What are the marks of weak faith?

One person’s faith gives great liberty in disputed matters, but the weak in faith place limitations on themselves.

They key is to avoid quarrels over disputed matters. Don’t condemn others whether they have more or less freedom.

In the case of acceptable food among the Romans there is no cause to judge one another because God has accepted both sides of the debate. Judgment of fellow believers is a mark of a lack of faith in God’s ability to make someone stand or fall. They have no place in judging God’s servants.

The standard set involves being convinced in one’s own mind about these matters, but to also hold back on judging others. We can expect to hit interpretive conflict when attempting to apply the principles of this passage to our doctrinal disputes today. Where do we draw the lines? I think we would quarrel over which matters are even worth quarreling over.

However, Paul reminds the Romans that they do not live for the approval of one another, but rather they live and die for God. Christ’s death and Resurrection established his Lordship over all humanity. If God acts in mercy, reigns as Lord, and is able to make his servants stand or fall, then there is no room to judge his servants.

When considering judgment and quarrels, it is important to ask whether the person being judged or challenged in an argument has anything to gain. In fact, does the judge or instigator derive the most “benefit” by justifying his/her own views or way of life?

Judgment has been reserved for God. The Romans are challenged to resolve to not put any obstacles in the way of a fellow believer since judgment and quarreling do not lead to peace or edification. Even those with freedom to eat anything should be willing to abstain out of love for those with weak faith. These peripheral matters do not promote righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. When promoting the growth of one another so that we are approved before God and others, the Romans will find that disputes often do little to help anyone.

When considering how to handle disputes, the direction of God and the peace of the Kingdom should lead all responses. That doesn’t open the door to heresy necessarily, but rather the goal is to build up others rather than picking them apart and condemning them.

They are free to hold opinions on disputed matters, but they are ultimately accountable to God and need only be approved by God in them. Their beliefs should be rooted in faith, believing that God is honored by their beliefs and practices. In fact, the practice of condemning others may be a sign that some need to justify themselves, to build up their convictions and ultimately their faith by pulling others into their systems of belief. Judging others and pushing them to accept other convictions on disputed matters shows a vestige of doubt and fear that one’s beliefs may be wrong unless everyone else accepts them.

However, if someone is not fully convinced on a matter before God, then there is a real possibility of sinning because his/her relationship before God is put into jeopardy with uncertainty interfering with the relationship. Faith is also the means by which the Romans are made right before God, and so departing from faith means reliance on other means for holiness and perhaps salvation.

For more on this topic, see my previous post: When We Should Not Debate Theology