Chapter 14

3 Men may not contemn nor condemn one the other for things indifferent: 13 but take heed that they give no offence in them: 15 for that the apostle proveth unlawful by many reasons.

1. Weak in the faith. That is, one who has but a limited grasp of the principles of righteousness. He is eager to be saved and is willing to do whatever he believes is required of him. But in the immaturity of his Christian experience (see Heb. 5:11 to 6:2), and probably also as the result of former education and belief, he attempts to make his salvation more certain by the observance of certain rules and regulations that are in reality not binding upon him. To him these regulations assume great importance. He regards them as absolutely binding upon him for salvation, and he is distressed and confused when he sees other Christians about him, especially those who seem to be more experienced, who do not share his scruples.

Paul’s statements in Rom. 14 have been variously interpreted, and have been used by some: (1) to disparage a vegetarian diet, (2) to abolish the distinction between clean and unclean meats, and (3) to remove all distinction between days, thus abolishing the seventh-day Sabbath. That Paul is doing none of these three becomes evident when this chapter is studied in the light of certain religious and related problems that troubled some of the 1st-century Christians.

Paul mentions various problems that are an occasion of misunderstanding between brethren: (1) those relating to diet (v. 2), and (2) those relating to the observance of certain days (vs. 5, 6). In 1 Cor. 8 the problem of the strong versus the weak brother, as regards diet, is also dealt with. The letter to the Corinthians was written less than a year before that to the Romans. It seems reasonable to conclude that in 1 Cor. 8 and Rom. 14 Paul is dealing with essentially the same problem. In Corinthians the problem is identified as the propriety of eating foods sacrificed to idols. According to the ancient practice pagan priests carried on an extensive merchandise of the animal sacrifices offered to idols. Paul told the Corinthian believers—converts both from Judaism and from paganism—that inasmuch as an idol was nothing there was no wrong, per se, in eating foods dedicated to it. However, he explains, because of earlier background and training, and differences in spiritual discernment, not all had this “knowledge” and could not with a free conscience eat such foods (see on 1 Cor. 8). Hence Paul urged those without scruples regarding these foods not to place a stumbling block in a brother’s way by indulging in them (Rom. 14:13). His admonition is thus in harmony with the decision of the Jerusalem Council, and doubtless throws light on at least one reason why that council took the stand it did on this subject (see on Acts 15). Probably for fear of offending in this matter some Christians abstained from flesh foods entirely, which means that their food was restricted to “herbs,” that is, vegetables (see Rom. 14:2).

Paul is not speaking of foods hygienically harmful. He is not suggesting that the Christian of strong faith may eat anything, regardless of its effect upon his physical well-being. He has already made plain, in ch. 12:1, that the true believer will see to it that his body is preserved holy and acceptable to God as a living sacrifice. The man of strong faith will regard it as an act of spiritual worship to maintain good health (Rom. 12:1; 1 Cor. 10:31).

A further fact throws light on the problems Paul is discussing. Only dimly, at first, did many Jewish Christians comprehend that the ceremonial law had met its fulfillment in Christ (see on Col. 2:14–16) and was henceforth no longer binding. Indeed, the first Christians were not called upon abruptly to cease attendance at the annual Jewish feasts or to repudiate at once all ceremonial rites. Under the ceremonial law the Jews were to keep seven annual sabbaths. Paul himself attended a number of the feasts after his conversion (Acts 18:21; etc.). Though he taught that circumcision was nothing (1 Cor. 7:19), he had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:3), and agreed to fulfill a vow according to the stipulations of the ancient code (Acts 21:20–27). Under the circumstances it appeared best to allow the various elements of the Jewish ceremonial law gradually to disappear as the mind and conscience became enlightened. Thus, it was inevitable that among Jewish Christians there would arise questions as to the propriety of keeping certain “days”—Jewish holydays, in connection with their annual feasts (see Lev. 23:1–44; see on Col. 2:14–17).

