Chag sameach Rosh Chodesh kol beit Yisra'el and Mishpachah! As Yahweh has not given me a particular prophetic word to share with you today, and also because it has been requested, I thought that I would instead share with you a summary of the long and very uplifting discussion we had in our sabbath meeting yesterday on the 14th chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. We worked from a couple of texts in parallel, the New King James Version (NKJV) and (primarily) N.T.Wright's Kingdom New Testament (KNT), but as this would require a lot of time to set out here, I am going to restrict my commentary to the KNT while you, the reader, work from your own particular favourite translation. A literal or 'formal equivalent' one would be best (e.g. KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, ESV).

I have been pouring over Romans for weeks now, as you will have known from our recent 5-part series, The Kingdom Road, which those of you not familiar with this presentation might like to read through first as it will give you a lot of useful Pauline background. Yesterday I had sat down with our congregation to talk about an entirely different subject when I was expressly commanded by the Ruach (Spirit) to abandon that and talk abour Romans 14, so in that sense this may well turn out to be a prophetic message after all. What follows is more-or-less what I shared, give or take.

Before we look at Romans 14, I would first remind you that this epistle is addressed to a multicultural, cosmopolitan congregation with converts from across the entire Roman Empire, from Parthia to Egypt, from Britannia to Germania, Gaul, and Hispania, and from North Africa and Italia. The believers are from all kinds of pagan backgrounds. Judging by the contents of other chapters, such as chapters 9-11 which is full of Tanakh (Old Testament) quotations, there can be no doubt that a sizeable proportion of the Roman congregation was Judahite (Jewish) in origin, because the appeal made there is clearly to Israelites trying to make sense of this New Covenant perspective. Romans 14, however, is for everyone, not just Judahites, most of whom, coming from a pagan background, would not have had much knowledge of the Torah (Law).

It is very easy to misread Romans 14 and it is typically misread and therefore misunderstood. Peter warns in his own epistle that Paul is very easily misunderstood (2 Pet.3:15-16), as I can confirm having heard Romans 14 used in all sorts of different ways by various denominations over the years.

So what was true then, being as they were close in time to source, will be even more so today, separated as we are by nearly 2,000 years of cultural and linguistic evolution. I realise that may seem difficult for most of you to comprehend, so let me give you an example of what the opening lines of the Lord's Prayer looked like in English a thousand years ago, half the period of time in question:

Fæder ûre þû þe eart on heofonum
(Father of ours, thou who art in heavens),
Sî þîn nama gehâlgod
(Be thy name hallowed)
Tôbecume þin rîce...
(Come thy kingdom)

This chapter in Romans is not, as you might at first perhaps be tempted to think, about food, even though food is the principle illustration and there is no doubt that Paul was giving practical answers about attitudes to diet. A Messianic and an Evangelical Christian are going to read this chapter very differently (as I well know, having been both) and both, typically, will miss the main point. This chapter is about THREE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE BESORAH (GOSPEL) which do not independent of outer things as far as their heart or core is concermed. The outer matters which flow from these three are illustrative.

So let's get underway. This chapter (14) makes a clean break with the previous chapter (13) which is political in content, dealing with relations with the State. And though the original epistle was not, of course, divided into 'chapters', whoever made a chapter division at this point was perfectly correct in doing so.

The first verse sets the tone of the entire chapter:

"Welcome someone who is weak in faith, but not in order to have disputes on difficult points" (Rom.14:1, KNT).

That established, we now get to the practical problem that needs addressing in the Roman congregation:

"One person believes it is all right to eat anything while the weak person eats only vegetables. The one who eats should not despise the one who does not, and the one who does not should not condemn the one who does - because Elohim (God) has welcomed them" (Rom.14:2-3, KNT).

What Paul is speaking about here has nothing to do with kashrut or what food is kosher and what is not. The first instruction is to welcome everyone, no matter how immature in the faith, no matter what their struggles and personal weaknesses, and don't quibble over doctrinal or practical disagreements - not at this stage, at any rate. Disagree, yes, but keep the disagreements on the back-burner for now. Focus on the heart of the Besorah (Gospel). Focus on drawing a circle of ahavah (love) around these new children of Elohim (God).

