Ro 14:1–23. Same
Subject Continued—Christian
Forbearance.
The
subject here, and on to Ro 15:13, is the consideration due from stronger
Christians to their weaker brethren; which is but the great law of love
(treated of in the thirteenth chapter) in one particular form.
1.
Him that is weak in the faith—rather,
“in faith”; that is, not “him that is weak in the truth believed” [Calvin, Beza,
Alford, &c.], but (as most
interpreters agree), “him whose faith wants that firmness and breadth which
would raise him above small scruples.” (See on Ro 14:22,23).
receive
ye—to cordial Christian fellowship.
but
not to doubtful disputations—rather,
perhaps, “not to the deciding of doubts,” or “scruples;” that is, not for the
purpose of arguing him out of them: which indeed usually does the reverse;
whereas to receive him to full brotherly confidence and cordial interchange of
Christian affection is the most effectual way of drawing them off. Two examples
of such scruples are here specified, touching Jewish meats and days.
“The strong,” it will be observed, are those who knew these to be abolished
under the Gospel; “the weak” are those who had scruples on this point.
2.
one believeth that he may eat all things—See
Ac 10:16.
another,
who is weak, eateth herbs—restricting
himself probably to a vegetable diet, for fear of eating what might have been
offered to idols, and so would be unclean. (See 1Co 8:1–13).
3.
Let not him that eateth despise—look
down superciliously upon “him that eateth not.”
and
let not him that eateth not judge—sit
in judgment censoriously upon “him that eateth.”
for
God hath received him—as one of His dear children, who in
this matter acts not from laxity, but religious principle.
4.
Who art thou that judges another man’s—rather,
“another’s”
servant?—that is, Christ’s,
as the whole context shows, especially Ro 14:8, 9.
Yea, &c.—“But he shall be made to stand, for God is able to
make him stand”; that is, to make good his standing, not at the day of
judgment, of which the apostle treats in Ro 14:10, but in the true fellowship
of the Church here, in spite of thy censures.
5.
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day—The supplement “alike” should be omitted, as injuring the
sense.
Let
every man be fully persuaded in his own mind—be
guided in such matters by conscientious conviction.
6.
He that regardeth the day, regardeth it to the Lord—the Lord Christ,
as before.
and
he … not, to the Lord he doth not—each
doing what he believes to be the Lord’s will.
He
that earth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth
not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks—The one gave thanks to God for the flesh which the other
scrupled to use; the other did the same for the herbs to which, for conscience’
sake, he restricted himself. 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 among 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 Mk
2:28)—it will be hard to show that the apostle must have meant it to be ranked
by his readers among 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.
7,
8. For none of us—Christians
liveth
to himself—(See 2Co 5:14, 15), to dispose of
himself or shape his conduct after his own ideas and inclinations.
and
no man—“and none” of us Christians “dieth
to himself.”
8.
For whether we live, we live unto the Lord—the
Lord Christ; see Ro 14:9.
and
whether we die, we die unto the Lord; whether we live therefore, or die, we are
the Lord’s—Nothing but the most vivid
explanation of these remarkable words could make them endurable to any
Christian ear, if Christ were a mere creature. For Christ is here—in the
most emphatic terms, and yet in the most unimpassioned tone—held up as the
supreme Object of the Christian’s life, and of his death too;. and that by the
man whose horror of creature worship was such, that when the poor Lycaonians
would have worshipped him, he rushed forth to arrest the deed, directing them
to “the living God,” as the only legitimate Object of worship (Ac 14:15). Nor
does Paul teach this here, but rather appeals to it as a known
and recognized fact, of which he had only to remind his readers. And since the
apostle, when he wrote these words, had never been at Rome, he could only know
that the Roman Christians would assent to this view of Christ, because it was the
common teaching of all the accredited preachers of Christianity, and the common
faith of all Christians.
9.
For to this end Christ both,
&c.—The true reading here is, To this end Christ died and lived (“again”).
that
he might be Lord both of the dead and—“and
of the”
living—The grand object of His death was to acquire this
absolute Lordship over His redeemed, both in their living and in their dying,
as His of right.
10.
But why, &c.—The original is more
lively:—“But thou (the weaker believer), why judgest thou thy brother? And thou
again (the stronger), why despisest thou thy brother?”
for
we shall all—the strong and the weak together.
stand
before the judgment-seat of Christ—All
the most ancient and best manuscripts read here, “the judgment-seat of God.”
The present reading doubtless crept in from 2Co 5:10, where “the judgment-seat
of Christ” occurs. But here “the judgment-seat of God” seems to
have been used, with reference to the quotation and the inference in Ro 14:11,
12.
11,
12. For it is written—(Is 45:23).
As
I live, saith the Lord—Hebrew,
Jehovah.
every
knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God—consequently, shall bow to the award of God upon their
character and actions.
12.