In view of these facts it becomes evident that Paul, in Rom. 14, is not (1) disparaging a diet of “herbs” (vegetables), or (2) doing away with the age-old Biblical distinction between clean and unclean meats, or (3) abolishing the seventh-day Sabbath of the moral law (see on ch. 3:31). The person who thus claims must read into Paul’s argument something that is not there.

That Paul does not teach or even imply the abolition of the seventh-day Sabbath has been recognized by such conservative commentators, for example, as Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, in their comment on ch. 14:5, 6: “From this passage about the observance of days, Alford unhappily infers that such language could not have been used if the sabbath-law had been in force under the Gospel in any form. Certainly it could not, if the sabbath were merely one of the Jewish festival days; but it will not do to take this for granted merely because it was observed under the Mosaic economy. And certainly if the sabbath was more ancient than Judaism; if, even under Judaism, it was enshrined amongst the eternal sanctities of the Decalogue, uttered, as no other parts of Judaism were, amidst the terrors of Sinai; and if the Lawgiver Himself said of it when on earth, ‘The Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day’ (see Mark 2:28)—it will be hard to show that the apostle must have meant it to be ranked by his readers amongst those vanished Jewish festival days, which only ‘weakness’ could imagine to be still in force—a weakness which those who had more light ought, out of love, merely to bear with.”

In Rom. 14:1 to 15:14 Paul urges the stronger Christians to give sympathetic consideration to the problems of their weaker brethren. As in chs. 12 and 13, he shows that the source of unity and peace in the church is genuine Christian love. This same love and mutual respect will ensure continuing harmony among the body of believers, in spite of differing opinions and scruples in matters of religion.

Receive ye. Gr. proslambanoµ, “to take to oneself.” Those who are “weak in the faith” should nevertheless be received into Christian fellowship as brethren, because Christ has thus received and welcomed them (ch. 15:7).

Doubtful disputations. Or, “disputes over opinions” (RSV). The “weak” believers are to be welcomed into fellowship, but not for the purpose of drawing them into controversy. The stronger brethren are not called upon to settle or pass judgment on the scruples of those who may be weaker in the faith.

2. Believeth. Or, “has faith” (see on ch. 3:3). Paul’s point is that one man’s faith allows him to eat things that another man’s faith does not permit.

Herbs. Gr.lachana, “vegetables.” See on v. 1. Paul is not discussing the propriety of eating or abstaining from certain foods but rather urging patience and forbearance in such matters. “The kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost” (v. 17). There fore, the man of strong faith will “follow after the things which make for peace” (v. 19) and will beware lest by his eating or drinking or any other personal practice he destroy the work of God (v. 20) and those for whom Christ died (v. 15).

3. Despise. Gr. exoutheneoµ, literally, “to throw out as nothing,” hence, “to look down on,” “to treat with contempt.” Those of stronger faith would naturally be inclined to look with some contempt upon the narrowness of those “weak in the faith” (v. 1) as regards foods. This, of course, would reveal that the faith of those supposedly strong was still deficient, for pure faith works through love (Gal. 5:6).

Judge. Censoriousness is often characteristic of those whose religious experience is based largely upon the fulfillment of external requirements. Both parties are in the wrong. Both are revealing spiritual pride instead of Christian love.

Received. Gr. proslambanoµ, “to take to oneself.” This is the word translated “receive” in v. 1. The Christian is to “receive” his brother as God has received him (see ch. 15:7).

Him. That is, the stronger brother who has no scruples about eating “all things” (v. 2). Paul’s point is that the abstaining believer should not condemn, for his freedom, the man whom God has accepted and received into His church in this freedom (see 1 Cor. 10:29; Gal. 5:13). If God has forgiven his sins and accepted him as His child, and his life in other respects reveals the presence of the Holy Spirit, all such criticism is out of place.

