Quote:
And the actual day of sabbath or which meat to eat, per Romans 14
This response is a bit lengthy, but should address your misunderstanding of Romans 14.
Chapter 14 of Romans seems to create two objections to Torah-Keeping.
The first is abolishing what God has declared as food in Leviticus 11, when in Romans 14:3 Paul writes:"The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him."The second seems to abolish God's Sabbath day in Romans 14:5."One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind."At the time Romans was written, those in Rome who followed Yahweh were a considerably smaller group than the gentile pagan city at large.
Most Believers don't know this, but the pagan religion of the early Roman period required them to be vegetarians. This is stated right there in chapter 14 as one of the first points, but it's often overlooked. In the very preceding verse of Romans 14:2, Paul writes:
"One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak
eats vegetables only."
You probably knew Romans were vegetarians without realizing you knew it. What is the quintessential picture of Roman gluttony? You are probably picturing a rich person in a palace lying on a couch eating what? Grapes. Grapes, because they were vegetarians.
https://owlcation.com/humanities/Vegetarianism-in-Ancient-Greek-and-Romehttp://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2010/08/the-hidden-history-of-greco-roman-vegetarianism/https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141020090006.htmBecause the vast majority of Torah food restrictions were against eating certain types of animal products, we see
the weak ones in Romans 14:2 are people who had a dietary law more stringent than what God required in His Torah. That doesn't strike us as weak, but more stringent. So in what sense does keeping a diet more stringent than Torah mean a person is weak?
Roman vegetarianism was less strict the further one moves away from Rome and it became less strict over the history of the Roman Empire. However, it was most strict within the city of Rome itself and during the early Roman period, both of which apply to the Book of Romans. Romans was written in the first century, which was the early part of the Roman Empire that lasted by most accounts into the fifth or sixth century AD. The book of Romans was also written to a congregation within the city of Rome itself - the absolute heart of this pagan practice. So, the Book of Romans was written to a congregation within the city of Rome itself during the early Roman period, which at that time held a form of strict vegetarianism for pagan religious reasons.
The exact belief of Roman religious vegetarianism isn't completely known. They may have feared gods who possessed the animals. For example, we see way back in Leviticus 17:7 that pagans believed in a goat demon. They may have held to beliefs of reincarnation as animals, which created an aversion to eating them. It's possible they may have considered eating animal flesh as merging their souls with that of animals, which seemed degrading. It could have been other reasons. We're not fully sure of the reason, but we do know it was for religious reasons.
It's not known why the new Believers hung on to these pagan restrictions if they had converted to this new Jewish- based religion. It's possible a lifetime of vegetarianism made their systems intolerant to meats. Perhaps they just didn't like the taste of it. However, continuing this practice might have looked suspiciously like they had not truly converted and were still holding on to their old pagan religious beliefs. This is likely the problem Paul was trying to address. Some of them must have converted to eating meats allowed in Leviticus chapter 11 and some probably refused. But the fact they were more stringent than what the Torah required meant they were actually not violating the Torah. It is to these people Paul is addressing his comments.
To them, even eating Torah-allowed meats was considered undesirable.We don't have this sort of suspicion for vegetarian Believers today, because the vast majority are doing so for health reasons and have no history of being vegetarian for pagan religious reasons. A more similar issue today might be that some people choose not to drink alcohol because they think it is a moral issue. Drinking in moderation is not a moral issue, because the Torah doesn't prohibit it. In fact drinking strong drink before YHWH is specifically condoned during the feasts in Deuteronomy 14:26.
"You may spend the money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of (YHWH) the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household."
There are times when drinking is to be avoided, such as when under a vow (Luke 1:15). Drinking to drunkenness is discouraged (Ephesians 5:8). Paul encouraged Timothy to drink wine for medicinal reasons in 1 Timothy 5:23. There are people who simply choose not to drink anything at all. That's okay, because the Torah allows someone to choose not to drink. There is no Law against not drinking. Paul says we should not condemn them for this. But they also should not condemn those who choose to drink within the limits prescribed in the Torah.
This discussion about drinking is similar to the discussion happening in Romans 14 about vegetarianism.
The "all things eaten" in Romans 14, implies all things allowed by Torah, as opposed to vegetarianism, because Paul uses the word Broma in Romans 14 several times which we know from Yeshua's "thus He declared all foods clean" is Torah prescribed food. Broma (Strong's G1033) brma, bro'-mah; from the base of
G977; food (literally or figuratively),
especially (ceremonially) articles allowed or forbidden by the Jewish law:meat, victuals.
Of course, Jewish Law was primarily Leviticus 11.
This is what Paul says about the matter in Romans 14:3.
"The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him."
Torah restrictions are regarding meat products and not vegetables. So, in Romans 14, we see Paul contrasting the eating of Torah allowed meats against those who are strict vegetarians, but none of this discussion is about eating meats that are not allowed in the Torah. That is a very plausible interpretation. And it's an interpretation that prevents Paul from being a lunatic by blatantly contradicting himself.