Remember, this is not Jerusalem, the capital of monotheist Torahland, but polytheist pagan Rome. This is a completely non-Israelite culture and world. There's a totally different atmosphere here, a totally different way of life. There are those who follow the kashrut or food rules in the Roman assembly - the Judahites - and there are those who don't yet (most of the gentile converts). The time is 57 AD. Nine years earlier, in 48 AD, the Council of Jerusalem had already established the minimum Torah that new gentile converts were expected to immediately submit to upon becoming accepted into the Messianic Community (Church). This consisted of four rules:

• 1. Abstain from food sacrificed to idols;
• 2. Abstain from eating blood;
• 3. Abstain from eating the meat of strangled animals; and
• 4. Abstain from sexual immorality (Acts 21:25, NIV).

Three of these are, interestingly, food-related. Why these four in particular? Because these are the areas of Torah the gentiles were stumbling over the most. Might the list have been different had all of this happened 2,000 years later in our day? Very likely, and especially in the area of sexual immorality, but food conditions are rather different. In most Western countries it's easy to get kosher food in the metropolis especially if there is a Jewish community. There are plenty of Jews in cities like New York!

This is probably a large congregation with people coming in with all sorts of eating habits, many - if not most - of whom would not have been eating a fully kosher diet...yet. But Paul is not interested in whether some of the people eat bacon or monkey brains even if he, and his fellow Judahite believers, abstain from such things as a matter of centuries-long Torah-engrained cultural habituation.

These Romans Paul is speaking to are spiritually young believers, some of whom he identifies as vegetarians. The other gentile group were eating "anything" they wanted to, much like today's Chinese, though they were now particular about not eating anything previously dedicated to pagan gods, or animals that had not been slaughtered in the proper Torah-mandated humane way, or which had not had the blood drained from them, as instructed by the Central Jerusalem Branch.

Please notice that Yahweh has "welcomed them" even if they are "weak in faith" and, by implication, scriptural knowledge, since owning Torah scrolls would have been impossible execept for the very rich. The three different parties here - kosher-observant Judahites, vegetarians, and those eating "anything" and everything, are not to "despise" one another but to accept one another based on where they currently are in their new-found spiritual walk. This is the ethic they have been commanded to follow. They're not ready for leadership positions as Deacons or Elders, which requires a Torah-compliant example to be set, but they're definitely family. We need to remember that in our own congregations.

You can picture the Judahites being upset with the 'eat-anything-you-like' crowd (I know a lot of messianics like that) and both of them looking down on vegetarians as "weak in faith" (I know a lot of messianics and evangelicals like that). Having mentioned the food issue, Paul then jumps to a second of three areas of controversy which he uses as another illustustration to arrive at his main point (which we haven't got to yet):

"Who do you think you are to judge someone else's servants? They stand or fall before their own master. And stand they will, because the master can make them stand" (v.4, KNT).

There seems to be a lot of 'judging' going on there, a common human weakness. Most of you are probably totally unfamiliar with the idea of having 'servants'. I grew up at the end of the British colonial era in the Far East where servants were common and in many countries they still are even in the post-colonial era. In imperial Rome these servants would have been slaves with far less rights than the servants we employed when I was a boy. We treated ours like family and I still have warm and affectionate relations with their children and grandchildren. Indeed, we know from the Scriptures that Israelite families were supposed to regard their servants as extensions of their own biological family and to treat them like sons and daughters. We know from Paul's letter to Philemon how believers were supposed to treat their servants in Messiah and to view them as spiritual kin.

So what's going on here? The Roman assembly would have included both masters and their servants and slaves. The masters of the households, just like fathers in homes, would have had their own domestic rules which would have included what they ate in their households. Egyptian and Germanic Romans would, for example, have eaten very differently. It's possible that servants were picking on one another as to what was an acceptable Christian diet. Maybe some had formerly belonged to religions that forbade the eating of meat, as is also true today in various New Age groups.

We know that the best athletes in ancient Rome ate only vegetables to be fit, a reason one of my own family members is a vegetarian, i.e. for health reasons rather than for religious reasons. In fact, we all of us in my own household eat slightly differently.

