Food Laws or Fasting? Misunderstandings regarding Romans 14

When I was confronted with the idea that “Christians must keep God’s Food Laws” for the first time, my immediate knee-jerk reaction was to quote Paul. Why… didn’t Paul say that we could eat anything as long as we don’t make anyone else stumble?

A few years later, I read the same verses from the Apostle Paul’s letters, and think to myself – how did I misunderstand his words? and why did I misuse them so carelessly? It was for this very reason Peter was quick to warn the congregations about Paul’s writings.

“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”2Pet 3:15,16

I was an unlearned person, as Peter says, perverting Paul’s words to suit my needs, doctrines and agendas. The “Misunderstood Apostle”, as I call him – Paul kept and obeyed the Law (Acts 21:24). To argue or teach that Paul taught against God’s Law in his epistles, is to corrupt his teachings and even the memory of all he did for the faith.

Putting Romans 14 under the microscope
Even though mainline Christianity uses Romans 14 as a means to argue that Paul taught against the food laws and showed a more tolerant way, closer study will reveal that Romans 14 has nothing to do with the clean/unclean food laws established by God.  So let us start from the beginning of the Chapter where he starts to advise on a particular topic, and walk down to see what his words really speak of.

Rom 14:1  Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
It is clear that there has been some sort of dispute happening in the congregation of Rome, to which Paul is trying to provide his advise. Paul’s writing in Romans Chapter 14 revolve completely around a “dispute which is doubtful” – this is the context! We must remember that there is no doubt or dispute when it comes to God’s Word. We know that not even one jot or tittle will in anyway pass from the Law till heaven and earth last. God’s eternal Word cannot be called a “doubtful disputation”. If God’s Food Laws was the main subject matter, this would make God’s Law and Word (which was kept by Paul) a “doubtful disputation”. In Paul’s own words “God Forbid”!

Rom 14:2-6 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
Now to deconstruct this debatable “dispute”. Paul Speaks of 2 categories of people. One eats all things, while the other only eats vegetables. One regards a certain day, while the other does not. One eats, while the other doesn’t. The dispute is hence, regarding eating or not on woman-with-empty-platespecific days. “Fasting” in other words! As we know, eating vegetables or a basic diet that did not include any meat, wine or anything pleasant was constituted by Daniel when he fasted (Dan 10:2,3 & Dan 1:12,16). It is a known fact that fasting was practiced heavily in the 1st century (Mat 6:16; 9:14,15, Mar 2:18-20, Luk 5:33-35). And historical documents reveal that Monday and Thursday were considered fast days in the second temple period (Ta’an. 2:4) The pharisee who prayed in Luke 18:12 about fasting twice a week, would have been keeping these fast days.

It is important to note that these fast days were traditions, and did not have root in Scripture. The “dispute” of Romans 14 is surely whether or not to fast on these days. Some believers were fasting on these days, and some were not. Paul’s advise was, not to judge one another and be thankful whether you eat or fast – or keep the traditional fast days or not – as these were doubtful disputes as they did not have Scriptural backing. It was not wrong to fast. It was not wrong to eat either. It was not wrong to fast on specific days. It was not wrong to fast on other days either. Be fully persuaded in your own mind, of what you do – was Paul’s advise to the congregation.

Rom 14:7-13 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.
Paul reiterates that no one should judge or become a stumbling block to his brother on this issue.

Rom 14:14  I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 
This verse is sometimes used to point out that this issue is none other than “clean”/”unclean” foods, as Paul seems to be saying that he is persuaded that there is nothing unclean.

It is worth mentioning the word “unclean” in Rom14:14 in our English versions of the Bible comes from the Greek word “koinos” (G2839 – κοινός – koinos) meaning “common”. The word “unclean” is actually a different Greek word “Akathartos” (G169 – ἀκάθαρτος – akathartos). Both these words can be read in Act 10:14  “But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common(koinos) or unclean(akathartos)”. In fact this is the only place where “koinos” is translated as “unclean” in the whole of the New Testament.

While unclean(akathartos) was used to denote something unclean like “unclean foods”, common(koinos) was used to indicate something “ritually impure”, such as in the case of eating with unwashed hands. “Ritual impurity” was not part of God’s Law, but was connected to Tradition. (Read this study for a in depth look at the difference of God’s Law & Tradition). Basically, unclean(akathartos) was part of God’s Law, while common(koinos) was part of tradition.

So with the above information, let’s try to understand the point Paul is trying to make. In the context of the issue of fasting, he must be reiterating the fact that there is no “common”/”ritually impure”/”wrong way” of fasting. That he believes there is no wrong way of practicing fasting – but if a person concludes he/she should not fast in a particular way, for him/her, the act of fasting in that particular way becomes “common”/wrong way”. In other words, if we fast, we must do it in the way we are led to do it, rather than adhering something that you do not fully agree with.