So then—infers the apostle.
every
one of us shall give account of himself to God—Now, if it be remembered that all this is adduced quite
incidentally, to show that Christ
is the absolute Master of all Christians, to rule their judgments and feelings
towards each other while “living,” and to dispose of them “dying,” the
testimony which it bears to the absolute Divinity of Christ will appear
remarkable. On any other view, the quotation to show that we shall all stand
before the judgment-seat of God would be a strange proof that Christians
are all amenable to Christ.
13.
Let us not therefore judge—“assume
the office of judge over”
one
another; but judge this rather,
&c.—a beautiful sort of play upon the word “judge,” meaning, “But let this
be your judgment, not to put a stumbling-block,” &c.
14,
15. I know, and am persuaded by—or
rather, “in”
the
Lord Jesus—as “having the mind of Christ” (1Co
2:16).
that
there is nothing unclean of itself—Hence
it is that he calls those “the strong” who believed in the abolition of all
ritual distinctions under the Gospel. (See Ac 10:15).
but—“save that”
to
him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean—“and therefore, though you can eat of it with out
sin, he cannot.”
15.
But if thy brother be grieved—has
his weak conscience hurt
with
thy meat—rather, “because of meat.” The word
“meat” is purposely selected as something contemptible in contrast with the
tremendous risk run for its sake. Accordingly, in the next clause, that idea is
brought out with great strength.
Destroy
not him with—“by”
thy
meat for whom Christ died—“The
worth of even the poorest and weakest brother cannot be more emphatically
expressed than by the words, ‘for whom Christ died’ ” [Olshausen]. The same sentiment is expressed with equal
sharpness in 1Co 8:11. Whatever tends to make anyone violate his conscience
tends to the destruction of his soul; and he who helps, whether wittingly or
no, to bring about the one is guilty of aiding to accomplish the other.
16,
17. Let not then your good—that is,
this liberty of yours as to Jewish meats and days, well founded though it be.
be
evil spoken of—for the evil it does to others.
17.
For the kingdom of God—or, as we
should say, Religion; that is, the proper business and blessedness for which
Christians are formed into a community of renewed men in thorough subjection to
God (compare 1Co 4:20).
is
not meat and drink—“eating and drinking”
but
righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost—a beautiful and comprehensive division of living
Christianity. The first—“righteousness”—has respect to God, denoting
here “rectitude,” in its widest sense (as in Mt 6:33); the second—“peace”—has
respect to our neighbors, denoting “concord” among brethren (as is plain
from Ro 14:19; compare Eph 4:3; Col 3:14, 15); the third—“joy in the Holy
Ghost”—has respect to ourselves. This phrase, “joy in the Holy Ghost,”
represents Christians as so thinking and feeling under the workings of the Holy
Ghost, that their joy may be viewed rather as that of the blessed Agent who
inspires it than their own (compare 1Th 1:6).
18.
For he that in these things—“in
this,” meaning this threefold life.
serveth
Christ—Here again observe how, though we
do these three things as a “kingdom of God,” yet it is “Christ”
that we serve in so doing; the apostle passing here from God to Christ as
naturally as before from Christ to God—in a way to us inconceivable, if Christ
had been viewed as a mere creature (compare 2Co 8:21).
is
acceptable to God, and approved of men—these
being the things which God delights in, and men are constrained to approve.
(Compare Pr 3:4; Lu 2:52; Ac 2:47; 19:20).
19.
the things, &c.—more simply, “the things of
peace, and the things of mutual edification.”
20.
For—“For the sake of”
meat
destroy not the work of God—(See on
Ro 14:15). The apostle sees in whatever tends to violate a brother’s conscience
the incipient destruction of God’s work (for every converted man is
such)—on the same principle as “he that hateth his brother is a murderer” (1Jn
3:15).
All
things indeed are pure—“clean”;
the ritual distinctions being at an end.
but
it is evil to that man—there is
criminality in the man
who
eateth with offence—that is, so as to stumble a weak
brother.
21.
It is good not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing—“nor to do any thing”
whereby—“wherein”
thy
brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak—rather, “is weak.” These three words, it has been remarked,
are each intentionally weaker than the other:—“Which may cause a brother to
stumble, or even be obstructed in his Christian course, nay—though neither of
these may follow—wherein he continues weak; unable wholly to disregard the
example, and yet unprepared to follow it.” But this injunction to abstain from flesh,
from wine, and from whatsoever may hurt the conscience of a
brother, must be properly understood. Manifestly, the apostle is treating of
the regulation of the Christian’s conduct with reference simply to the
prejudices of the weak in faith; and his directions are to be considered not as
prescriptions for one’s entire lifetime, even to promote the good of men
on a large scale, but simply as cautions against the too free use of Christian
liberty in matters where other Christians, through weakness, are not persuaded
that such liberty is divinely allowed. How far the principle involved in
this may be legitimately extended, we do not inquire here; but ere we consider
that question, it is of great importance to fix how far it is here actually expressed,
and what is the precise nature of the illustrations given of it.