4. Thou that judgest. Paul is addressing the weak brother, since “judgest” corresponds to “judge” in v. 3.

Another man’s servant. Rather, “another’s servant,” in this case God’s or Christ’s, depending on whether “God” or “the Lord” is accepted as the reading in the latter part of the verse (see below under “God”; cf. vs. 8, 9). The Greek word here used for “servant” (oiketeµs) is rare in the NT, occurring only here and in Luke 16:13; Acts 10:7; 1 Peter 2:18. It denotes a “household servant,” distinguished from an ordinary slave, as being more closely connected with the family. The “weak” (Rom. 14:1) believer is condemning one of God’s servants, one who is responsible to God, not to the criticizing fellow servant.

Standeth. Some have understood this to mean moral and spiritual steadfastness (cf. 1 Cor. 16:13; Phil. 1:27); others, acquittal or approval in the sight of God (cf. Ps. 1:5).

Falleth. In contrast with “standeth” (see above). Some view this as moral and spiritual failure (cf. ch. 11:11, 22), others as condemnation or disapproval in the judgment. Both terms are used in the first of these two senses in 1 Cor. 10:12, “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”

Holden up. Literally, “made to stand.” In spite of the criticisms of his censorious brethren, the believer who in faith exercises his Christian freedom in the matters under question will be strengthened and supported by his Master. The one whose faith is “weak” (v. 1) may even fear that the stronger brother is in great danger by not sharing his scruples. But Paul suggests that whatever the danger, the Master, who called His servant to freedom (Gal. 5:13), has power to preserve him from the perils that freedom involves, which perils the “weak” (v. 1) brother is seeking to avoid by other means. Some, however, interpret this phrase to refer to acquittal in the judgment.

God. Important textual evidence (cf. p. 10) may be cited for the reading “the Lord,” or “the Master,” maintaining the idea of the Master and His servant introduced in the first part of this verse.

5. Esteemeth. Gr. krinoµ, “to judge,” to estimate, “to approve of.” Paul now discusses the observance of special days, another cause of dissension and confusion among believers. See on v. 1. Compare a similar situation in the churches of Galatia (Gal. 4:10, 11), and in the Colossian church (Col. 2:16, 17).

Those believers whose faith enables them immediately to leave behind all ceremonial holidays should not despise others whose faith is less strong. Nor, in turn, may the latter criticize those who seem to them lax. Each believer is responsible to God (Rom. 14:10–12). And what God expects of each of His servants is that he shall “be fully persuaded in his own mind” and conscientiously follow his convictions in accordance with the light he has received and understood so far. Among Christ’s followers there is to be no force, no compulsion. A spirit of love and sympathetic tolerance is to prevail at all times. Those who are stronger in faith are to “bear the infirmities of the weak” (ch. 15:1), as Christ has borne the weaknesses of us all. There is no room for self-righteous criticism of those whose views and practices may differ from our own, or scorn for those who may still be “babes” (Heb. 5:13).

Fully persuaded. Or, “fully convinced” (see on ch. 4:21). Paul does not suggest that Christians should have no convictions regarding these matters about which there may be disagreement. Rather, he urges believers to come to clear and definite conclusions. But at the same time they should do so with charity toward those who reach other conclusions. No attempt should be made to rob anyone of this freedom to make up his own mind with respect to personal duty. Compare DA 550; Ed 17.

6. Regardeth. The four occurrences of the word in this verse are from the Gr. phroneoµ, here meaning “to observe,” “to esteem.” Compare Phil. 3:19; Col. 3:2, where phroneoµ is translated respectively “mind,” “set … affection on.”

Unto the Lord. The motive of both parties is the same, whether in the observance or neglect of a day, or in the use of, or abstinence from, food. The stronger brother thanks God for “all things” (v. 2) and partakes of his food to the glory of God (cf. 1 Cor. 10:31). His weaker brother thanks God for what he eats and to the glory of God abstains from foods that may have been sacrificed to idols (see on Rom. 14:1).

Regardeth not. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of the clause, “and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it.” It is therefore omitted in modern versions. The meaning of the verse is left unchanged, for this clause simply presents, in the negative, the thought of the preceding clause.

Eateth not. See above under “unto the Lord.”

