1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting after you have posted 20 posts and have received 5 likes.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

  2. Faith Options in Your User Profile
    Please click on the following regarding this important notice in Announcements:

    Faith Options in Your User Profile.

Romans 14

Discussion in 'Messianic Judaism' started by Steve Petersen, Dec 24, 2010.

  1. Steve Petersen

    Steve Petersen Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    29
    Politics:
    US-Libertarian
    Faith:
    Non-Denominational
    Romans 14 is being discussed in another forum and I wanted to see if this is a plausible explanation of the real controversy.

    The question of 'days' arises early in the chapter

    Lay this alongside the Mishnah, Avodah Zarah:

    If the congregations in Rome were mixed Jew/Gentile and believer/unbeliever and that some form of these restrictions were in place for Jews, isn't reasonable to assume that Paul was trying to mitigate the fences erected between Jews and Gentiles by rabbinic decree and not addressing the Torah at all?
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2010
  2. GuardianShua

    GuardianShua New Member

    Messages:
    8,129
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Non-Trinitarian-Messianic
    It is difficult to say Steve. Paul was addressing the Christian community. It is a known fact that the Rabbi's added many laws to what was already written. Perhaps it has to do with Rabbinical additions.
     
  3. Lulav

    Lulav Messianic Maven Supporter

    Messages:
    14,196
    Likes Received:
    116
    Gender:
    Female
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Faith:
    Messianic
    I remember reading somewhere that Paul was not even acquainted with this congregation in Rome. He did not start it but was trying to add it to his group.

    By verse 1:13 it seems he is only addressing Gentiles.
     
  4. yedida

    yedida Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

    Messages:
    9,779
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    In Relationship
    Faith:
    Non-Trinitarian-Messianic
    I've just vilolated my own (normal) rules for answering a post before reading through - but in the last 6 years of study this is what I have presumed was meant the majority of the time the "law" was mentioned, whether it be by Yeshua or Paul or any of the others. (It's what most of the teachers I've listened to lean toward, anyway.)
    And it was for this reason (such passages as you shared) that gave rise to the Jews thinking that the Gentiles had to undergo "ritual conversion" to Judaism to "be saved" by faith in Yeshua who was the Jewish Messiah. And that view Paul was trying to prove otherwise. (This also from most of the teachers I've listened to.)
    I have a hard time understanding how anyone can read of Hashem and/or Yeshua and still have hatred in their hearts for other human beings. The Bible tells us in no uncertain terms that that man (Jew or Christian or anything else) does NOT have God within them.
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2010
  5. Tishri1

    Tishri1 CF Owner's Advisory Team Staff Member Site Advisors Supporter

    Messages:
    41,651
    Likes Received:
    175
    Gender:
    Female
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Messianic
    are we allowed to post anything we see in chapter 14?

    If so then this is my favorite part
     
  6. yedida

    yedida Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

    Messages:
    9,779
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    In Relationship
    Faith:
    Non-Trinitarian-Messianic
    I agree. We need to be sensitive to others and where they are at in their journey.
    When I read about foods in the Bible from Sinai to Rev. I always figure they are speaking of the Bible list that we have to know what is clean and unclean - i.e., Paul wouldn't be calling bacon or catfish "food", unclean animals never made the ascension to equality with clean animals. So when he said "all" I'm thinking in terms of maybe (clean) meats that may have been offered to idols before getting to market, the uncertainty of that possiblity - that would hold no power over Hashem's blessings, but it could cause some people some anxiety.
    Or, maybe, like for me I won't cook meats and dairy together, but I will put cheese on a cooked hamburger or add some meat to a cooked pizza. A lot of my congregation won't eat dairy and meats in the same meal. I don't think it would cause them to stumble at all but to keep from offending them at table I've chowed down on many naked hamburgers!
     
  7. visionary

    visionary Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I. Supporter

    Messages:
    44,680
    Likes Received:
    230
    Gender:
    Female
    Faith:
    Messianic
    I am also of the opinion that Paul is speaking and writting letters to the congregation leaders who during his time would have been Jewish brethren believers who would be teaching the gentiles coming into the congregations ...do not talmudize them..
     
  8. MikhaelDavid

    MikhaelDavid Guest

    Here is my brief take on Romans 14...

    This is talking about things indifferent, those things that can not be determined by the word of God, such as "what days of the week to fast" or "what color should I wear today". God tells us that fasting is good but outside of the required "Day of Atonement" He has not given us what days we are to fast.. I believe this is where the food and drink comes in, in the passage... The man who keeps the day and does not eat, keeps it to the Lord, and the man who does not keep the day and does eat, keeps it to the Lord...

    Remember, the Pharisee's were saying, "I fast three days a week" and some were saying I am better because "I fast Monday, Wednesday and and Sunday" and others were saying I am better because "I fast Tuesday and Wednesday and Friday" No one can determine from God's word what is the better day to fast on..

    What about the weaker brother? Remember first that we are taught that there is a difference between a weaker brother and a Pharisee. A weaker brother is new to the faith and is not quite sure what is allowed and what is not allowed.. A Pharisee is one who has added to God's law and is not new in the Faith.. A Pharisee is one who will not be shown that he is wrong.. He commands people to abstain from things that God has not required.. He is not stumbled but inflamed in emotion, passion and anger..

