Romans 14:13-23
Love your
Brother, Not your Belly
Tom J. Nettles
This text gives a concrete example of how a thing
indifferent in itself may become a positive evil. If the indifferent thing is
put in a position of priority, if someone prefers it, over something that is
demonstratively good and excellent in itself, that which
is indifferent in itself, becomes evil in the use of it in such a circumstance.
Specifically, eating food of different sorts is a matter of indifference, but
when this freedom is chosen at the expense of the tender conscience of a fellow
member of God’s kingdom and has the result of harming his spiritual growth,
then the one doing the eating, a thing indifferent in itself, is committing a
real evil by the result that it entails. How does the eating of meat compare to
the commandment to love our brother—how does a temporal freedom compare to the
infinite excellence of kingdom values? Love your brother, not your belly.
13 [esv] Therefore
let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to
put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.
Paul deals both with the relationship between the supposed weaker
brother and the supposed stronger brother. Perhaps the weaker brother is disposed to
judge the liberty claimed by the stronger brother. He should be careful of
this, especially in light of any clear Scripture that that could be conclusive
as to the moral nature of his action. Do not assume that you have either the
clarity or the prerogative of judgment reserved for God alone. Instead of
judging, each ( perhaps he has in mind particularly
the stronger brother here) should act in love, rather than judgment, and be
careful not to set up any hindrance to a person’s maturity in Christ. That,
more than any supposed rights, should be our concern.
14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord
Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who
thinks it unclean.
Notice how
strong Paul’s language is about his understanding of the moral nature of eating
and drinking. His vision concerning the ceremonial nature of food and drink in
relation to the Old Testament declaration of clean and unclean has been utterly
transformed by the gospel. He has seen clearly the temporal nature of many
aspects of the Old Covenant and has learned to differentiate between those
things that were symbolic and were observed for a time to protect and give
“peculiarity” to
15 For if your brother is grieved by what
you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the
one for whom Christ died.
If a person
therefore, that has the insight of Paul as to the nature of creation, moral law
in relations to ceremonial law, is in the presence of those that still have
moral scruples about certain types of food, or are fearful of participating in
evil practices through eating food offered to idols [as in the case of the
Corinthians], he is to conduct himself in accord with the conscientious concern
of his brother rather than act in accord with his superior knowledge. He might
be right in the action itself, but would be wrong in violating the conscience
of his brother. The principle that undergirds all moral absolutes is the
principle of love. Love is the fulfillment of the Law. If we do a thing that is
not wrong, but violate the principle of love in doing it, then taken as a whole
we have done wrong. Christ has acted in absolute grace toward that person in
dying for him. He surrendered himself to divine wrath though he himself had
done no wrong in order that his enemies, evil-doers, might be forgiven. If the
one infinitely above us has so regarded that brother, how could we refuse to
act toward him, or her, in love. If Christ left heaven
and the glorious manifestation of his intrinsic deity, could we not leave a
viewpoint about the amoral status of meat behind in order to encourage our
brethren in spiritual growth.
16 So do not let what you regard as good be
spoken of as evil.
If your
conviction about the acceptability of using all of God’s created things in a
way for the joy and benefit of mankind becomes an occasion of doing evil to
your brother and corrupting his conscience, then a thing good in itself may be
spoken of as evil in its effect. For the sake of the brother, but for the sake
of preserving an opportunity to teach him the ways of God more perfectly, we
must take care not to let freedoms be injurious to the overall spiritual tone
of the church.
17 For the
The true
moral absolute in this matter is the upbuilding of
God’s people in those things that constitute the glory of living in God’s
presence and under his immediate rule.