7. Liveth to himself. Paul now expands as a general rule of life the thought suggested by the phrase “unto the Lord” in v. 6. It is not only in the matter of food and special days that the Christian does all “unto the Lord.” It is the aim of his entire existence to live not “to himself,” for his own pleasure and according to his own desires, but “unto the Lord,” for His glory and according to His will (see 2 Cor. 5:14, 15). His whole life, to its very last moments, belongs to the Lord (Rom. 14:8), and in due time he must give an account of himself to God (v. 12). Therefore Christians should live as men who must someday “stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (v. 10).

The words of this verse have often been applied to the influence that a man exerts upon his fellow men. It should be remembered, however, that this is not the primary meaning, as the context makes evident. Paul is emphasizing the point that whatever the Christian does, he does with reference to the Lord.

8. We are the Lord’s. That is, we belong to Christ, for He is “Lord both of the dead and living” (v. 9). Whether weak in faith or strong, in life or death alike, we are responsible to the Lord, for we are His purchased possession (Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 6:20; Eph. 1:14). What right have we to sit in judgment on anyone who belongs to Christ?

9. To this end. That is, in order that Christ might become Lord of the dead and the living.

Died, and rose, and revived. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading “died and came to life.” By His death Christ purchased a people. By His resurrection He delivers those whom He has purchased (see on ch. 4:25). After His death and resurrection Christ was enthroned at the Father’s right hand, and universal domination was given to Him (see Mark 14:62; 16:19; Eph. 1:20–22 Phil. 2:8–11 Heb. 1:3).

He might be Lord. Gr. kurieuoµ, “to rule over,” “to become lord of.”

The dead and living. The reversal of the usual order of these words is perhaps due to the order of the words about Christ in the first part of the sentence. Even in death the Christian belongs to Christ, because when he dies he falls asleep “in Jesus” (1 Thess. 4:14 cf. Rev. 14:13). “The dead in Christ shall rise” and thenceforth “ever be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:16, 17). Even those who reject Christ cannot escape their responsibility to Him by death. For all the dead shall rise again, either “unto the resurrection of life” or “unto the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:29; cf. Rev. 20:12, 13). In that day “every one of us shall give account of himself to God” (Rom. 14:12).

This verse is used by some commentators as evidence that the soul is immortal and that death simply transfers the believer from one sphere of conscious service to another. The interpretation is out of harmony with the rest of Scripture. The question of whether the soul is immortal must be determined on the basis of other passages that deal with the condition of the soul in death, which Paul is not here discussing (see Job 14:21; Eccl. 9:5; John 11:11; etc.).

10. Why dost thou judge? The first part of this verse is emphatically expressed in the Greek: “But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you also, why do you set at nought your brother?” The one judging his brother is the one who “eateth herbs,” and the one setting at nought is the one who conscientiously believes he “may eat all things” (v. 2).

We shall all stand. In the Greek the word for “all” is in the position of emphasis. All of us, both weak and strong, are to stand before the divine tribunal. Since all believers are alike subjects and servants of God, and must all stand before the same judgment seat, they have no right to sit in judgment on one another. Such judging usurps a prerogative of God (Rom. 14:10; cf. 2 Cor. 5:10).

Of Christ. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading “of God.” The reading “of Christ” may have come in from the parallel passage in 2 Cor. 5:10. God the Father will judge the world through Christ (see Rom. 2:16; cf. Acts 17:31).

11. It is written. The quotation is from Isa. 45:23, though with some variations from the Hebrew.

Every knee. These words emphasize the universal character of the final judgment.

Shall confess. Gr. exomologeoµ, “to acknowledge,” “to give praise.” The latter meaning is common in the LXX (see 1 Chron. 29:13; etc.). Compare the use of this Greek word in Luke 10:21, where it is translated “to thank.” However, the alternative meaning “to confess,” “to acknowledge,” is also possible (cf. James 5:16, “Confess your faults”). Either meaning may be suitable in the context of Rom. 14:11. In the original quotation from Isaiah the oath of homage expressed by the phrase “shall swear” (cf. Joshua 23:7; 2 Chron. 15:14; Isa. 19:18) marks the submission of the whole world to Jehovah and the solemn confession of His sovereignty.