Rom 14:15  But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
One of the reasons that people believe the earlier verse speaks of “unclean food” is the fact that this verse contains the word “meat”. Yet again, we must dig into the original words of the Greek Manuscripts, to find the truth for ourselves.

The word translated as “meat” in many of our English translations of the Bible, originates from the Greek word “Bromah”(G1033 – βρῶμα – brōma) which means “food”. The Greek word “Kreas”(G2907 – κρέας – kreas) is the word which means “meat” and is used in verse 21, further down in the chapter. “Bromah” is extensively used in the Septuagint for general food, while “kreas” is the word used for meat. It is a grave error in translations that lead to this erroneous teaching of “don’t eat unclean meats if you become a stumbling block to your fellow brother” – leading all to believe that Paul is giving leeway for believers to eat unclean meats as long as others don’t take issue with it.

Paul’s whole discussion which revolves around fasting is yet again what he is addressing in this verse. Basically what he is saying is “you are not walking in love, if your brother takes issue in the fact you eat, while they fast. Don’t allow food to be a factor which can destroy their faith.

Rom 14:16-19 Let not then your good be evil spoken of: For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
Paul continues his advise, asking them to not allow anyone to defame them because of this issue – whether you fast or not, whether you fast on a particular day, or not. He explains that the kingdom of God stands on “righteousness”, “peace” and “joy” in the Holy Spirit, and not on disputed issues of “food and drink”. He asks to serve Christ in whatever personal decisions they take on the issue at hand, as this is the only criterion to be acceptable to God. He advises that we must all strive to edify each other, and take a path of peace rather than engage in disputes/arguments on the matter of fasting.

Rom 14:20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
Paul goes onto finish his advise on the matter of fasting by explaining that “food”(Bromah) should not cause the destruction of the work of God – meaning it should not hinder the work of salvation. All manners of Fasting, whether on a specific day or not, is pure. But it is evil if someone eats and becomes a stumbling block to others through doubtful disputes.

Rom 14:21  It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak
The fact that he is speaking of fasting, is cemented by this verse as he speaks of refraining from meats(kreas), wine and any other thing that makes others stumble, brings them displeasure or make them weak in the faith. The parallels between Paul’s words here and Dan 10:2,3 where Daniel refrains from meat, wine and delightful bread should be noted.

Rom 14:22,23 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
Paul’s final words on the matter, is to instruct them to not cause disputes because of personal faith. Whatever a person believes, must be kept to himself in front of God, in such a situation according to Paul. He exhorts not to fall into condemnation by what each person sees fit to do. And to not doubt yourself if you decide on eating rather than fasting, as your decision must be made in faith without doubts.

Romans chapter 14 is commonly used as an argument to say that Paul endorsed the eating of unclean foods – as long as we don’t make anyone else stumble. Reading the chapter from the beginning provides much needed context and clarity to this misunderstanding. It is clear that Paul is addressing a dispute in Rome. While God’s Word and Law cannot be called a “doubtful disputation”, we know that Paul himself walked orderly and according to God’s Law(Act 21:24).

Rom 14:6 is clear – “He that regards the day, regards it unto the Lord; and he that does not regard the day, he regards it not to the Lord. He that eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he that eats not, does not eat to the Lord, and gives God thanks”. Some are eating, some are not eating. And some are regarding a particular day above the other. It appears to be a dispute about fasting. some eat. some fast. some fast on a particular day. some eat vegetables only(a kind of fasting like done by Daniel). So what is Paul’s advice? avoid doubtful disputes as there are no laws on fasting. Let people eat or fast so that they do not make other brothers stumble. Be sure of your decision, but do not create disputes on the matter. Making the issue addressed by Paul here, into one about God’s Food Laws does not align with the entirety of Scripture, nor does it support the context of the chapter. We must be careful in jumping to conclusions when reading Paul’s words, and try our best to deconstruct them without giving way to our preconceived notions.

31 thoughts on “Food Laws or Fasting? Misunderstandings regarding Romans 14

  1. dj

    Wow, this is terrible\ exegesis of the passage on so many different levels. You obviously are trying to make it say what you’d like to.

    1. rameshdesilva Post author

      Dear dj, if Paul was speaking of food laws, as is believed by the majority of Christians, then he would have been teaching to break God’s Law – and as per Christ’s words whoever teaches to break one of the least of the commandments would be called the least in the Kingdom of God(Mat 5:19).

      But you are free to have your opinion and disagree with me. Thank you.

