TABOO OR TO DO?
or
WORKING THROUGH THE SOCIAL GRAY AREAS - III

Romans 14:13-23
May 26, 1996
Bob Bonner

In the last 30 years, swimming suits have had various style changes. For men, back in the early sixties, we use to wear suits that went below our knees and were somewhat tight around the legs. This style of swim suit came to be, because the early southern California surfers wanted their legs to stay warmer in the water and wanted their knees to be covered so as to provide some protection between their knees and their surf boards when they paddled. 

Then came the "baggies" style swim trunks. They were called that because they were big and hung loosely over one's legs, but were above the knees. They gave one more freedom in movement on the surf board. Then the men's suits got a little shorter, but not much. Now, they have returned to the old "baggies" style once again.

Throughout the past 30 years, for the most part, men's swim suits have not been designed so as to indecently expose a man's figure. Their design has been driven primarily by what is practical for swimming. However, I do have a relative who is three years older than I am, who believes that all of men's modern swim wear is indecent. She is a committed follower of Jesus Christ. She believes that men's swim wear should return to the styles of the 20's where men swam in shirts and pants that at least covered the knees. Obviously, she cannot buy those kind of swim suits, so she has made them for her sons and husband. Her boys have been on a swim team, and even in the races, she would not let them wear racing suits as all the rest of the kids did, but they had to compete against other swimmers while basically wearing clothes. If you have never had the experience of trying to swim with clothes on, I can testify as a strong swimmer, that it is not easy.

About three years ago, we had a family reunion at the beach where this relative came and all the males in the family and all the females had matching swim wear that covered them from their necks to their knees. I, quite frankly, was embarrassed to be seen on the beach with them. And furthermore, I know for a fact, that at least one of her sons was embarrassed to be dressed in those suits, yet he submitted to his mother's wishes.

I never shunned this mother or showed contempt for her because of her convictions. Nor did I publicly mock her for it. I couldn't help but privately laugh at the ridiculousness of it, but I would not put her on the spot for her convictions. Why? Because she is family and I love her. I understood her logical reasoning, but still I did not agree with her. Although I was embarrassed by her "weaker" sister syndrome and her legalistic approach to swim wear, I love her and support her fully. In addition, I didn't force my opinions on her; but neither did I ask her to make me a new swim suit! Culturally, I felt that I could honor God in what I was wearing and I could thank God that I didn't have to wear what her husband was wearing. Furthermore, I did not believe that I was forcing her to go out and buy up-to-date swim wear so as to violate her conscience. She understands where I am coming from as well, and I don't believe that she shuns me for my swim wear.

Through that vacation, we shared what the Lord had been doing in our lives, the lessons He was teaching us. We prayed together and discussed world issues from a Christian perspective. Even though we did not agree on swim wear, we are united in Christ and committed to winning the rest of our family to Christ.

Last November, we all met for another family reunion in Hawaii. I noticed that she had relaxed her convictions a little in that the men no longer have to wear their swim shirts. I believe, that that is due to the Lord, in His own time, convincing this mother to lighten up. If, on the other hand, I had tried to force her to my point of view or she felt pressured to defend her point of view, two things would have happened. First, there would have been no ground of unity from which we could bear testimony to Christ before our unsaved relatives. Secondly, I would have prevented the spirit of God from educating her in her freedoms at her own pace.

Now, you may think that that is an isolated or weird example of a social gray area. Maybe it is. But I can assure you, she was as serious about it as some of you may feel about the issue of dancing, gambling, wearing pierced ear rings and a whole host of other debatable cultural practices. No matter what those practices entail, no matter how far out we may feel them to be, we are to respond to these situations as Paul tells us to in Romans 14-15.

Let's review what we have learned so far in our study of the first thirteen verses of Romans 14 and then continue our study of the last half of Romans 14.

First, we saw in verse 1 a key principle stated. The principle was this: As it concerns those areas of life, in which the scriptures do not clearly speak, accept one another for the purpose of maintaining unity. 

The rest of this section, down through 15:4 explains what it means to accept one another. Paul points to three guidelines to applying this principle. The first one we have looked at closely for the past two weeks. It states: To accept someone means not to despise them for their differing convictions, verses 2-12.