    Paul gives us different ways to handles the two.. With a weaker brother, I, out of love, should desist my action or allowance of a certain thing in front of that brother until he is shown biblically that it is allowed or taught from the elders that the thing is permitted. A weaker brother is to be taught and not coddled as a weaker brother down through his life.

    On the other hand, Paul tells us how to handle a Pharisee.. Not like a weaker brother, we are to stand up to that Pharisee and if he does not desist then we have done all we can and walk away but we are not required to desist our actions or allowance in front of that person.


    So, what about other things, like drinking wine? Well the bible as already determined by God that drinking wine is ok, in moderation. And sometimes required, The Lord Supper and Passover. So outside of those two ordinances I would abstain in front of the weaker brother until he is shown or taught. The Pharisee on the other hand is quite a different approach.

    One more note, Whatever God has required in His law can not be put under the banner of "Weaker Brother". So if God said "Thou shalt Not" or "Thou shalt DO" then we are required to submit whether that be a keeping of a Sabbath day, the Lord Supper with wine, or abstaining from immoral conduct.
     
    visionary likes this.
  9. Tishri1

    Tishri1 CF Owner's Advisory Team Staff Member Site Advisors Supporter

    Messages:
    41,651
    Likes Received:
    175
    Gender:
    Female
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Messianic
    I was thinking more about the deaper meaning but yes we know that not everything out there is considered food:thumbsup:

    deaper meaning
    word:thumbsup:
     
  10. Steve Petersen

    Steve Petersen Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    11,046
    Likes Received:
    29
    Politics:
    US-Libertarian
    Faith:
    Non-Denominational
    Mark Nanos believes that the 'weaker brother' are Jews who have not yet come to faith in Jesus. Thus, he believes, as I do, that Paul was addressing mixed congregations, not only of Jews and Gentiles, but believers and unbelievers.
     
  11. Lulav

    Lulav Messianic Maven Supporter

    Messages:
    14,196
    Likes Received:
    116
    Gender:
    Female
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Faith:
    Messianic
    That goes against what Paul himself says in Romans 1:13.

    If you compare this to other of his writings you will see that the 'weak' ones he is talking about are the believing Jews, the first ones, the ones of the Jerusalem church. Read especially about those he calls 'weak' regarding eating only vegetables, James the Just, the Righteous, the Tzadek, the brother of Yeshua was said to have been a vegetarian.

    As can be seen here he is speaking to believers only (brothers and sisters)

    He also says that he wants to reap some harvest (for himself) from amoung them like he has from 'the rest of the Gentiles'.

    This wording shows he is speaking to Gentile believers only.


     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2010
  12. Shimshon

    Shimshon Jewish Believer קדוש לישוע

    Messages:
    3,314
    Likes Received:
    21
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Messianic
    Only if you take this one verse out of context.

    In context I believe Steve and Mark are correct. Otherwise, how would you explain Rom 2:17-29? Pauls audience is definitely mixed. Rom 1-2:16 are one audience, while Rom 2:17-29 are another.

    Or would Paul be saying things like this to Gentiles?


    Verse 27 is contrasting those who are not circumcized with those who are. He is speaking and refering to both Jew and Gentiles.

    I belive your desire to discredit Paul is blinding your reasoning.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2010
  13. Shimshon

    Shimshon Jewish Believer קדוש לישוע

    Messages:
    3,314
    Likes Received:
    21
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Messianic
    This is why I do not agree with the Stern Manifesto. This is a classic case where he took the plain meaning and skewed it. If you read this statement in it's un-sternian context you find Paul was talking bout reaping harvests among the Romans as he has among the rest of the NATIONS.

    Nations where Jews had made a home in exile and not returned. Pauls harvest were Jews and Gentiles throughout the Nations. As opposed to Israel.

    Remember how Yeshua mentioned the 'lost sheep'. Paul was gathering them at the command of the Lord. Both Jews and those who lived where they were scattered. (Jew and Gentiles throughout that nations (known world).
     
  14. Lulav

    Lulav Messianic Maven Supporter

    Messages:
    14,196
    Likes Received:
    116
    Gender:
    Female
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Faith:
    Messianic
    You can flame my beliefs all you want, it is a matter of believing what the church has taught about these letters or to make your own analysis of them with true unbiased reason.

    this follows what I posted and it is speaking of the Gentiles, no Jews here. Paul had never met these people, one should ask why he presumed to take it upon himself to write them such a letter? Even an cursory look into this letters history will show you that. Why are you being so antagonistic to me Shimshon, what have I done to deserve this?

    I think you should be more concerned if I were to try and discredit Yeshua, he is much much more important to learn from than Paul.

    I think if you read the letter as a whole you will come away scratching your head, as you have shown he changes course mid-way. The only other conclusion is that there were two letters combined. But I don't think that is what happened, even though there is some discussion as to the last two chapters belonging possibly to the letter to the Ephesians.
     
  15. Lulav

    Lulav Messianic Maven Supporter

    Messages:
    14,196
    Likes Received:
    116
    Gender:
    Female
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Faith:
    Messianic
    There is much evidence if one can look at it unbiasedly that shows that Paul was not gathering any Jews to his teachings.
     
  16. Shimshon

    Shimshon Jewish Believer קדוש לישוע

    Messages:
    3,314
    Likes Received:
    21
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Messianic
    I disagree
     
Loading...