It looks like some believers, who were masters of slaves, were criticising the slaves of other masters from different religious, ethnic, cultural and therefore dietary backgrounds. Paul reminds them that these servants are under the authority of their masters and no one else, just as wives are under the authority of their husbands, and no one else. The same is true of children who stand under the authority of their fathers and mothers, and no one else. It is never the business of local pastors or elders to interfere with the affairs of families. Remember, Messianic Israel (the Church) is patriarchal. Had the local Roman leadership had any problems with married women, children, or servants, they would have gone directly to the husbands, fathers and masters. That remains true today too. If a man's wife is out of order, than as a pastor it is none of my affair to go and correct a married woman - I must go to the husband so that he can sort any dispute out. That is the Messianic Evangelical way. So Paul is saying: always respect these lines of authority, just as we are to obey our Master, Yah'shua (Jesus), whose instructions are being given through the apostle.

Paul then goes on to give a third example about observances and partly uses a chiastic device which brings the subject back to food again:

"One person reckons one day more important than another. Someone else regards all days as equally important. Each person must make up their own mind. The one who celebrates the day does so in honour of the Master. The one who eats does so in honour of the Master, and gives thanks to Elohim (God): the one who does not eat [meat] abstains in hour of the Master, and give thanks to Elohim (God)" (vv.5-6, KNT).

We're supposed to see in this the parallel between the Heavenly Master here and the human masters of slaves previously mentioned, and by extension between husbands and wives. It's a one-to-one matter of accountability. Every believer is directly accountable to Yah'shua (Jesus) in his conduct, just as wives are accountable to their husbands, children to their parents, and servants to their masters. This order is heavily emphasied by Paul throughout his writings. How alien is that in our modern, liberal, lawless society! Therefore any true congregation is going to stick out like a sore thumb compared to the prevalent society, more so today than ever before. And if it does not, then it is too much like the world and in serious need of reform.

On the surface, it looks as though Paul is saying you can eat pretty much what you like - 'if you want to eat ham sandwiches and lobster, that's just fine', but is he? On the surface it looks as though he might be saying that it doesn't matter what days you observe (though he doesn't actually specify that these are religious days) so if you want to observe a Talmudic Jewish Saturday, a pagan Sunday, or a Creation Calendar Sabbath that varies from month to month, that's just fine, though, of course, that makes no sense for many reasons, not least of which is the obvious implication (using that kind of faulty logic) that the Roman congregation would have been meeting on different days of the week according to their preference or former traditions. And, hey, if it's a free-for-all, maybe some could meet on a Roman Wednesday since that might suit some better?

But it obviously isn't a 'free-for-all', is it? Actually, as I have pointed out over the years in various articles and sermons, the "days" spoken of here have nothing to do with biblically-mandated observances but with personal things. For instance, the Jehovah's Witnesses and many messianics think birthday celebration is a sin whereas most Evangelicals do not. As Messianic Evangelicals we have our own policy as stated in the second (online) edition of the Olive Branch, Chapter 301.

The point is, Paul has something different in view in this chapter which we're getting to. The disputes are incidental to the main message. Remember, these are young converts limited only to four initial Torah rulings. Paul is not interested whether someone is put off by birthday or anniversary celebration or other observances. What, then, is Paul getting act?

"Let everyone be definite in his own convictions" (v.5b, JBP).

We are now approaching the core of this section of Paul's letter. However upsetting this may at first be to Torah-zealous messianics and those in search of uniformity and conformity (I have to admit I am one of those orderly kinds of people by nature), Paul is here saying that the vertical relationship we have with Yahweh through Yah'shua (Jesus) is much more important than any common set of rules in a new congregation when it comes to those new in the faith, and I want to underline that in particular.