Obviously, we are only dealing in this passage with those disputable areas of life to which the scriptures do not give a clear, black and white, definitive yes or no. We are not talking about things such as respecting authority, honoring parents, paying taxes, not lying, etc. We are talking about peoples' personal convictions as to whether or not that they should practice certain customs of our culture. Ie. Can a Christian teenager be totally pleasing to God and wear a mohawk haircut, or dye their hair purple or wear sixteen earrings? Should Christians have Easter egg hunts at Easter? And so forth.

In verses 2-12, we noted four reasons why we are not to despise others who have different convictions and gave some more illustrations as to how we can accept other Christians, even though we may not agree on how to approach these social gray areas.

This morning, we want to look at the second guideline as to what it means to be accepting of others. In the first 12 verses of this chapter, the subject matter dealt pretty much with how both the "weaker" less knowledgeable Christian and the "stronger" more knowledgeable person is suppose to treat each other. In the second half of this chapter on accepting one another, it is primarily addressed to the "stronger" Christian and how he or she uses their liberty. In the first half of the chapter, it dealt with the fact that there is Christian liberty in these areas, and in the second half, how that liberty is to be exercised.

A key word that might drive home the heart of this last part of Romans 14 is the word responsibility. The stronger Christian is free to exercise his or her freedoms, but must do so in a responsible manner that supports, helps or builds up another believer. Let me first summarize the point of these next verses, then let's look more closely at the text. Paul's point in these verses is, that to accept someone means not to damage them but to encourage their spiritual growth. 

In verse 13, Paul begins with a reminder of something he has been saying since the first verse of this chapter. That is, that we are to stop passing judgment on one another. Paul writes, "Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this--not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way."

In other words, "Stop judging one another. If you are so into judging people, start with yourself and ask yourself, "By exercising my freedom right now, right here, am I causing my fellow Christian to violate his convictions in these matters."

Paul uses two words that are synonyms in this verse. Some of your translations even translate them using the opposite terms. In the NASB, the first word is "obstacle" and the second word is "stumbling block". In the NIV, it translates the words in reverse; the first word "stumbling block" and the second word "obstacle."

Regardless of your translation, the first word literally means something which one may strike his foot on, causing him to stumble. The second term presents an additional picture. It is that of a trap designed to ensnare a victim. Either way, Paul is referring to a deliberate attempt on the stronger more knowledgeable and free Christian's part, to push the weaker Christian to violate his or her convictions, so as to get the weaker Christian to be as free as the stronger Christian. 

It is very important to note that this is a deliberate action. It is not something done by accident. In other words, Paul is not referring to a stronger Christian exercising his or her freedom in public, not knowing that there is a weaker Christian in the background who spies this person exercising his or her freedom; and then, the weaker Christian deciding that the weaker Christian can likewise partake of this freedom, knowing his conscience says "NO!" 

For instance: Let's say that you are a more knowledgeable Christian, a stronger Christian and you feel the freedom before the Lord to go to a movie theater and see a movie. The movie you decide to see is a PG rated movie in one of those theaters that have 5-6 movies all playing at once with various ratings. Unbeknownst to you, another weaker Christian, outside the movie theater, sees you at the theater going to a movie. The weaker Christian then says, "I saw elder so and so, or teacher so and so go into that theater, so he must believe it is okay to go to any movie. Therefore, I am going to go to any movie," and proceeds to go into the theater and not just go to a G or PG rated movie, but decides to go to an R or an NR rated movie and violates his conscience and sins. 

Paul is not saying here that that is the fault of the stronger brother or that the stronger brother was wrong in exercising his freedom. The stronger brother did not deliberately try to cause this person to stumble. The stronger brother in no way encouraged or put his stamp of approval on seeing another rated movie. You and I are not responsible for someone, unknown to us, seeing us exercising our freedom and then deciding for themselves to violate their own conscience. They have their own responsibility to the Lord in those choices they make.

There is no way that another party can be held responsible before God for a second party's wrong choices, when the first party never intended to encourage wrong behavior. Paul is not talking about that here. He is only speaking to a situation where one person, a stronger more free Christian, deliberately tries to force or stretch another weaker, less free Christian's convictions to include the stronger Christians freedoms.