In addition to being vegetarians,
the early Roman calendar was full of pagan holidays. These were much more numerous and invasive in their lives than anything we experience today in our society.
http://www.pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/mythology.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_festivalsFor example, in the month of December alone, we have the following Roman festival dates by one account:
Dec 1: (Kalends) ceremonies at temples for Neptune and for Pietas
Dec 3: Bona Dea rites for women only
Dec 5: (Nones) a country festival for Faunus held by the pagi
Dec 8: festival for Tiberinus Pater and Gaia
Dec 11: Agonalia for Indiges; also the Septimontium
Dec 12: ceremonies at the Temple of Consus on the Aventine
Dec 13: (Ides) dies natalis of the Temple of Tellus, and associated lectisternium for Ceres
Dec 15: Consualia or Feriae for Consus, the second of the year
Dec 1723: Saturnalia in honour of Saturn, with the public ritual on the 17th
Dec 18 Eponalia in honour of Epona
Dec 19: Opalia in honour of Ops
Dec 21: Divalia in honour of Angerona; Hercules and Ceres also received a sacrifice
Dec 22: anniversary of the Temple of the Lares Permarini in the Porticus Minucia
Dec 23: Larentalia; commemorations for the temples of Diana and Juno Regina in the Circus Flaminius, and for the Tempestates; Sigillaria, the last day of the Saturnalia, devoted to gift-giving
Dec 25: Dies Natalis Solis Invicti ("
Birthday of the Unconquered Sun"); Brumalia (both Imperial)
We see about half of all days in December are dedicated to some pagan god, theme, or ritual. This is not an anomaly that occurs only in December. All the months of the Roman Julian calendar are full of similar occurrences. Many of these days constituted "dies fasti", meaning "allowed days." That is, public business was suspended on many of these days. On certain days some type of business was either encouraged or prohibited. Some days were dedicated to legal business. Certain days were for going to the market. Certain days were for banking. Certain days required religious performance.
But all these requirements and restrictions were driven by what the gods either favored or prohibited. These requirements came to completely control the daily lives of Romans. So strong was this belief, that even today, most of the months on our English calendar are named after pagan gods. This even extends to the names we assign to our days of the week. The sun god was usually the premier pagan god, so he was given the honor of the first day of the week, which we now call "Sun-day". The second largest heavenly body was given the second day, as "Moon-day", which is now our Monday. English includes Norse influences, so we have a day dedicated as Thor's-Day, which has become known as Thursday, in English. And the God of Saturn was used to replace YHWH's Sabbath in English as the 7th day of the week we now know as Saturday. Interestingly in some languages, such as Spanish, the 7th day of the week is still called "Sabado," and you don't need to be a linguistic expert to see how that is still connected to the Sabbath.
So, you now you can imagine how much stronger the connection to days of the month and days of the week were to this Roman society who instituted all this. If you wanted to press a legal matter, but tried to do it on the wrong day, you would likely be thwarted, because everyone who was following these days would refuse to conduct legal matters on prohibited days. Similarly, if you went to the market, people might refuse to sell you certain items on the wrong day for fear of offending their gods.
You can see how this would affect the new Roman Believers in Yeshua.
If they continued to observe these days, did that mean they were still worshipping their old pagan gods? If this bothered their conscience so they tried to work around them, the basic life of daily business would be very difficult. What is a Believer to do?This is exactly the question Paul is answering in Romans 14:5. That is, just because one of your fellow Believers is doing business on one of these days sanctioned by the Roman gods that doesn't mean they are worshiping idols. But it someone managed to work around them, then good for them. Perhaps, for them, the symbolism of following these pagan sanctioned days was just too much. But the one who avoids these days should not criticize the one who follows these days. The opposite is also true. This is what Paul means in Romans 14:5.
"One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind."
You will notice none of this has anything to do specifically with the Sabbath day. In fact, the word "Sabbath" is not used anywhere in this discussion, or in the entire letter to the Romans, for that matter. That's because Paul is not addressing the Sabbath in chapter 14, but the Roman "dies fasti." Paul adds some commentary which can be interpreted consistent with this and then ends this discussion with Romans 14:20-23.
"Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. 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. The faith which you have, have as your own conviction before God. 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."
We see Paul is telling us not to eat meat or drink wine if it causes our brother to stumble. Both of these are allowed in the Torah. But Paul is telling us to even avoid doing these things allowed in the Torah if it causes our brother to stumble. Paul is telling us to be more strict than the Torah about what we eat and drink, not less strict. By being more strict than what the Torah requires, Paul is not giving us license to violate the Torah. Quite the opposite. By this, Paul can't mean all things being clean to include things that are declared unclean in the Torah. He closes by encouraging these Roman vegetarians to only eat Torah allowed meats if they have faith to do so. But vegetarians are allowed to remain vegetarians, because, outside of leaven during Passover, there are no restrictions in the Torah against vegetarianism.
For more information if you care:
https://www.amazon.com/These-Things-Should-Have-Done/dp/1457558998 Shalom.