      Be a blessing to everyone around you!

  2. HisCreation

    I think this is INCREDIBLE and shows a tremendous understanding of the context of this particular passage! I am definitely using it in a blog post of mine! Thank you!

  3. Nicky

    After reading from your website, I tried to follow the unclean and clean doctrine, but when I was led to read chapter4 of 1 Timothy, I rethinked what I was doing. 1Timothy 4:1-4
    Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth, For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving.

    I would like it if you would clear this for me. Because I’m at a dead end.

    1. rameshdesilva Post author

      Dear Nicky,
      I went through these same questions when I first started reading/researching these ideas… so I am glad that you have an open mind while questioning all of the doctrines presented to you.
      1Timothy 4:1-4 is used by many denominations as a proof text to prove that the food laws are no longer in effect. But we must dissect what Paul is saying very carefully.
      The first thing Paul says is that some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons. so he equates “forbidding to marry” and “commanding to abstain from foods” to doctrines of demons.
      The first questions we must ask is, whether the Food Laws God gave can be a doctrine of demons? If not, what can Paul be speaking of?
      We know that forbidding to marry is not from God’s Word. So what is the abstinence from food? Paul does not go into specifics – but I believe he is speaking of people who command others to lead a strict vegetarian lifestyle. (We are free to be vegetarians if we want to, but we cannot say that God commands such). The Gnostic sects in the 1st century were known for these sort of heresies – forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from particular foods.
      There is a simple reason Paul cannot be speaking of God’s Food Laws here. In verse 3 Paul says of “meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”
      Meats which God created to be received with thanksgiving were listed by Him as clean animals mentioned in Lev 11 & Deut 14.
      Additionally, the last bit of verse 3 says “which believe and know the truth” – what is Truth? God’s Word. and what was considered God’s Word in the 1st century? It was the Old Testament. (Books and letters of our new testament were not used as Scripture at the time of Christ and His disciples).
      Verse 5 is a must when reading verse 4. In verse 4 Paul seems to be saying that we can eat everything irrespective of what God said in the Scriptures. But in verse 5 this is clarified – nothing is to be refused as it is sanctified(made holy) by the Word of God and prayer. Now the question is what exactly is sanctified by the Word of God…. If God says “eat this” and “don’t eat this”… surely what He says to eat, is what is sanctified. Whatever He deemed unclean cannot be sanctified by His own Word.
      So in conclusion, I do not think Paul was talking about people who were adhering to God’s Commands. These were foreign doctrines. I believe Paul himself walked according to God’s Law (Acts 21:24) which included dietary instructions.

      May you be a blessing to everyone around you!

  4. Harry

    Hey Ramesh awesome blog my brother! So unclean food and clean food still is law correct? I would like clarification as my opinion is biblically we should go off the bible instead of what people deem to eat whatever food they please whether clean or unclean. What is your opinion on this matter of only eating clean foods based on the bible?

    1. rameshdesilva Post author

      Dear Brother Harry,
      I believe God knows what is best for us, and that His Word endures forever. No one can add to it or take away from it till the heavens and earth passes away. So I believe that His Law including what He has said “eat” and “do not eat” is still valid. Me and my wife stopped eating unclean meats as described by God – but it was a gradual journey for us, as I had questions because of Paul’s words. Then when I understood that Paul was not going against God’s Word, rather he was speaking of other issues (mainline Christianity has misunderstood these teachings to be abolishing of God’s commands) only then did I stop eating unclean foods altogether. It’s a healthier way as well!
      Be a blessing to everyone around you!

      1. Cyneah Mabera

        If Paul was adhering to God’s law that were written in the OLD COVENANT then he must be refuting hiss own self coz he wrote about this, New International Version 1984 Galatians 3:24-25 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law”. And why then he refused Christians to undergo circumcision? Circumcision is God’s law isnt it? For me what I eat I doubt not by what I eat. Why should I doubt if what I am eating is CLEAN? Paul was PERSUADED BY the Lord Jesus that “NOTHING IS UNCLEAN IN ITSELF” was this phrase written in the law? Please clarify my cited verses brother.

      2. rameshdesilva Post author

        Dear Brother Cyneah,

        These are all good questions… and questions I grappled with. I will give a short answer to you, but will provide studies I have done on these subjects for you to get a better understanding.

        The first misconception is that the Old Covenant is done away. The New Covenant depends on the Old as it is the same law written in our hearts according to Jer 31:31-33 & Heb 8:8-10.