The deadly trap that Paul is warning the Romans against is applying the Davar Elohim (Word of God) harshly in order to control behaviour by external imposition. Evangelicals - and in particular, liberals - would go beyond what Paul is saying here by claiming we should not take Bible passages relating to a particular culture or circumstance and making them rules for all time. The goal is unity, yes, and that means a common lifestyle is the goal but it cannot be imposed by force because such quenches the liberty that the Ruach (Spirit) grants us as we work things out between ourselves and Yah'shua (Jesus) according to our conscience. The basis of unity, the gound of our fellowship, is not externally-imposed compliance but voluntary submission, born of spiritual conviction, that is an outgrowth of Yah'shua's (Jesus) ahavah (love) and forgiveness provided for us through the cross. If this means time is needed, then time must be granted. That's how the New Covenant works and that is a fundamental emet (truth). Miss that and you run the risk of slipping back into an Old Covenant mindset. Yes, the ministers (deacons and elders) must be conformed to the Messianic Torah Rule but, once again, by personal conviction and they should not be called until that have come to this conviction and have clean consciences

This is a basic New Covenant rule that Paul lays out: we can have our own convictions but we can't insist that others agree with us on everything. If we do, we will become like the Pharisees of Yah'shua's (Jesus') day, so concerned with their interpretation of the Torah (Law) that they were blind to Messiah (Mt.23:23-24). I have seen messianics lose their Messiah focus because they have put Torah-compliance ahead of personal relationship with Yah'shua (Jesus). Their doctrine can be perfect but their spiritual life may be dead. Better alive in relationship and doctrinally imperfect than the reverse.

Nevertheless, that should not be used as a licence to be lax. The Jerusalem laid down four cardinal rules for new converts from non-Torah backgrounds. We, in our time, have done the same in respect to admitting baptised members to the Master's Supper and to the Deaconate and Eldership. You can read more about that in NCAY's Constitution. There is therefore a very definite balance between conscience and rules, between grace and justice, something we are well known for.

The apostolic focus here is clear:

"None of us lives to ourselves ('as self-contained units' - JBP), none of us dies to ourselves. If we live, we live to the Master, and if we die, we die to the Master ('we come face-to-face with Him' - JBP). So, then, whether we live or whether we die, we belong to the Master. That is why the Messiah died and came back to life, so that He might be Master both of the dead and of the living" (vv.7-9, KNT).

All of these instructions relate to new believers walking in the early steps of the spirit represented by the spring festivals. The most important thing at this stage for fresh, inexperienced converts, is knowing Yah'shua (Jesus) intimately and staying connected to Him. Our consciences as new converts need retraining, and that takes time. And the consciences of new believers coming from a non-Torah background will inevitably be tuned differently. Like children, we have to be trained up - raised - in the emet (truth). Newly born-again folks need the same kind of time, diligent teaching and discipling, just as children do at the hands of careful, devoted parents.

Right now - at this stage - Paul wants these new family members to get to know Him without being harranged by hundreds of mitzvot (commandments). Since these are unfamiliar and will demand huge lifestyle changes in some cases, they need grace in the form of time to adjust. When I became Torah-obedient by declaration in 1999, it took many years for me to 'get it right'. I followed many false Jewish traditions at first which had to subsequently be unlearned. That's how it goes. A trusting relationship between parents and their children is much more important initially than enforcing lots of rules, even if some basic rules do have to be in place. Once the trust is there, the rules will seem less restrictive and more liberating as their purpose is discerned, and the ahavah (love) behind them grasped. It's the same with Yah'shua (Jesus) and children in the emunah (faith).

This being true, Paul asks the Roman believers:

"You, then: why do you condemn your fellow Christian? Or you: why do you despise a fellow Christian? We must all appear before the judgment seat of Elohim (God), as the Bible says:

'As I live, says Yahweh, to me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall give praise to Elohim (God) (Is.45:23)'"

"So, then, we must each give an account of ourselves to Elohim (God)" (Rom.14:10-12, KNT)

One-to-one accountability comes before the One-to-many accountability of congregations and the whole Messianic Community (Church). The most important thing right off the bat is pleasing our Master in Heaven before fellow believers. That's not to say we don't have horizontal accounatbility too (for we do) nor does it mean that there isn't a unifiied doctrine of emet (truth) (for there is) or that we are not to live a common lifestyle (for we must) but what it does mean is that we must have the personal relationship with Messiah first.

That is a significant spiritual difference between the inferior Mosaic Sinai (Old) Covenant and the superior Messianic (New) Covenent. They start on the basis of entirely different premises. In the first Moses was the Intermediary, the divinely-appointed Theocratic Dictator representing Elohim (God) on earth; in the second, there are no intermediaries at the first or primary level - it's between each man or woman and his or her Creator.

