Romans 14

Romans 14:1-8
1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

So I'm back to the debate between grace and legalism (or if you like, between liberalism and righteous living.) Here, Paul uses the example of eating meat to indicate that some things of faith will be disputable. Whether or not you believe in eating meat, each should be fully convinced and live accordingly. Each should be doing this out of a heart for God, honestly seeking Him out. Neither should look down upon the other because they disagree. In the end, both are serving God and in that there should be unity.

Now, back out to a bigger picture. Take any example you want: Remarriage, drinking, R-rated movies, working on Sunday, etc. Pick any of these and you'll have two sides: those who see a line which God has drawn and which defines the righteous life we are called to live, and those who see us as living under grace and therefore it's relationship and not rules we need to worry about. Righteousness vs Grace.

Sure, these things are disputable matters. You can think drinking is unrighteous and I would disagree. But we both follow Jesus and honestly seek Him out, so therefore we can have unity even in our disagreement. The hard part is that each side sees the other as being week in the faith and therefore needing to deal with sin. The one arguing for righteousness sees sin and a need for discipleship in the other's life. The one arguing for grace sees lack of faith and dependence on man-made rules in the first. Both are honestly seeking out the the other's best good and wanting them to live more fulling in Jesus, they just disagree on how.

I think there's a couple good points to make here. First, the Truth must lie in, not so much a balance between the two, but in upholding both completely. Some things are issues of righteous living and must be upheld, others are our own rules and freedom must abound. Jesus lived this way. He lived a righteous life with very high standards and yet dismissed human interpretations of God's law, such as working on the Sabbath.

The second comes from v5 "Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." These matters may be disputable and there will always be disagreements, yet we are to think, pray and decide what we believe. We are to seek God's heart in these things for ourselves and not just dismiss them. If you are fully convinced in either Righteousness or Grace, that can be used to teach and correct others. But being luke-warm, simply disregarding it doesn't do anyone any good. That won't build anyone up.

Can we have these disagreements and not tear each other down for them? I hope so, it's the only way we can have unity. We also need to be sure not to let these issues/arguments effect our sharing with non-Christians. The core issues, the sinfulness of man, the Lordship of Jesus, the need for salvation, these should not be muddied by internal arguments.