12. So then. The word order of this verse in the Greek adds emphasis to the individual responsibility of each believer: “So then each one of us concerning himself an account will give to God.”

Account. Gr. logos (see on ch. 9:28). In matters of conscience each man is personally responsible to God, and to Him alone.

13. Judge this rather. A second reason why believers should not criticize one another. Paul gives that reason with a play on the word “judge.” In this phrase he uses the word in the sense of “to decide,” “to determine” (see 1 Cor. 2:2; 2 Cor. 2:1; Titus 3:12). If there is to be any judging at all, let it not be criticism of others but the determination not to cause a brother to fall. Paul’s first reason for not judging is that men are accountable, not to one another but to God, who is their Master and Judge. His second reason is his oft-repeated rule of Christian love. Believers who are strong in faith will, out of love, be considerate of the feelings and consciences of their weaker brethren, and will exercise every care to avoid offending or confusing them. Although it is true that in matters of conscience no man is accountable to another, nevertheless all Christians are responsible for one another’s welfare. And though a Christian is free to shake off all legalistic remains of a former day, yet love for others forbids any use of this freedom that might harm a fellow believer who is “weak in the faith” (Rom. 14:1).

14. I know. Paul expresses his own personal, Spirit-enlightened conviction about the Christian’s freedom and right to reject certain scruples to which others hold (cf. 1 Cor. 8:4). By this emphatic assertion he shows that consideration for the “weak” (Rom. 14:1) is to be based upon love and not upon a recognition that such scruples are justified.

By the Lord Jesus. Or, “in the Lord Jesus.” Paul’s conviction springs from a mind dwelling in communion with Christ and thus enlightened by His Spirit. Compare ch. 9:1.

Nothing. That is, in this context, those kinds of foods that Paul has been speaking about here (see on v. 1). The word “nothing” must not be understood in its absolute sense. Words often convey more than one meaning; therefore, the particular definition intended must in each case be determined by the context. For example, when Paul said, “All things are lawful unto me” (1 Cor. 6:12), his statement, when isolated from the context, could be interpreted as a declaration that the apostle was a libertine. The context, which is a warning against immorality, immediately prohibits such a deduction (see comment there). Similarly in Ex. 16:4 the expression “every day” could be interpreted as meaning every day of the week. However, the context shows that the Sabbath is excluded.

Unclean. Gr. koinos, literally, “common.” This term was used to describe those things which, though “common” to the world, were forbidden to the pious Jew (see on Mark 7:2).

Of itself. The foods that the “weak” (v. 1) brother refrains from eating, but which the strong brother allows, are not the kinds of foods that are unclean in their own nature, but owe their taint to conscientious scruples (see on v. 23). Paul is not here sweeping away all distinctions between foods. The interpretation must be limited to the particular foods under discussion and to the specific problem with which the apostle is dealing, namely, the sympathetic treatment of those whose partly-enlightened consciences prevent their eating certain foods.

It is unclean. The uncleanness does not lie in the nature of the food but in the believer’s view of it. The “weak” (v. 1) Christian believes he ought not to eat foods offered to idols, for example, and makes it a matter of conscience to abstain from such foods. So long as he holds this conviction, it would be wrong for him to partake. He may be in error, judged from another’s point of view, but it would not be proper for him to act in violation of what he conscientiously supposes God requires (see v. 23).

15. But. Rather, “for,” apparently connecting this verse with the preceding argument.

Be grieved. The weak brother is pained and troubled in conscience by seeing more experienced believers indulging in what he considers sinful. This grief may result in his destruction, for either he may be turned away from the Christian faith, which seems to be associated with practices he regards sinful, or he may be led by the example of his stronger brethren into a cowardly acquiescence in a course of action which to him appears to be sinful (see 1 Cor. 8:10–12).

