Yep!
God calls people to peace--"The circumcised shouldn't become uncircumcised, the uncircumcised shouldn't become circumcised", the Jew doesn't need to eat pork, the Gentile doesn't need to observe the Sabbath, but we should remain as He called us, and let Him guide us into truth from the state of our present convictions, NOT overstepping those boundaries of conviction, even if they are incomplete or inaccurate (the one with vegan conviction CANNOT break those convictions, the Jew who thinks Sabbath is to be kept must keep it), and God will lead us into greater truth from that point.
Rom_14:23
But he who doubts -- He that is not fully satisfied in his mind; who does not do it with a clear conscience.
doubts --
This refers to the weak Christian who does not understand the true implications of Christian belief in this area of opinions. It is not a sin to have this inadequate understanding or to have doubts about such things as eating meat offered to idols, though it would certainly be better to come to a right understanding of such things. But it is wrong, in the presence of these doubts, to go ahead and eat the meat anyway. - CP
is condemned -- This is a PERFECT PASSIVE INDICATIVE from kata + krinō, meaning (1) “placed in a guilty light by contrast” (cf. Harold K. Moulton, The analytical Greek Lexicon Revised, p. 216) -Utley
The one who says eating the meat is wrong, but does so anyway, places himself in a guilty light; condemning himself by what he himself has said.
The "condemnatin" is not from God, but himself.
condemned -- This word is κατακρίνω (katakrinō), an intensified form of krinō; it leaves no doubt that eating or doing anything else contrary to one’s conscience is condemned by God as a sin. - CPNIVC
is condemn -- We apply this word almost exclusively to the future punishment of the wicked in hell. But it is of importance to remember, in reading the Bible, that this is not of necessity its meaning. It means properly to “condemn;”
and here it means only that the person who should thus violate the dictates of his conscience would incur guilt, and would be blameworthy in doing it. But it does not affirm that he would inevitably sink to hell. - BN
for whatever is not from faith is sin -- “Whatever is not done with a full conviction that it is right, is sinful; whatever is done when a man doubts whether it is right, is sin.” This is evidently the fair interpretation of this place.
whatever [NIV everything] -- The context limits the “everything” to the debate about matters of opinion.
(See Lard, 428–429; SH, 393–394; Murray, 2:196; Cranfield, 2:728; Fitzmyer, 699–700. Taking the former view are Lenski, 853–854; Hendriksen, 2:468; and Dunn, 2:828–829, 835.)
faith -- 1) the weak's brother's personal conviction; or, 2) the "faith" i.e, the gospel, the teaching of Christ.
His action therefore is not consistent with Christian faith as he understands it; thus he is violating his own conscience, to his own condemnation. Even though the action is not wrong in itself, he thinks it is wrong; therefore if he does it anyway, for him it is a sin. - CPNIVC
To the "weak" brother's conscience it is "sinful" to eat such meat which is contaminated with idolatry. (I'm not sure it is saying that such is "sinful" in God's sight, for there are no idol gods!) The brother has violated his own personal coviction with "sin".
- - - - - -
Can this last statement of v. 23 be exteded to cover more than "eating meat"?
1) In context the "whatever" or "eveything" is the matter of eating meat which has been offered to idols.
2) The point can be extended.
Thus the point is to extend the statement in v. 23a about eating contrary to one’s conscience, to cover all acts that violate one’s convictions about what Christian faith requires. This again is the meaning of “does not come from faith,” as in v. 23a. Thus we may paraphrase Paul thus: “Every act that is in fact a matter of opinion but is nevertheless inconsistent with one’s (even faulty) understanding of Christian faith is a sin.” CPNIVC
You have the liberty to disagree here.
J.