Therefore, Paul continues:

"Do not, then, pass judgment ('by turning critical eyes' - JBP) on one another any longer. If you want to exercise your judgment, do so on this question: how to avoid placing obstacles or stumbling blocks in front of a fellow family member" (v.13, KNT)

or as J.B.Phillips nicely puts it:

"If we must be critical, let us be critical of our own conduct and see that we do nothing to make a brother stumble or fall" (v.13, JBP).

I know, this may seem a 'messy' way of going about things and not at all the way the authoritarian nature of the flesh likes to control things, but this is the only way to grow in ahavah (love) and emunah (faith). You can't militarise the Besorah (Gospel) even though too many denominations have done so over the centuries. They may have created order and efficiency but the cost is invariably spiritual death and fossilisation, like the Old Covenant.

Chayim (life) has to be cultivated in an entirely different way. It must be allowed to clumsily and imperfectly grow on its own until it is sure in its own strength and can volunarily yield to the kind of discipline required of adulthood. Youth and zeal may be intoxicating at times but they do tend to lead to trouble without the moderating influence of age and wisdom. That is why every local congregation must have elders, male and female, to temper the young and guide them in the ways of the Kingdom until they are mature enough to enter the Melchizedek Priesthood Order and its strict discipline.

You'll forgive me, I hope, as I struggle to render these concepts into words that make sense to young and old alike. I guarantee I did not understand what I am saying today 30 years ago. Paul perplexed and sometimes enfuriated me - I preferred the Mosaic way because it seemed so much 'cleaner' and more 'efficient'. Such a system was needed then because of the choices the people had made at Sinai to abrogate personal responsibility by shoving everything on the Navi (Prophet) Moses. They thought it would be easier for them doing that but they came to hate it later. They pretty soon wanted to be independent and forgot their fear of Elohim (God) as they grew bolder and more cocky in their fleshiness. Those first Israelites were soon rebelling en masse, weren't they? They didn't want the system they chose after all. They ended up breaking the covenant altogether. The old way of doing things was bound to fail in the end.

Now the crux. Paul comes to say some things which the liberals love and provides them with the excuse their lawless fleshy nature craves - a subjective 'gospel'...but Paul is by no means actually giving them that excuse even though it may at first appear that he is:

"I know, and I am persuaded in the Master Yah'shua (Jesus), that nothing is unclean in itself, except that some things do become unclean for the person who regards them as such. For if your brother or sister is being harmed by what you eat, you are no longer behaving in accordance with love. Don't let your food destroy someone for whom the Messiah died! So don't let something that is good for you make other people blaspheme" (vv.14-16, KNT)

Yah'shua's (Jesus') death is thus not simply a convenient way for Elohim (God) to deal with sins. It reflects the heart and character of the one true Elohim (God), and that reflection must shine through the life of the messianic community (church) invokes Him and one Master (Lord). Otherwise if 'you', with 'knowledge' of this one Elohim (God) and one Master (Lord), go ahead and eat despite the weaker fellow-believer, 'you' may encourage such a person to go back into genuine idolatry. And as Paul was to reiterate to the Corinthian qodeshim (saints, set-apart ones):

"And so, you see, the weak person - a brother or sister for whom the Messiah died! - is then destroyed by your 'knowledge'. That means you'll be sinning against your brother or sister, and attacking their weak conscience; and in doing this you'll be sinning against the Messiah" (1 Cor.8:11-12, KNT).

Isn't that ironic! All fallen religion (i.e. all non-biblical religion) is essentially 'Gnostic' - the claim that salvation is in proportion to the amount of knowledge one has or in the things one does (legalism). In the 19th century, the false Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith, repeated this very heresy in his new religion (falsely called 'Restored Christianity') when he said that "a man is saved no faster that he gets [spiritual] knowledge". And yet here the apostle Paul is saying that bona fide knowledge can actually destroy salvation by underminding the much more important principle of emunah (faith) which is the medium through which we are saved by grace (Eph.2:8).