Meat. Gr. broµma, a general term for “food.”

Walkest thou. That is, you live, you behave (cf. on ch. 13:13).

Not charitably. Literally, “not according to love.” Compare ch. 13.

Destroy not. Whatever tends to influence anyone to violate his conscience may result in the destruction of his soul. A conscience once violated has been greatly weakened. One violation may lead to another until the soul is destroyed. Therefore a Christian who, by selfish indulgence even in something he regards as perfectly proper, exerts such a destroying influence, is guilty of the loss of a soul for whom Christ died (cf. 1 Cor. 8).

With thy meat. Literally, “by your food.” See on Mark 7:19.

Christ died. Christ died to save the “weak” (v. 1) brother, and his fellow believers must not destroy him for the sake of indulgence in certain foods. A very small sacrifice is asked in comparison with what Christ gave. He gave His life. Surely Christians who are strong in faith will be willing to forgo the pleasure of some favorite item of food or drink for the sake of their weaker brother.

16. Your good. This probably refers to the stronger faith, greater knowledge, and fuller freedom enjoyed by the stronger believers (see 1 Cor. 8:9–11; 10:30).

Be evil spoken of. Gr. blaspheµmeoµ, “to blaspheme.” Compare the use of this word in Rom. 3:8; 1 Cor. 10:30. The strong man should not let the selfish use of his liberty give occasion to those “weak in the faith” (Rom. 14:1) to condemn and speak evil of something that to him is a good thing and a blessing. He should beware lest he give any cause for others to reproach him for the harm his personal conduct may have brought to some overscrupulous brother. See on 1 Cor. 8:7–13.

17. The kingdom of God. This expression, standing alone, may refer either to the future kingdom of glory (cf. 1 Cor. 6:9, 10) or to the present kingdom of grace (see on Matt. 4:17; Matt. 5:2, 3). The latter meaning is here obviously intended. The essence of the kingdom of God lies not in things external, but in the inward graces of the spiritual life.

Meat and drink. Or, “eating and drinking.” These matters are trifling and insignificant when compared with those of which the kingdom of God actually does consist. Presumably the Christian whose faith is strong is aware of the spiritual nature of God’s kingdom. In fact, the knowledge of this vital truth is part of the “good” mentioned in v. 16. Surely then this knowledge will prevent him from grieving or destroying his weaker brother over matters that are so relatively inconsequential in themselves.

Righteousness. That is, a righteous way of life; right doing (see Rom. 6:19; Eph. 4:24).

Peace. This includes not only reconciliation to God (ch. 5:1) but also harmony and love in the church (cf. Rom. 14:19; Eph. 4:3; Col. 3:14, 15).

Joy in the Holy Ghost. This is the holy gladness with which the Spirit of God suffuses those who “life in the Spirit” (Gal. 5:25; cf. Rom. 15:13; Gal. 5:22; 1 Thess. 1:6). Those who are the strongest in faith understand best that the kingdom of God consists in such spiritual graces as these, and not in such material things as food and drink. Consequently as regards their Christian freedom in eating and drinking they would rather curtail their own personal liberty than to have their exercise of such freedom destroy the peace of the church (Rom. 14:13), or lead a weaker brother to do what, for him, would be unrighteous (v. 14), or rob him of his joy in the Spirit by grieving his conscience (v. 15).

18. In these things. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading “in this,” meaning, perhaps, “in this way.” The believer who acts charitably wins the good will of his brother instead of putting a stumbling block in his way.

Approved. Gr. dokimos, “tested,” “able to stand the test of inspection and criticism.” Compare the use of dokimos in 1 Cor. 11:19; 2 Cor. 10:18; 2 Tim. 2:15.

19. Let us. The verse reads literally, “So then let us pursue the things of peace and the things of upbuilding for one another” (cf. 1 Thess. 5:11; see also 1 Cor. 14:26).