        Does Paul say there is no law when he speaks of us being under faith now? The Law brings us to faith according to Paul. The Law is simply a description of Sin… according to paul (Rom 7:7). Not being under the Law is a theme carried on in Paul’s letters. This means we do not look to the Law for salvation. But we need to know the law and keep it… as breaking the law is “sin”(1John 3:4).

        Circumcision was a command for parents. Parents used to circumcise their children on the 8th day after birth. No person got circumcised when they were old. The law is clear on this. The issue with gentiles was that, they had not been circumcised at birth. In Acts 15 they considered the issue of whether a person needs to be circumcised to join the congregation being deemed saved. The answer was that they do not to be forced to circumcise… they will learn the law in the synagogue on the sabbath (Acts 15:21).

        On Romans 14:14, even though our translations say “nothing is unclean of itself… the word “unclean” here is koinos… translated in all other places as “common”. Most of us don’t know the difference between “common” and “unclean”. If you study this, it will become clear what Paul is saying here. I have given all the appropriate links below.

        Please read the following if you do want a clearer understanding.

        Be a blessing to everyone around you!

      3. Cyneah Mabera

        This is the conflict. It is not because murder is also a law of the new covenant, forbidding pork also applies here.

        Paul was clear,

        New International Version 1984 Galatians 3:25 now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

        Here’s another translation that says,

        New Living Translation Galatians 5:18 But when you are directed by the Spirit, you are not under obligation to the Law of Moses.

        Think about this my dear brother.

      4. rameshdesilva Post author

        Dear Brother Cyneah,

        Sorry. I did not understand what you meant as the conflict. Please do explain. I have thought a lot about this and provided answers for the verses you quote. I am not sure whether you have taken time to check my side of the story. Please do read the provided material before you showcase your side of the argument as fact.

        Be a blessing to everyone around you!

  5. Pingback: Unclean Foods sanctified by God’s Word and Prayer? Misunderstandings regarding 1Tim 4:1-5 | Bible things in Bible ways

  6. tbuddrowl Yoder

    From what I can see in scripture to a Hebrew anything outside of “clean” animals / (insects) was not regarded as food. So when Paul who was thoroughly Hebrew through & though talked about food he was automatically talking about that which Hebrews considered food (Lev clean food law). Just as when I talk to my family about food they know I am not talking about bats, spiders, rocks, twigs, bark etc. we all know what food is in our family just so Hebrews knew what food was when Paul referred to it.

    1. rameshdesilva Post author

      Amen! exactly. We cringe at the fact that some people eat dog/snake/rat/etc. Yet fail to see that to some it is normal food. What we should understand is what God considers as food fit for us.
      Be a blessing to everyone around you!

  7. jstewardjst

    Isnt koinos used in these passages ?

    Titus 1:4
    To Titus, mine own son after the common faith…
    Jude 3
    Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation…

    You couldnt say that the faith or salvation was “ritually unclean” ?

    1. rameshdesilva Post author

      Dear jstewardjst,
      Yes they are. The word Koinos simply means Common which means shared by many. When it came to these particular verses, especially Mark 7:2 and Acts 10:15 it is the same case, although the translators have used “defiled” – the reason being the pharisees saw eating with unwashed hands to be sharing uncleanness from other unclean things you may have touched. It is the same case in Acts 10. The mixing of the animals made the clean animals “common” or shared the uncleanness of the unclean animals in Peter’s eyes. The word “koinos” in itself can mean “common” in a few different ways. Which is why we see this explained in the Thayer’s Greek Definitions as :
      Thayer Definition:
      1) common
      2) common, i.e. ordinary, belonging to generality
      2a) by the Jews, unhallowed, profane, Levitically unclean
      Part of Speech: adjective
      A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: probably from G4862
      Citing in TDNT: 3:789, 447
      Hope this helps
      May you be a blessing to everyone around you!

      1. Cyneah Mabera

        If salvation could be gained by observance of the law of the old testaments then salvation could not make his way to us. It was forbiden that the Jews cannot mingled with Gentiles especially in eating with them.

  8. Nick

    My exegesis is slightly different; some of the verses you highlight as talking about fasting are talking about how the strong brother should act (regarding their personal freedom to eat things sacrificed unto idols) around the brother weak in faith (who doesn’t understand this freedom and eats as if it were sacrificed unto one due to the actions of the strong).

  9. reikster

    You said, “All manners of Fasting, whether on a specific day or not, is pure.” It makes more sense to me if Paul is talking about the food being pure/clean in verse 20. Can a manner of fasting even be clean or not clean?

    1. rameshdesilva Post author

      Since there were certain days which were separated for Fasting, some may have viewed Fasting on a different day would be an unclean/unkosher way of Fasting.
      Be a blessing to everyone around you!