To use the movie example to show what Paul is talking about here, would be this. Let's say that the stronger Christian and a weaker Christian want to go see a movie. However, the weaker Christian feels that for him, he shouldn't see anything rated below a G rated movie, or maybe he is a teenager and his parents have forbidden him from seeing anything lower than a G rated movie. But the stronger Christian, who wants to see some more action and has no problem before the Lord viewing a PG rated movie says, "Man, the only movie playing that is G rated is The Muppets. Don't be a sissy. Let's go see the latest Arnold Swartzeneger film, the PG rated one."

Now, that's causing the weaker brother to violate his conscience. That is wrong and an unloving thing to do to the weaker brother. That is damaging that brother, not building that person up. That is not accepting one another. Hence, we damage weaker Christians when we deliberately tempt them to violate their consciences. Paul continues to explain in verse 14, "I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean." Paul reiterates something he has said previously and will repeat once more, in verse 20, as it concerns these gray areas, that being, that the stronger believer is correct in his freedoms, that nothing in these gray areas is unclean or outright sinful in itself. In these areas, it is a matter of conscience, and we are to allow the individual and his conscience to decide whether to exercise a freedom or not to exercise a freedom.

Remember that the very author of this letter, Paul was a Pharisee who previous to his coming to Christ was taught that eating pork was a sin, an abomination to God, and he says earlier in this passage that "no food is unclean". He went from being a weaker brother in this area to becoming a learned stronger brother, in Christ, where he has experienced some freedom in God, in this same area. Through his own experience, Paul learned that one person's conscience may move much more slowly toward maturity than another; therefore, we are to adjust to one another's needs, and not force our freedoms on another. We damage weaker Christians when we refuse to adjust our freedoms to their learning curve. 

Paul explains that to not adjust is unloving, in verse 15. He states, "For if because of food your brother is hurt, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food him for whom Christ died."

When Paul says that your brother is "hurt" or as in the NIV, he is "distressed", Paul does not mean that if your freedom to drink or dance or go to movies simply bothers or irritates another Christian's personal convictions, like my relative didn't like the swim suits my sons and I wore, then I should stop wearing them...that's not what Paul is talking about here. 

He is talking about flaunting your freedom to deliberately shock the weaker brother and by doing so "destroy" or cause that weaker Christian to lose one's spiritual fervor and eagerness to serve the Lord and to drift off into sinful behavior. Knowledge is good as long as we don't use it pridefully destroy others in the process. As Paul clearly stated in 1 Corinthians 8:1, "Knowledge makes arrogant, but love edifies." Love looks to encourage build up and to strengthen someone in their faith. In the right time and the right way, love means slowly to educate and bring the less knowledgeable along into truth as they can handle it. We encourage spiritual growth when love causes us to temporarily limit our liberty. 

Paul continues, verse 16 "Therefore do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil;" There are many ways that we can take that which is good and use it in such a way that it becomes evil or wicked. Allow me to give you two examples. Last week, I told you about Spurgeon, the great english pulpiteer and his smoking of cigars. When Spurgeon, a very godly man, made the issue of his smoking cigars so prominent that it became his trade mark, rather than Christ, then his cigar smoking became evil. He later realized his wrong, and to his credit, gave up cigars.

But previous to that, when Spurgeon pushed his freedom to smoke and made it an issue to divide the body over by arguing so hard for his rights and flaunting his freedom in everyone's face, that takes the freedom, a good thing, and causes it to be spoken of as evil. It wasn't that Spurgeon didn't have the freedom to smoke in public, because he did. But often times when he did smoke, he did so with the attitude of, "in your face." And although at times, it may have been humorous, it was wrong.

Verse 17, "for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but [word for major contrast] righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." Paul is saying that the kingdom life, being lived for God is not so much concerned with the externals, like what you eat and what you drink, or what you wear. Instead, it concerns that which is internal, like "righteousness, peace and joy."

By "righteousness", Paul is not referring to a lifestyle. All throughout the book of Romans, Paul has never used the term "righteousness" to refer to one's lifestyle. Although it is rightly used by Paul and other authors else where in scripture to refer to a lifestyle or a behavior, that is not what Paul has had in mind in the entire book of Romans. Throughout Romans, this term "righteousness" has referred to one's total acceptance and standing of approval in Christ. And as a result of our standing in Christ, the believer has a strong sense of worth, self-respect and dignity. For the stronger brother, he doesn't have to exercise his freedoms at every chance to prove his maturity or worth. He can give way at times, in the interest of others.