We might glory in our ability to enjoy all the creation as our servant,
but those things will perish. Righteousness will never perish and will never
lose its luster. It is the perfect reflection of the divine character. All that
we can do to enhance our grasp of righteousness and move others toward it far
transcends the petty spirit of claiming our rights. Peace is that condition of
a restored relationship with God. He, in this matter of redemption, is the God
of Peace [1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 13 20; Philippians 4:9] Joy consists of
the unbroken experience of delight, the exuberance of praise and wonder and
adoration that one finds in the presence of God [1 Peter 1:8]. It comes to us
partially in this life through the presence of the Holy Spirit and his
operations upon our affections [1 Corinthians 2:14-16]. It is brought to us
fully at the coming of Christ [Phil 1:11; 1 Peter 1:7]. The Spirit is an
earnest of our inheritance and is thus a present experience of eternal life,
and eternal joy [Ephesians 1:13; 4:30; 2 Corinthians; Romans 8:10] We should be
about the task of fostering these things in the minds and hearts of ourselves
and our brothers, rather than entering into a contest about who is right on
these non-essential matters. On an essential matter of revelatory status, such
as the doctrine of justification by faith, Paul was willing to confront even
that pillar of the apostles, Peter, and make sure that the crowd around knew
that Peter had erred grievously [Galatians 2] on the matter and that the issue
should be set right. It really doesn’t make any difference as to where one
lands on the issue of what kind of food you will allow yourself to eat. What
matters is what one does to his brethren as he lives out his conviction, or his
freedom, in public. A mark of true faith, and thus acceptance before God, is
service to Christ in seeking the conscientious well-being and spiritual growth
of all that are in Christ, even those that have been received into fellowship
though in some aspects weak.
20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy
the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make
another stumble by what he eats.
Paul sets
the contrast in proper perspective when he puts eating food on one side of the
scale and the work of god on the other side. Which one weighs the most. Eating food is absolutely nothing compared to the
importance of the work of God in one of his redeemed ones, a person for whom
Christ died. In the next sentence he draws an inference from this comparison.
It is true that everything is clean. Paul’s doctrine of creation combined with
his knowledge that all ceremonial law has been fulfilled has settled that
issue. But to make a brother stumble, even in doing something that is not
wrong, is wrong. The word wrong is one that normally means an intrinsic moral
evil. One’s good become evil in such a context.
21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine
or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.
So do not do
that which evil, Instead, do that which is intrinsically a moral good; that is
refrain from your freedom to eat or drink certain things for the sake of your
brother’s tender conscience. Abstaining in a neutral area normally would not be
considered “good” in this sense. The purpose for which
one would abstain, however, makes such non-action a good thing.
22 The faith that you have, keep between
yourself and God.
The fact
that your understanding of truth in light of a more mature grasp of divine
revelation makes your freedom a matter of faith, does not
necessitate the public manifestation of that faith. Holding such a position is
not one of those things that must be proclaimed. A conviction about the safety
of eating certain things or doing other things, does
not make it necessary that you either eat or do. If one may eat without
violating either his conscience or a moral principle, he may just as easily
abstain without violating a moral principle or his conscience. That conviction
may be kept as a matter of one’s own enjoyment of his knowledge of God without
ever having to be made an issue of public demonstration. Charles Spurgeon was
perfectly satisfied that drinking wine with biblical moderation was acceptable
and a legitimate freedom for a Christian; he also was perfectly satisfied to
forego his personal freedom and join with the temperance movement for the
benefit of the many that could not enjoy his personal freedom without great
damage to their souls, and even perhaps to their physical well-being.
Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass
judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But
whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from
faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.
The man who
possesses that kind of mature understanding will never have reason to put
himself under condemnation for giving approval to embracing his freedom in this
non-essential issue. He is happy and has no burden of conscience with which to
deal. A person whose faith, however, does not approve that freedom, but is led
to do it any way, brings condemnation to
his conscience, but also, in reality, sins against God, for he has violated,
what he believed to be in the sight of God, a divine command. Again we are led
to see how vital the issue of conscience is.
For the person with freedom and an informed conscience to provoke a
situation where the man of tender conscience violates his understanding of
God’s requirement for him is a tragedy in both Christian fellowship and
personal sanctification.