Is Romans 14:5-6 discussing the Sabbath?

The following verses are often used by those that do not advocate keeping the 7^th day Sabbath.  But are these verses even discussing the Sabbath or was Paul discussing something else?

“One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.”

When Christians read these verses they tend to place their own definition into the days that Paul is referring to. Since Christians today don’t observe the 7^th day Sabbath, the assumption is that this must have been the days being discussed. But is this the case? Was the 7^th day Sabbath something that needed discussion in Paul’s time? Wouldn’t there have been an uproar from the Jewish believers if Paul was actually denouncing the sacred Sabbath (that I have established in previous posts was an everlasting covenant between them and God)? See http://messianicmama.blogspot.com/2010/11/sabbath-as-described-in-bible.html

I think that there may be more to this passage than first meets the eye. The first thing I want to point out is that the congregation in Rome was made up of predominately Gentile converts with a handful of Jews among them. The Jews came with baggage, so to speak. They learned about historical events that were taught to them from childhood. Many of these events were observed by fasting for a designated day in memory of the event. Some of these fast days included:

1. The fast day in the 4th month of the Jewish calendar was in remembrance of the destruction of the Wall of Yerusalem.
2. The fast day in the 5th month was in remembrance of the burning of the Great Temple in Yerusalem.
3. The fast day in the 7th month was in remembrance of the killing of Gedaliah which brought about their ancestors’ exile into the nations.
4. The fast day in the 10th month was in remembrance of the siege of Yerusalem.

Taken from this link: http://www.shabbat-kallah.org/romans14.htm

These fast days were not commanded by the Torah; they were days that had been added on to the commanded feasts. There was nothing wrong with these fast days, they commemorated important events in Jewish history and were very meaningful to the Jewish believers. However, the Gentiles were coming in by the droves and had no knowledge of Jewish history. They were being judged and pressured to fast on these days. Yet, they had no meaning to the Gentiles, and were not commanded of God.

Another thing I want to point out was that there was a controversy on which day the festival of First Fruits (and consequentially Shavuot since it is fifty days later) would be observed. The Jewish believers would have been aware of this controversy and many had decided upon what day they would observe these feasts. Yet, the Gentile converts may have come in without knowledge of the Scriptures, not knowing the controversy present. The Jewish factions may have been pulling the Gentiles in either direction in regards to which day to observe these festivals.

So we have two much more likely candidates for what Paul was addressing in this passage. Please notice that Paul makes no mention of the Sabbath in Romans 14. He only makes mention of “days”. If he meant Sabbath I think he would have said Sabbath.  He uses the Greek sabbaton in other places where he refers to the Sabbath, but doesn't here.  


So, I personally think that the first of these two scenarios makes the most sense. Let me tell you why. If you back up to the beginning of Romans 14 you have the following:

Romans 14:1-6 “Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.”

So what was the subject at the beginning of this chapter? It was food, not feasts days or Sabbath. The Jewish believers, who ate meat according to the dietary laws found in Torah, were judging the “weak in their faith” aka Gentile converts for eating only vegetables. There was nothing wrong with eating only vegetables; in fact that was the diet in the Garden of Eden. Yet, we were given freedom to eat meat according to the Torah. Paul understood that the Gentile converts had come out of paganism and had been eating meat from animals that had been strangled, drinking blood, etc. So, when they abandoned their paganism after they chose to follow God, they may have quickly abandoned meat (which was often from questionable sources such as pagan sacrifices at the pagan temples) as well in an effort to please God with their dietary choices. Their zeal to follow God's dietary laws may have pushed them to forsake meat altogether.  Paul tells us there is nothing wrong with this as long as it is done for the Lord and without judging other's decisions. As an aside, some use this scripture to argue that Paul condones the eating of all (including unclean) meat.  I disagree, but that is for another topic entirely! 


My point is that the context of this passage is about dietary choices. He starts talking about food choices.  And notice that when Paul sums up his discussion, he again brings it back around to food and compares observing days to eating. Since the context is eating, doesn’t it make sense that the days being observed would be days without eating (fasting days)? He says:

Romans 14:6 “He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.”

So the person eating is not observing the fasts while the person not eating is observing the fasts. Therefore it fits right in with the context to assume that Paul was referring to the fast days being observed by the Jewish believers.

In conclusion:

There is no contextual evidence that supports the idea that Romans 14:5-6 is referring to the 7^th day Sabbath. It doesn’t make sense to say that Paul is referring to the Sabbath in these verses considering the Sabbath was not a debate in his time; it was always kept on the 7^th day. There would have been uproar from the Jewish believers if Paul was referring to Sabbath. There are at least two other explanations of what days could be referring to in the text that were controversies in Paul’s time. The text seems to be pointing to food as the main subject, so for Paul to interject a one liner about the Sabbath does not fit.

There, again, is no evidence in scripture that any believer kept any day other than the 7^th day as Sabbath. There is also no evidence in Scripture that the 7^th day Sabbath had been made obsolete. These ideas did not come into existence until much later into the 2^nd century. See my post on the history of the Sabbath for more info on why it was abandoned or changed. http://messianicmama.blogspot.com/2010/11/history-of-sabbath-how-it-was-changed.html

So the question remains, still unanswered by Scripture, why don’t Christians observe the 7^th day Sabbath as outlined in Scripture?

Shalom!