Judge for Yourself
Notes from Lance Shumake's sermon on Sunday, January 12, 2024.
Sermon text: Romans 14:13-23
For Christians, there are essential truths to uphold
For Christians, there are gray areas to decide for themselves
The strong should walk in love before they walk in liberty
“The individual who enjoys the kingdom’s righteousness, peace, and joy will also strive to promote them and will sacrifice his rights to that end if necessary.”
—Daniel M. Doriani, Romans
The strong should value relationships more than being right
What does this mean for all of us?
“The weaker must be willing to really review the biblical data, rethink their position, and refuse to condemn those who disagree. Instead, they must allow others to follow their own consciences in that area.
At the same time, the stronger must also be willing to review the biblical data, rethink their position, and be willing to curb their freedom to avoid discouraging or harming fellow believers, especially if their convictions in the area are very strong.”
—Tim Keller, Romans 8-16 For You
—Do everything for the glory of God
1 Corinthians 10:31
"So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God."
—Live out your convictions, but keep your views to yourself
—Welcome each other because Jesus has welcomed us
This principle is better even than the golden rule [to treat others as we would treat ourselves]. It is safe to treat others as we would like them to treat us, but it is safer still to treat them as God does.”
—John Stott, The Message to the Romans
Discipleship Questions:
- What are some examples of limiting liberties in order to walk in love?
- What are practical ways we can avoid causing weaker friends to stumble?
- In what instances have you chosen a relationship over being right?
- What does this passage tell us about Paul’s desire for the church to be unified?
- How can we find a good balance between keeping our views to ourselves and having productive conversations within the body?
- How can we be more welcoming and accepting of those with different views on non-essential matters?