Hence, when others in the world see your life, what they should see in you is a sense of the kingdom of God, in that you have a confidence and underlying assurance as to who you are, just like the world saw this same kind of kingdom of God in Jesus. Jesus gave way to much of our human foolishness, when he was here on earth. This righteousness, like Christ's righteousness is not a cockiness or self-conceit, but poise, balance, composure, an assurance that goes deep to your being. I know of non-Christians who are insanely jealous of Christians who are "so together" or "so at peace" with their lives, regardless of their circumstances. It drives them so nuts, they deliberately do things to try to upset those Christians.

The second thing that Paul says that the world needs to see, is not so much our behavior as it concerns these gray areas, as it is our peace. Peace is that visible kind of calmness that is at the inner core of our being. It's a peace that comes from knowing that things couldn't be better between you and God, and even if you face some injustice, God, the just one will take care of it in the end.

Peace is that ability of not being disturbed by the minor irritations of the moment. The unflappability over the hurt or injustices caused by others. It's this righteousness and peace that communicates the kingdom of God to this world. It comes from the quiet assurance that God is present in the situation. People, non-Christians are drawn to that like flies to honey. On the other hand, the world is not attracted to two people, in conflict, arguing with one another or rejecting each other over some issue as ridiculous as whether or not a person should listen to Christian rock music or not.

The third thing Paul points to in this verse is joy, that absolute delighting in God, that seems to make life so worthwhile, even though filled with problems. When a person has that kind of joy in Christ, then that person can easily give up some momentary indulgence if it is going to bother someone or make them move beyond his own conscience. This joy, enables one to not insist on one's rights, but to give way.

Ray Stedman, when he was teaching on this here at Crossroads, several years ago, said, "Give yourself to the taking from the Lord righteousness, peace and joy. When you do, these issues [the debatable issues] barely raise their head because there is such a quality of vitality and joy about you that when people see you exercise your liberties or a freedom they don't possess, never the less, they have to admit that it hasn't affected your spirituality or made you a difficult person to live with or changed your sense of righteousness, peace and joy which is from God. Your sense of peace and joy and righteousness is an adequate answer that these issues are not the important thing." [RCS, TAPE 3/17/92]

In verse 18, Paul adds, "For he who in this {way} serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men." Notice the order of these two verbs: first acceptable to God and then approved by men. When we live our lives by our consciences, so as to honor God then, we will have a better chance of being approved of by others. You don't earn others approval by trying to please others. If you are going to gain others approval, it will come as you learn to honor the Lord, first. 

Note: Paul is not saying that just because you honor the Lord, all men will approve of you. You will never be able to please all the people all of the time, even if you live a perfect life for the Lord. Look at Jesus...He got crucified.

With verse 19, Paul now begins to wind down this chapter and drive home his point. He says, "So then let us pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another. Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food." Paul's point is that it is not a question of whether or not we have the right to do something or not, but whether or not it will edify our brothers, or hurt them. If we really love someone, we will do things that will help them grow, not tear them down. We can tear down the work of God in another's life by fighting over things that are not important. We can tear down the work of God in another's life by insisting on our rights. We can tear down the work of God in others by making unbiblical rules that everyone must follow. We can tear down the work of God in others by having a condemning spirit. That's wrong. We are to build up and challenge each other to grow mature in Christ.

In addition, we can tear down the work of God by arresting growth in others by catering to the immature or weaker Christians and not challenging them to grow or be built up in the knowledge of the faith. It is wrong for a Christian to remain immature and to have a weak or unlearned conscience. They should be challenged to grow in their knowledge. Then, once they have gained knowledge, if they choose to limit their freedom, fine.

Dr. Warren Wiersbe, Christian speaker, author of numerous books and has had a radio ministry around the world for 30 years uses the following illustration to drive home the point of what is involved in building up the weak in faith. He writes, "When a child comes into a home, everything has to change. Mother and Father are careful not to leave the scissors on the chair or anything dangerous within reach. But as the child matures, it is possible for the parents to adjust the rules of the house and deal with him in a more adult fashion. It is natural for a child to stumble when he is learning to walk. But if an adult constantly stumbles, we know something is wrong. Young christians need the kind of fellowship that will protect them and encourage them to grow. But we cannot treat them like "babies" all their lives! The older Christians must exercise love and patience and be careful not to cause them to stumble. But the younger christians must grow..." [p. 561]