So what does Paul mean when he says that "nothing is unclean in itself". Is a wild pig, minding its own business in a forest, 'unclean' in itself? No, it only becomes unclean if eaten, otherwise the charge could be levelled against Yahweh that He created something that wasn't "good" since it's "unclean" for merely existing. Thus you are not rendered 'unclean' by touching a pig (as in Islam, a gnostic religion) but only by ingesting it. So there's nothing wrong having a pet pig if you want one. How does one "regard" something as being "unclean"? By correctly identifying it according to Yahweh's Torah as unfit to be eaten (e.g.) or incorrectly regarding it as inedible because it has been dedicated to an idol. Either way, conscience is involved, and we must respect the latter's weak conscience which has been incorrectly programmed. So no licence is being given here to break Yahweh's Kashrut laws even if Yahweh turns a blind eye when we break them in ignorance. What of those Romans who thought it was OK to eat "anything"? That depends how you interpret the word and actually we don't know for sure what Paul meant here. But I guarantee he wasn't giving the green light to eating ham sandwiches and fried rattlesnake.

However, even assuming these new believers were still eating pork, we must remember the bigger picture and the fact that new converts were only bound immediately upon conversion (and presumably baptism) to the Four Rules given by the Jerusalem Council. My belief - and the rule we have in this fellowship - is that we expect baptised members to have advanced sufficiently in their knowledge of the emet (truth) and are being obedient to it before they may partake of the Master's (Lord's) Supper (see the Constitution cited earlier).

So what is the main thing for new believers?

Elohim's (God's) Kingdom, you see, isn't about food and drink, but about JUSTICE ('RIGHTEOUSNESS' - NKJV), SHALOM (PEACE), AND SIMCHA (JOY) IN THE RUACH HA'QOEDSH (HOLY SPIRIT)" (v.17, KNT).

This is the Kingdom within because that is where the Kingdom begins, not with externally imposed rules. Without the New Birth the Torah cannot be written in the heart (Jer.31:31-34) and so obedience cannot spring spontaneously into the believer's life. In other words, Paul rightly sees the Messianic Community (Church) of those who live by the rule of the one Elohim (God) and one Master (Lord) - which is the community of the crucified Messiah, defined by him in His death and resurrection (v.9) - as the community in and through whom Yahweh's sovereign rule is coming to birth. [1] This is not a 'renewed' Old Covenant that has been revealed (as so many messianics mistakenly misunderstand it to be) because it's a Brand New Covenant that works from the inside and outwards. And that is why Paul revised and expanded the Shema to include the resurrected Messiah:

The Old Shema:

"Hear [and obey], O Yisra'el (Israel), Yahweh our Elohim (the Lord our God), Yahweh (the Lord) is echad (one)" (Mark 12:29, NIV).

The New Shema:

"There is one Elohim (God), the Father,
From whom are all things, and we live to Him and for Him;
And one Master (Lord), Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ),
Through whom are all things, and we live through Him"
(1 Cor.8:6, KNT).

What is it that defines the New Life in Messiah? What lies at the core 'inside'?

"Justice ('Righteousness' - NRSV, 'Goodness' - NLT), Shalom (Peace) and Simcha (Joy) in the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit)" (Rom.14:17b, KNT).

Anything that causes a man to lose that is blasphemy because it comes of chayim (life) in the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit) even if the conscience is defiled and the new believer still believes in a number of wrong things, like being sensitive to meat previously used in idol worship. Everything else (like pork) is secondary but not unimportant.

This is the difference between the spirit of the New and the spirit of the Old Covenant because it is the difference between a living entity and a formal covenant agreement imposed externally. And the best illustration of this is the old imposed rule of the involuntary circumcision of 8 day-old males and the freewill baptism of adult males and females.

A good parent loves their children first so they know they will not be rejected even when they are naughty and break the rules. A loving parent does not withdraw love and acceptance until a child is obedient even if such a parent will - and must - discipline a disobedient child. It is no different in the New Covenant Shema.

I believe this is one of the most common errors not only made by many messianics (for whom Torah is often more important than grace or undeserved loving-kindness) but also for many evangelics (like radical Calvinists) who, though they acknowledge the primacy of grace over obedience, can often abuse the word 'grace' to make it mean something something forced against human will ('irresistable grace', so-called), and who use Elohim's (God's) 'Sovereignty' as a cudgel much as some messianics use the Torah and some Christians use the KJV Bible. I'm sure you can think of plenty of other abuses.