20. Meat. Gr. broµma, food in general.

Destroy. Gr. kataluoµ, literally, “to loosen down.” The word is used to describe the pulling down of something that has been built up and thus carries on, by contrast, the figure begun by “edify,” literally, “build up,” in v. 19. For the sake of mere food Christians are not to fight against God by tearing down and destroying what He has built up.

The work of God. Compare 1 Cor. 3:9; Eph. 2:10.

Pure. See v. 14; cf. 1 Cor. 10:23.

With offence. This may refer either to the strong brother who, by taking advantage of his own liberty, offends his “weak” brother, or to the “weak” (v. 1) brother who, by the example of his strong brother, is emboldened to eat that which his conscience does not allow (see 1 Cor. 8:10). Most commentators seem to prefer the first interpretation. If this is correct, Paul is saying that “it is wrong for a man to be a stumbling block to others by what he eats.”

21. It is good. The strong Christian should be willing to give up his freedom in these comparatively inconsequential matters rather than to offend a weaker brother (cf. 1 Cor. 8:13).

Flesh. Gr.krea, “flesh foods.” The word occurs only here and in 1 Cor. 8:13. In Rom. 14:15, 20; etc., broµma, the word for food in general, is used.

Wine. Flesh and wine were evidently the principal objects of the weaker brother’s religious scruples, probably because they were customarily used by the pagans in sacrifice to their idols.

Nor any thing. The words “any thing,” though supplied, are clearly implied in the Greek. Paul adds this general caution to cover any activity that, though legitimate in itself, may upset or confuse the brother who is not yet persuaded that such actions are divinely permitted. The Christian who is contemplating a certain course of action will not only ask, Is this lawful? but also, How will this affect my brother’s soul?

Stumbleth. Gr. proskoptoµ, “to strike against,” “to stumble,” “to beat against,” metaphorically, “to take offense at.”

Offended. Textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of “or is offended, or is made weak.” However, these ideas are implicit in “stumbleth.”

Is made weak. Literally, “is weak,” meaning that the stronger brother is to be careful in all matters about which his brother’s unenlightened conscience may be easily grieved.

22. Hast thou faith? Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the reading, “The faith that you have.” The pronoun “you” is emphatic in the Greek. “Faith” in this context is the faith to “eat all things” (v. 2).

Have it to thyself. Such faith is not to be paraded openly to the offense of the “weak” (v. 1) brother, but is to be kept between yourself and God.

Happy. Gr.makarios (see on Matt. 5:3). This happiness is the blessedness of a clear and undoubting conscience.

Alloweth. Gr. dokimazoµ (see on ch. 12:2).

23. Doubteth. Or, “debates within himself.” Compare the description of the double-minded man (James 1:6; cf. Matt. 21:21; Mark 11:23; Rom. 4:20).

Is damned. Gr. katakrinoµ, “to condemn.” The man who eats, in spite of the doubts of his conscience, is condemned.

Faith. Here referring to a conviction of right and wrong, resulting in the determination to do whatever is believed to be God’s will. Paul’s meaning is that if a Christian does not act from strong personal conviction that what he does is right, but, instead, complies weakly with the judgment of others, then his action is sinful. The Christian should never violate his conscience. It may require educating. It may tell him that certain things are wrong that in themselves may not be wrong. But until convinced by the Word and the Spirit of God that a certain course is proper for him, he ought not to pursue it. He must not make others the criterion for his conduct; he must go to the Scriptures and learn for himself his duty in the matter (see 2T 119–124).

Ellen G. White comments

4    MB 57

5     DA 550

7     CT 33; FE 191, 206; GW 396; ML 212; PK 94; SC 120; 4T 72, 339, 493, 562; 5T 386, 565; 6T 236, 242; 7T 50, 296

10   MH 166

12   DA 550; 4T 654; 5T 399

13   MH 166; 1T 420; 2T 87, 552; 5T 352

16   CT 257; Ev 680; EW 70; 5T 593

17   TM 422, 497; 2T 319

19   DA 356; 6T 460

23        GC 436; MYP 198; 5T 437