Paul continues with the rest of verse 20. Notice, that once more, Paul is addressing these words to the individual, not to the church as a whole. It is not the job of churches, Christian schools or other christian organizations to pass rules on spiritual conduct that fall in these areas of debatable issues. Paul writes, "All things indeed are clean, but they are evil for the man who eats and gives offense. It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or {to do anything} by which your brother stumbles." Again, this term for "offense" and "stumble", doesn't mean to make someone feel offended, or to annoy someone else's convictions. It means, as it did back in verse 13 to deliberately, with intent, cause a person to violate their own conscience and to do what is sin for them.

This brings us to a very important question. Do the strong in faith have to forgo anything about which some weaker believer might object? For a brief answer, NO! In a world with so much variety there is hardly anything you or I might do that will not be objected to by some other believer, as it concerns these social gray areas. If we were to try to live by all the weaker or less knowledgeable Christians standards, we would either fall into a new legalism or go crazy trying to balance thousands of conflicting consciences.

Paul is not saying that we can't ever enjoy freedoms in these gray areas wherever you are. If he was, then he would have to rewrite or deny everything he has written thus far in this chapter and others. If he meant that we can never enjoy our freedoms and remain spiritual leaders or spiritually mature believers, then that would be tantamount to making the least common denominator of faith govern the conduct of the whole church. That would mean that we were to limit the weaker brothers growth, rather than to build him or her up. 

Allow me to quote Ray Stedman's wisdom here. He writes, "I think it is a healthy thing for a Christian who has liberty in some of these areas to indulge it on occasion. The cause of Christ is never advanced by having every strong Christian in a congregation completely forego his right to enjoy some of these things. What happens then is that the question is settled on the basis of the most narrow and most prejudiced person in the congregation. Soon, the gospel itself becomes identified with that view. That is why the outside world often considers Christians to be narrow-minded people who have no concern except to prevent the enjoyment of the good gifts of life that God has given us.

It is a good thing for people to indulge in their liberties. Such action raises questions in the minds of those who are not free, especially when they see that this indulgence is linked with a clear manifestation of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. It makes them think, when they see a godly person whom they admire and respect indulge freely in something that they have never been able to indulge in. Yet, they cannot deny that he is a godly person. It is good for them thus to be forced to rethink their prejudices....Notice that Paul does not say it is wrong to make him [the weaker brother] think; it is never wrong to indulge you liberty to such a degree that your brother has to ask questions about his viewpoint. But it is wrong to persist in it to such a degree that you cause him to act beyond his convictions." [p.156-157]

In verse 22-23, Paul continues to put the responsibility of whether or not one should exercise his liberties on the individual's shoulders. He says, "The faith which you have, have as your own conviction before God." The NIV translation, unfortunately suggests that you are to keep quiet about your liberties; but that is not what this verse is saying. What it literally says is that if you have the faith or knowledge that a particular activity is okay for you, have it between yourself and God. Let God's word be the basis of our decision as to whether or not you exercise your liberty. Be sure that you are not exercising your liberty out of pride to merely show off how free you are.

Paul continues, "Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because {his eating is} not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin."

Let's say that you woke up this morning and thought about what you would wear to church. You thought that maybe you would wear something completely different from your normal attire and different from everyone else's around you---perhaps cut-offs and a ripped T-shirt---go to God with that decision before you enter church. Why have you made such a choice? You're certainly free to come to church in cut-off's and a T-shirt; God doesn't care what you wear to church. He isn't offended by cut-offs. But the question is, why are you doing what you are doing? Have you invited the living God into your decision making process? Is your conscience totally free, uninhibited to do whatever it is you are thinking about doing? If there are no doubts and you have a green light...go for it. But if you have a red light this time, then don't, even if it means gaining or losing approval from your friends, don't do it. If you do, then you are not doing it according to knowledge from the word and with a clear conscience and you are in sin.

Here are three things to consider as you contemplate your behavior in these gray areas:

1. Determine before God, that by your lifestyle, you will not deliberately cause others to stumble or prevent their spiritual growth.

2. When my liberty hinders God's work, I will yield.

3. Love God will all your heart...THEN DO AS YOU PLEASE.

Notice, that the healthy restraint of the first part of this condition, gives guidance to the second part.

back to top