Everything in the Kingdom of our Messiah begins and ends with Justice/Righteousness/Goodness, Shalom/Peace and Simcha/Joy. Everything else is 'filling'. Paul's whole thrust in both the 14th chapter or Romans, and indeed all his writings, is that these things matter the most. And in the same way that Yah'shua (Jesus) taught that we should love Yahweh in such a way that our love for everyone else will seem like hate (Lk.14:26; cp. Mal.1:3; Rom.9:13), so Paul in underlining the inner Core of the Besorah (Gospel) can make it seem as though rules about food, observances, and so on, are completely unimportant and a matter of personal preferance. They're important but only after the New Birth. They aren't what save us anyway. Being saved is by grace through trusting which generates the 'Three Biggies'. Am I making sense?

Paul continues:

"Anyone who serves the Messiah like this pleases Elohim (God) and deserves respect from other people. So, then, let's find and follow the Derech Shalom - the Way of Peace - and discover how to build each other up" (vv.18-19, KNT).

"Let us concentrate on the things which make for harmony, and on the growth of another's character" (v.19, JBP).

Anything else will pull people down, create a bad atmosphere, stifle spiritual growth, displease Yahweh, and earn us contempt. Why? Because we will be dragging these new believers into slavery all over again, relying on external imposition instead of relying on the power and chayim (life) released by the Cross. So:

"Don't pull down Elohim's (God's) work on account of food. Everything is pure, but it becomes evil for anyone who causes offense when they eat. It is good not to eat meat, or drink wine, or anything else which makes your fellow Christian stumble" (vv.20-21, KNT).

Here's yet another area of common controversy - wine, the use of alcoholic beverages. What is Yahweh's will in this matter? In the Old Covenant, alcohol was permitted in moderation. Only cohenim (priests) serving in the temple were forbidden it when on duty, so that they would be spiritually and physically alert. (If they were caught sleeping, as they might on occasion have been had they been inebriated), they had their clothes stripped off them and burned, forcing them to walk home naked in shame.

The Rechabites, a clan of Israelites who totally abstained from alcohol, were hugely blessed by Yahweh and their path was clearly the better one. What about the New Covenant? Most Christians and Messianics continue in the way of the Old Covenant, teaching alcohol consumption in moderation. We, as Messianic Evangelicals, follow after the Rechabites, because we wish to please Yahweh and be better attuned to the Ruach (Spirit). Unlike the Old Covenant, we are now all called to be a "Royal [Melchizedek] Priesthood" (1 Pet.2:9), it isn't just the Levitical clan who provide the cohenim (priests).

We are on temple duty 24/7. How so? Because our physical bodies are now the temple (1 Cor.3:16.19) - at elast we are if we are serious about being Melchizedek Cohenim (Priests). So does that mean all new believers should immediately cease drinking alcohol? Ideally, yes, but as in food matters, their consciences are likely defiled and we are not to force new believers to quit alcohol overnight if they choose not to. They must sense the Ruach (Spirit) telling them to obey. Mind you, we will not serve the Master's (Lord's) Supper to them, or ordain any to the Deaconate or Eldership, unless they have become properly teetotal.

But doesn't the way Paul writes suggest it was the other way round? Weren't those refusing alcohol 'weak'? Wasn't he those with alcohol scruples together with the vegetarians? Apparently, yes. Were the Rechabites 'weak', then? Not according to Yahweh:

"And Jeremiah said to the house of the Rechabites, 'Thus says Yahweh of hosts, the Elohim (God) of Israel: 'Because you have obeyed the mitzvah (commandment) of Jonadab your father, and kept all his precepts and done according to all that he commanded you, therefore thus says Yahweh of hosts, the Elohim (God) of Israel: 'Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not lack a man to stand before Me forever'" (Jer.35:18-19, NKJV).

This takes us back to the beginning of Romans 14 and to a special exception rule which is carefully inserted by the Ruach (Spirit) in the middle of this long discourse about food:

"Who do you think you are to judge someone else's servants? They stand or fall before their own master. And stand they will, because the master can make them stand" (v.4, KNT).