      1. reikster

        The thing is why Paul said “all things are indeed pure”? Why didnt he just say all manners of fasting are indeed pure? Dont add to wwhat Paul is saying. In verse 20 also talks about meat so it makes more sense in the context if he said that the meat was the one that was pure.

      2. rameshdesilva Post author

        You do know Meat mentioned here means “food” in a general sense and not “meat of animals”, right… My wish is not to add to Paul’s words, but understand them in their context.
        Be a blessing to everyone around you!

  10. Jacob

    Thought this was a VERY insightful article and may God bless you for doing this because as someone who recently has, through reading the word for myself, seen nothing that indicates those parts of the law that are applicable to us today should not be followed(I think stuff about the priesthood and maybe a few others are not applicable because of Christ food laws is still applicable I believe) this was amazingly edifying truly great full for the amount of scholarship that clearly went into this

  11. Carmine Scarpa

    Thank your your insight. I read this awhile back and it helped me with my struggle when trying to figure out what Paul was speaking about. You helped me look at his writings more carefully.
    One of your responders brought up Galatians which I had trouble understanding also but through your guidance with the Food Law I researched it more carefully by looking at the original translations;
    Galatians 2:19 KJV, “For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.” As I read 19-21 I was so confused. Especially as I sat with my bible group who kept saying the law does not apply to us anymore.
    When I continued researching I came across the jewish translation which blew me away and opened my heart to so much more.
    Galatians 2:19 Complete Jewish Bible, “For it was through letting Torah (The Law) speak for itself that I died to its traditional legalistic misinterpretation, that I might live in direct relationship with God.
    Compare the rest against KJV;
    CJB, “20 When the Messiah was executed on the stake as a criminal, I was too: so that my proud ego no longer lives. But the Messiah lives in me, and the life I now live in my body I live by the same trusting faithfulness that the son of God had, who loved me and gave himself up for me.
    21 I do not reject God’s gracious gift: for if the way in which one attains righteousness is through legalism then the Messiah’s death was pointless.
    The Law is not dead.
    Jesus said in Matthew 11:29, “Take my yoke upon you,,,30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”
    John proclaimed that Jesus is the Word. So my understanding is that Jesus is the Word, which the Word is Torah, that in turn makes Torah the Law. Not the oral law of the pharisees but the written Law of God. The light burden, the easy yoke.
    ” The Law is not dead!”
    Thank you for your guidance.
    Gadol Elohai!

  12. Servant of Christ

    The law is not dead

    We are dead to the law

    And we are alive in Christ

    All flesh is as grass

    It was Jesus who said “follow me”, so I follow him

    “If we who have been justified by Christ are counted unrighteous, why seek justification in Christ at all? If we are justified by the Law, tell me, what has Christ achieved by His death, by His preaching, by His victory over sin and death? Either we are justified by Christ, or we are made worse sinners by Him.”

    If you seek Justification through Faith in your stomachs, go ahead, the flesh profits nothing… go ahead and kept a count of your good works and sins, place them upon the scales and fall short.

    And this is eternal life – to know you, the one true God and Jesus Christ whom you sent

    Depart from me you workers of lawlessness, I never knew you (and he spoke to those who were performing great works in his name – people that we would consider great saints) our concern should be to know him, to be found IN HIM, if you do not rest in his love – you have NOTHING to give to others – the only valuable treasure in this life is to know God

    For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.

    You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

    1. RameshDeSilva Post author

      What is the reason for the Law? Is it to put us to death? Or is it to show us what sin is? Maybe it is better to try to understand better whom you are quoting…

      What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. No, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, You shalt not covet.

      Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
      Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid.

      What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

      What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

      Whosoever commits sin transgresses also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

      Learn the connection between the Law and Grace. Righteousness comes through Grace, but then everyone needs to know what “sin” is, to live according to His righteousness. The knowledge of Sin is only through the Law.

      Be a blessing to everyone around you

  13. Friend of Christ

    But let him who glories glory in this,
    That he understands and knows Me,
    That I am the Lord, exercising lovingkindness,
    judgment, and righteousness in the earth.
    For in these I delight,” says the Lord.


    1. RameshDeSilva Post author

      He also says in the very same chapter…

      Who is the man so wise that he can understand this? To whom has the mouth of the LORD spoken, that he may declare it? Why is the land ruined and laid waste like a wilderness, so that no one passes through? And the LORD says: “Because they have forsaken my law that I set before them, and have not obeyed my voice or walked in accord with it, but have stubbornly followed their own hearts and have gone after the Baals, as their fathers taught them.

      It maybe worthwhile to check what “IT” means, when Yeshua says “It is Finished”.

      Be a blessing to everyone around you


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s