Our accepted and imagined concept of first century congregations often was [is] oversimplified. That imagined simplicity likely never existed. Often we think if today's Christian visited a Christian congregation in the 50's A.D. in any part of the Roman Empire, he or she would encounter familiar circumstances that were virtually identical. A congregation in Jerusalem would be like one in Ephesus, and both would be like all congregations in Rome.

That is not true. Many powerful factors worked together to produce the nature, practices, and attitudes of a first century congregation. Factor one: were the former religious experiences of converts (1) the result of generations of exposure and practice in Judaism, (2) the result of generations of exposure and practice in idolatry, (3) atheism, (4) being a non-Jew attending a Jewish synagogue, (5) being a convert to Judaism, or (6) exposures to other religious concepts?

Factor two: what were the converts' economic realities? The first century world had a small middle class. Most people lived in poverty. A small group [comparatively] composed the elite [they had positions of power, or money, or both]. Were converts exclusively from lives of poverty? Were they exclusively from the elite? Were they a mixture of poor and elite? Were they Jewish by birth, culture, and background? Were they non-Jewish by birth, culture, and background? Were both heritages present among the converts?

Factor three: what were the converts' cultural and geographical realities? Were they a minority, "relocated people" living among a majority? Were they in a Roman city? a Greek city? a Palestinian city? Did they live in isolation? Were they a functioning part of the general populace? Did they keep the "traditions" of the "old country" alive in their current environment, or did they assimilate into and adopt the culture and lifestyle of the area?

Other factors existed, but we should relate to these quickly. Different regions of this country do things differently. Religiously, often we are unsettled or disturbed by the differences: "That is not the way we did it where I came from." Frequently because it is different it must to be wrong. Christians rarely view contrasts as "different." They commonly view contrasts as "wrong."

Even when we seek to combine a "blue collar" congregation and a "professional congregation" in the same city, we face major adjustments that often take years to make. In southern communities where the church is strong, the economic backgrounds of members powerfully influences internal concepts about the nature of Christian fellowship.

In this community, imagine trying to combine Hispanic or Laotian congregations with a typical American congregation. Imagine the challenges of placing qualified Hispanic or Laotian leaders as leaders in a typical American congregation. Even if everyone heard and spoke English well, soon cultural differences would be apparent and significant.

All of these insights are shared for a single reason: congregational [Christian community] realities in the first century were as disturbing, complex, and demanding as those factors are today. To dismiss the fact that those challenges were evident in first century churches is to found some of our basic concepts on a myth. The New Testament acknowledges such existed.

Read Romans 14 and consider these matters. First, is it not evident that differences existed in the Christian community in Rome? We are considering a multi-congregational situation in Rome (Romans 16:16--note the words "all" and "churches").

Second (14:1, 19), the "weak" were to be accepted and encouraged, not condemned. God made an enormous investment in the weak's salvation (14:9,10,20). The "strong" destroy God's investment when they drive the weak from Christ instead of encouraging them (14:15).

The problem centered in worship practices. Both converted Jews and converted non-Jews worshipped through sacrificial systems. Both commonly ate portions of the sacrifice as an act of honor to the deity. Thus, a common act of worship in both former religious communities was to honor a deity by eating part of the sacrifice. A common worship concept: if you ate part of a sacrifice, you honored the deity to whom the sacrifice was offered.

Both Judaism and idolatry observed holy or festival days (see Deuteronomy 16:16 for Jewish practices). Again, observance of the holy day honored the deity. What if you, your father, your grandfather, and generations in your past family observed those days? What if you felt it dishonored the Father of Jesus Christ not to observe holy days?

Thus some Christians ate everything in the correct conviction that food had no spiritual significance, and some ate only vegetables because they feared they unknowingly would eat sacrificial meat offered to an idol. Some Christians observed what they regarded to be appropriate holy days, and some Christians concluded there were no holy days.

Please note the conclusions, reasoning, and practices were exactly opposite based on religious convictions. We would approach the situation with this question: "What is right?" Paul did not approach the problem in that manner. He said both belonged to God. Both were seeking to honor God in what they did (14:5,6). Therefore they were to understand they were not to hold each other in contempt or judge those who drew opposite conclusions (14:3). They were to understand each was the Lord's servant, God was the Master of each, and God could and would make each stand (14:4). God understood the inner motive of each Christian, and He responded to the motive of the person.

In addition to the two things mentioned above, Paul declared: (1) faith in God is not based on personal views but on Jesus Christ (14:7-9). (2) God is the only judge (14:12). (3) The judgment will be the occasion for God's judging (14:10-12). (4) The primary, appropriate concern for servants is not to cause other servants to fall from Christ (14:13) (5) The primary issue among Christians is not, "Who is correct?" but, "What are God's purposes?" (14:14-20) (6) The priority among Christians is conscience, not correctness, because conscience acts on faith and love. Do not use your conviction to spiritually destroy one who is in Christ! (14:22, 23)

For Thought

Discuss your understanding of these statements from Paul in Romans 14:

1. Do not accept the weak "for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions." (v. 1)

2. Do not "regard with contempt" or "judge" the one "God has accepted." (v. 3)

3. "To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand" (v. 4).

4. "Why do you judge your brother?" (v. 10)

5. "He who doubts is condemned." (v. 23)

Link to Teacher's Guide Lesson 13

Copyright © 2004
David Chadwell & West-Ark Church of Christ

previous page | table of contents | final lesson