This was a House of Rechab matter. In my household, there is no alcohol, because Yahweh led me to impose this rule. I made a free-will zero-alcohol covenant when I was very young. Those family members of mine who abstain from alcohol "stand" in right relation to Yahweh because of me in this matter - they are in 'right standing'. How? Because as the master of the house I "can make them stand", as Paul said - I put them in 'right standing' before Yahweh because of the toqef or authority Yahweh has given me as patriarch in my family. When my children leave home, it will be up to them to choose the rule they follow.

Likewise all Messianic Evangelicals follow in the steps of Rechab following the 'temple tavnith', following in, and under, the founder of this ministry and its pastors. Do we condemn other believers who drink alcohol? No. It is none of our affair even though we will instruct them in the higher ways of the Melchizedek Priesthood so that they are informed for we do not believe the Remnant will want to drink alcohol because they seek purity. Who needs stimulants when they have Yah'shua (Jesus) and His chayim (life) manifesting as justice/righteousness, peace and joy within?

One thing I hope you are beginning to appreciate here is the tremendous importance of free agency. We do not force new converts to NCAY to quit alcohol. We will fellowship with them if they drink in moderation, and treat them as family, just as I would a son who, after leaving home, decided to drink alcohol in moderation. But, based on our covenants, we would not be able to advance them into the alcohol-free Melchizedek Priesthood. But then we aren't forcing them into that either - they must be called by the Ruach (Spirit) within and when they are called, they will quit drinking. Then they will enter into priestly covenants...of their own free will.

So who is 'strong' and who is 'weak' in the matter of alcohol and food? It really doesn't matter, even though Paul gives his opinion (remembering the it was water was pretty unsafe to drink water in those days and on one occasion Paul counselled the young evangelist Timothy to take some wine medicinally for his bad stomach (1 Tim.5:23). Actually, many Messianic Evangelicals regard vegetarianism as a superior way of life healthwise and there is much to be said for that. The important thing is not to badger a new believer to forsake his concience until he is satisfied which way to go, for to deny conscience is sin. Equally, we must educate the conscience with the written Davar (Word) so that the latter leavens and transforms the former.

Paul concludes the chapter with this very point:

"Hold firmly to the emunah (faith) which you have as a matter between yourself and Elohim (God). When you've thought something through, and can go ahead without passing judgment on yourself, Elohim's (God's) blessing on you! But anyone who doubts is condemned even in the act of eating, because it doesn't spring from emunah (faith). Whatever is not of emunah (faith) is sin" (Rom.14:22-23, KNT).

"The emunah (faith) that you have, have as your own conviction before Elohim (God)" (Rom.14:22a, NRSV).

Point made, I think. What a statement for Christian Libertarianism! That's why the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) talk about Christian "liberty" so much - not the liberty to break the mitzvot (commandments) but the liberty to act with a pure conscience [2].

Chapter 15 continues on the same vein but we don't have time to go into that today, unfortunately. It explains how we actually come to unity or echadness (oneness) and it is not by externally imposed rules - it must spring up from within, a genuine expression of the relationship between the individual believer and his Messiah. Only in this way go we "glorify the Elohim (God) and Father of our Master Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ)" (Rom.15:6, KNT).

People come to this unity in all sorts of different ways. Some, by nature, are more independent-minded than others. Some are like the Centurion who had such tremendous emunah (faith) (Mt.8:5-13) and others Paul likened to athletes (2 Tim.2:5). He uses all sorts of people as illustrations. Our job is simply to welcome everyone "as the Messiah has welcomed [us]" (Rom.15:7, KNT; cp. 14:1). We are not here to please ourselves but to serve others. It takes all sorts to build the Kingdom which is why there are so many different kinds of gifts.

I have gone into somewhat more detail than we covered in our assembly meeting in order to answer the types of questions we usually get asked about this topic. I hope this has been a blessing to you. May the Elohim (God) of this spiritual liberty through the cross of Messiah grow more and more within you so that your simcha (joy) might be full, is my prayer in Yah'shua's (Jesus') Name. Amen.

Endnotes