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?
The question of 'days' arises early in the chapter
Romans 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Lay this alongside the Mishnah, Avodah Zarah:
MISHNA I.: Three days before the festivals 1 of the heathens it is forbidden to have any business with them. One must not lend them anything (which can be useful to them) nor borrow such from them. And the same is the case with cash money, even to pay or to receive payment is forbidden. R. Jehuda, however, maintains: To receive payment is allowed, because it is a displeasure to the payers. And he was answered: Although it is now a displeasure, it pleases them, in the future.
MISHNA. II.: R. Ismael said: Three days before and three days after it is prohibited. The sages, however, say: Before the festivals, but not after them.
MISHNA III.: The following are the festivals of the heathens: Kalends, Saturnalia, kratsin. The accession of their kings upon the throne, their birthday, and the day of their death. So R. Mair. The sages, however, maintain that only such a death on which burning (dresses) is used, is conjoined with worshipping the idols. But in such on which it is not used, there is no .idolatry. All, however, agree concerning the following days: That of shaving his beard and hair, that in which he lauds, that on which he was released from prison, and that on which is celebrated a marriage of his son that the prohibition concerns only one day, and the only one man engaged in this affair.
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: