“Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth…”
The problem being addressed by the apostle was over what foods were acceptable for Christians to eat. Some believed it was just food and all food was acceptable. There were others who attached a spiritual significance to the food they ate. The tone of the passage seems to say Paul leaned toward the former, though that is immaterial to his argument.
The problem wasn’t food, it was attitude. More specifically, how people treat those within the church with different ideas. In the kingdom of heaven, there is a supreme judge of all, and the apostle recommends leaving judgment in His hands.
Therefore, if we have a complaint about a fellow Christian’s behavior, there is a proper place for it to be heard—address the offender’s master. If we believe that master to be Christ and have ears to hear, we can rest assured the guilty will receive a just punishment. (Beware the true guilty party could be the accuser.) If we believe the master involved is the devil, well, judgment has already been passed upon that person.
Beyond prayer, there is no need for us to be involved in the judicial process. That is, of course, unless we do not trust in God to rightly judge the offender. In such a case, the apostle says that the public forum is the worst possible venue for justice. (1 Cor 6:1-7)
Assuming the role of judge, deciding right and wrong is a very human attitude. It goes back to the Garden and the temptation to “be as gods”. We are witnesses to how well that decision has gone, and yet, still continue in the same error.
We are allowed to form opinions that drive our decisions about what we eat, where we go, and how to earn and spend money. We have been given divine guidance and the freedom to work out our own salvation. However, that freedom applies only to our salvation.
To our offended sensibilities, the scripture says, “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap”.