5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.
In the first four verses, Paul addressed the subject of judging one another. In verses five through eight, he turned to how those on each side of the controversy should look at themselves. We are people under the sovereign control of the Lord.
Verse five introduces an additional divisive area. Some people believed that certain days were special in God’s eyes, but others believed that no day is special.
5 One person [the weak] esteems one day above another;
Weaker Christians consider some days to be more sacred than others. This was the second area of dispute among Christians in Rome.
another [the strong] esteems every day alike.
Stronger Christians deem each day alike. All days belong to God. Each day offers opportunities to serve Him.
Co 2:16, So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,
Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.
Whether or not one holds a given day as more sacred than another is not the issue. The crucial matter is that each believer must be convinced in his own mind. The essential principle is that a person should not violate his own conscience.
There is a clear biblical principle that abstaining from eating meat and observing certain days as holy is wrong (Ro 14:14, 22-23). Having established that legalism is wrong, we need also to take into account that a person might not be mature enough to come to grips with the principle of grace. A person with a scrupulous conscience is another matter. The exceptional issue is that a weak or immature believer must come to his own convictions about grace and the liberty it affords him.
The phrase “fully convinced in his own mind” indicates our liberty in Christ to make a decision about what we believe. Liberty, therefore, is central to making a decision on disputed things. Legalism is the opposite of liberty. Paul made no prescription about which day was for worship. This kind of choice cannot be imposed on someone who has not come to a conclusion about it. People must make their decision from the liberty of examining the doctrine for themselves.
PRINCIPLE:
God expects Christians to seriously examine what they believe.
APPLICATION:
A settled conviction about what one believes is high priority in God’s system of values. Our convictions are to be our own. Our decisions should not be made on how someone else believes or acts.
It is not healthy to accept in an unqualified manner what someone else believes, because then it will not become a matter of personal conviction. If we practice what we do not believe, we will undermine our conscience. It is important to come to an honest decision about what we believe.
Each believer is responsible for his view on the subject of a special day. An onus lies on him to honestly look at Scripture on this point. We cannot deny this responsibility by saying, “That has always been my view,” or, “I just grew up with that belief.”
Christians can disagree with each other on certain issues yet can at the same time be convinced of their own position. On certain issues it is not necessary to impose our conclusions on others, because an immature believer may need time to grow in grace.
I would like to have you comment on my treatment of this verse:
Paul wrote, “One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike” (Romans 14:5). Paul then states that both views are acceptable; “Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind”. Verse 6 explains why it is acceptable for each person to decide for himself, namely that, whatever people do, whether they eat meat of not, and whether they “observes the day” or not, they do it “for the Lord”.
Paul seems to say that it is equally acceptable to regard “one day above another” and to regard “every day alike”, but since observing special days is optional, we can conclude that it is the “weak” brother that “regards one day above another”.
Many Bible students believe that Paul here includes the weekly Sabbath. This would mean that weekly Sabbath observance is optional. However, for the following reasons it is proposed here that 14:5 does not apply to the weekly Sabbath:
1. Romans chapter 14 seems devoid of Jewish elements. Nothing is mentioned that is specifically Jewish.
2. Actually, the specific main issue in the chapter–the question of eating meat—is not founded on the Law of Moses. The Old Testament allows the eating of meat. If the main issue in the chapter does not relate to Old Testament prescripts, then the days probably also do not deal with Old Testament laws.
3. In Galatians Paul rebukes Christians for observing days (Gal. 4:10), but here in Romans he allows each person to decide for himself whether to esteem days. The context in Galatians is Christians that were forcing other Christians to comply with the Law of Moses (Gal. 6:12; 2:14). It is therefore likely that the “days” in Galatians include the weekly Sabbath. If the days in Romans 14 also include the Sabbath, then Paul would be rather inconsistent in reprimanding the Galatians for doing the same things that he allows the Romans to decide about each man for himself..
4. It is not likely that Paul would leave a plain commandment of Scripture as optional. Who can have a divine commandment before him and say to others: you can treat that commandment as you please; it really makes no difference whether you keep it or not?
5. Since we must “abhor (hate) what is evil” (12:9), we should rather reverse the logic and argue that, when Paul says “each person must be fully convinced in his own mind” with respect to days (14:5), that such days do not relate to days that are declared special by the Bible.
6. In Romans Paul says many positive things about the law. He describes God’s law as “holy, just and good” (7:12) and described himself as “serving the law of God” (7:25). In the closing verses of Romans 13 he links the second table of the Ten Commandments to the great commandment to love one’s neighbor. After saying these things about God’s Law, would he a few verses later describe one of the Ten Commandments as optional?
7. The weekly Sabbath was extremely important to the Jews and in the context of the early church in which Paul lived. If Paul was advising the church to move away from the Sabbath, he would have said much this clearly and specifically. He would not have interjection this as a side issue into a chapter that deals mainly with a dispute about eating meat.
8. Since Romans 14:5 is found nestled deep inside a chapter that deals with a dispute about eating meat, it probably refers to days on which meat was eaten or not eaten.
9. Paul contrasts the person that eats meat with the one that “eats only vegetables” (v2). Then he contrasts the man that “esteems one day as better than another” with the man that “esteems all days alike” (v5). These two contrasts in close proximity seem to parallel one another. This would mean that these days had to do with eating meat. It probably had something to do with meat offered to idols. Some Christians that previously were idol-worshipers believed that meat offered to idols is contaminated (1 Cor. 8:7-9); not suitable for Christian consumption.
10. This contrast is repeated in verse 6, where the same justification is given why it is okay to eat meat or not, and why it is okay to esteem specific days or not. Since the same justification applies to days and to meat, days and meat are probably related. It is therefore quite possible that these verses only describe two people groups, namely the “weak’ that don’t eat meat on certain days and the more mature Christians that regard all days alike as far as eating meat is concerned.
11. Lastly, since observing special days is optional (14:6), we can conclude that it is the “weak” that still cling to special days. The “strong” (15:1) ”regards every day alike“. If Romans 14:5 applies to all special days, and not limited to special meat-days, then for the Christian there remains no sacred days and no prescribed day for weekly public worship; all distinctions between days have been abolished, and each Christian may decide on which day to worship. Would that be Paul’s intension, seeing what confusion it would create in the church?
In conclusion, just like the principle in verse 1 will be misunderstood unless read in the context of a dispute about eating meat, verse 5 will also be misunderstood unless read in the same context. The days in 14:5 cannot be separated from eating meat.
Iam in Indonesia now and cannot reply now.
Andries, thanks for your careful presentation on current use of the Sabbath. However, most of your arguments are hypothetical, not exegetical. Note my reply to Chris in http://versebyversecommentary.com/colossians/colossians-216c/ on the use of the Sabbath during the church age as not valid.