade practices

Paul placed emphasis on the God-given position of superiority Christ enjoys. (Col 1:13-20) This truth would counteract paganistic philosophy, Jewish tradition, and another practice, "a form of worship of the angels............... Yes the reality belongs to the christ.

Jehovah is the Spirit; and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom. 2 corinthians 3;17

Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. Truly I say to YOU, He will appoint him over all his belongings matthew 24;45-47............... yes the nessesary things back then was spiritualfood at the right time ,and the congregations took it to heart and applied it, as christians now should still keep doing . when did we ever get told to refrain from doing the nessesary things . are you saying that it is ok to fornicate, be an idoloter ,i dont think so

 

[joeboonda]

yes i agree love of God and neighbour are the most important things ,so if we love God and he was directing the apostles to make known what is right for the early congregations and they listened to that direction ,
That council sent their decision to all congregations: Christians need not keep the code given to Moses, but it is "necessary" for them to "keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled [unbled meat] and from fornication." (Acts 15:22-29) notice it says KEEP ABSTAININGThe apostles were not presenting a mere ritual or dietary ordinance. The decree set out fundamental ethical norms, which early Christians complied with. About a decade later they acknowledged that they should still "keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood . . . and from fornication."—Acts 21:25......so yes as you say the loads of decrees were not needed and we also dont need the manmade practices

Paul placed emphasis on the God-given position of superiority Christ enjoys. (Col 1:13-20) This truth would counteract paganistic philosophy, Jewish tradition, and another practice, "a form of worship of the angels............... Yes the reality belongs to the christ.

Jehovah is the Spirit; and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom. 2 corinthians 3;17

Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. Truly I say to YOU, He will appoint him over all his belongings matthew 24;45-47............... yes the nessesary things back then was spiritualfood at the right time ,and the congregations took it to heart and applied it, as christians now should still keep doing . when did we ever get told to refrain from doing the nessesary things .

are you saying that it is ok to fornicate, be an idoloter ,i dont think so

I dont think anyone is saying to go out and blatantly sin, we were talking about eating meat. Most folks on this thread seem to understand, we were saved by grace through faith the moment we believed, and are now passed from death to life and shall not come back into condemnation. See eph :8-9 and John 5:24. Salvation is a free gift, see Romans 5:16-18, and we know we are adopted, God's children, new creations, seated in heavenly places with Christ Jesus, sealed by the Spirit, and Jesus said he wil in no wise cast us out. I am told in the Greek it is 5 negatives- He that cometh to me I will never, no never, no never cast out. We know grace is unmerited favor, we are saved only by the blood of Christ, trusting in his death and that alone to pay for our sins. So we do not go back and put heavy yokes we cannot bear with old jewish laws, meats, drink, holy days, circumsision, not to mention many man-made laws. One example was that if you spit in the dirt on the sabbath it made clay and that was work, so you sinned. Probably why Jesus spit in the dirt and made clay to heal the blind man, as a jab at those laws-they were actually hard-hearted cruel leaders who burdened the people needlessly. Anyway, praise God we have liberty in Jesus. All thing are not profitable or expedient, and we are to do our best not to sin, but we do not have to ever again be legalists or suffer from Galatianism, or try to earn or keep our salvation by being good enough or observing some insane set of rules. Jesus has paid it all, he loves us, he forgave us, and that is why we serve him, out of love for him, for what he did for us, that is the motivation for a pure life, nothing more. Peace !

 

[joeboonda]

Peace,
"For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables." - Romans 14:2

why does being a vegetarian make one weak of faith?

especially since part of the nazarite oath to separate oneself to the Lord (numbers 6) is being a vegetarian.
it seems contradictory to me, but i may be misunderstanding it. thanks for the input.

There have been good answers on this, so briefly, one was weak of faith IN CHRIST, that is, he was still trusting in his OWN good works, of keeping all the burdensome laws of the OT, and many other man-made laws as well, made by the Pharisees and Sadducees, etc. The strong trusted only in Christ's atoning work on the cross, his shed blood offered as a free gift to those who would believe in, or accept it, and depend on that, and nothing more. He came to set us free, and he did, we need not go back and be burdened down by anything else. Those strong in the faith understood that, and those weak in their understanding and faith in what Christ accomplished for us were tempted to go back and say its Christ plus...Christ plus my good works, or plus my church attendance, or plus my giving, or plus my being pure, etc. All those are things we should strive to do, but not to GET, or keep saved, but because we already are. Hope that helps.

 

[Quiddity]

Christians need not keep the code given to Moses

Are the ten commandments not applicable?

~Victor