22.
Hast thou faith—on such matters?
have
it to thyself—within thine own breast
before
God—a most important clause. It is not
mere sincerity, or a private opinion, of which the apostle
speaks; it is conviction as to what is the truth and will of God. If thou hast
formed this conviction in the sight of God, keep thyself in this frame before
Him. Of course, this is not to be over-pressed, as if it were wrong to discuss
such points at all with our weaker brethren. All that is here condemned is such
a zeal for small points as endangers Christian love.
Happy
is he that condemneth not himself in that which he alloweth—allows himself to do nothing, about the lawfulness of which
he has scruples; does only what he neither knows nor fears to be sinful.
23.
And—rather, “But”
he
that doubteth is damned—On the
word “damnation,” see on Ro 13:2.
if
he eat, because he eateth not of faith—On
the meaning of “faith” here, see on Ro 14:22.
for
whatsoever is not of faith is sin—a
maxim of unspeakable importance in the Christian life.
Note, (1) Some points in Christianity are unessential to
Christian fellowship; so that though one may be in error upon them, he is not
on that account to be excluded either from the communion of the Church or from
the full confidence of those who have more light. This distinction between
essential and non-essential truths is denied by some who affect more than
ordinary zeal for the honor and truth of God. But they must settle the question
with our apostle. (2) Acceptance with God is the only proper criterion of right
to Christian fellowship. Whom God receives, men cannot lawfully reject (Ro
14:3, 4). (3) As there is much self-pleasing in setting up narrow standards of
Christian fellowship, so one of the best preservatives against the temptation
to do this will be found in the continual remembrance that Christ is the one Object for whom all
Christians live, and to whom all Christians die; this will be such a living and
exalted bond of union between the strong and the weak as will overshadow all
their lesser differences and gradually absorb them (Ro 14:7–9). (4) The
consideration of the common judgment-seat at which the strong and the weak
shall stand together will be found another preservative against the unlovely
disposition to sit in judgment one on another (Ro 14:10–12). (5) How brightly
does the supreme Divinity of Christ shine out in this chapter! The exposition
itself supersedes further illustration here. (6) Though forbearance be a great
Christian duty, indifference to the distinction between truth and error is not
thereby encouraged. The former is, by the tax, made an excuse for the latter.
But our apostle, while teaching “the strong” to bear with “the weak,”
repeatedly intimates in this chapter where the truth really lay on the points
in question, and takes care to call those who took the wrong side “the weak”
(Ro 14:1, 2, 14). (7) With what holy jealousy ought the purity of the
conscience to be guarded, since every deliberate violation of it is incipient
perdition (Ro 14:15, 20)! Some, who seem to be more jealous for the honor of
certain doctrines than for the souls of men, enervate this terrific truth by
asking how it bears upon the “perseverance of the saints”; the advocates of
that doctrine thinking it necessary to explain away what is meant by
“destroying the work of God” (Ro 14:20), and “destroying him for whom Christ
died” (Ro 14:15), for fear of the doctrinal consequences of taking it nakedly;
while the opponents of that doctrine are ready to ask, How could the apostle
have used such language if he had believed that such a catastrophe was
impossible? The true answer to both lies in dismissing the question as
impertinent. The apostle is enunciating a great and eternal principle in
Christian Ethics—that the wilful violation of conscience contains within
itself a seed of destruction; or, to express it otherwise, that the total
destruction of the work of God in the renewed soul, and, consequently, the loss
of that soul for eternity, needs only the carrying out to its full effect of
such violation of the conscience. Whether such effects do take place, in
point of fact, the apostle gives not the most distant hint here; and therefore
that point must be settled elsewhere. But, beyond all doubt, as the position we
have laid down is emphatically expressed by the apostle, so the interests of all
who call themselves Christians require to be proclaimed and pressed on every
suitable occasion. (8) Zeal for comparatively small points of truth is a poor
substitute for the substantial and catholic and abiding realities of the
Christian life (Ro 14:17, 18). (9) “Peace” among the followers of Christ is a
blessing too precious to themselves, and, as a testimony to them that are
without, too important, to be ruptured for trifles, even though some lesser
truths be involved in these (Ro 14:19, 20). Nor are those truths themselves
disparaged or endangered thereby, but the reverse. (10) Many things which are
lawful are not expedient. In the use of any liberty, therefore, our question
should be, not simply, Is this lawful? but even if so, Can it be used with safety
to a brother’s conscience?—How will it affect my brother’s soul (Ro 14:21)? It
is permitted to no Christian to say with Cain, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Ge
4:9). (11) Whenever we are in doubt as to a point of duty—where abstinence is
manifestly sinless, but compliance not clearly lawful—the safe course is ever
to be preferred, for to do otherwise is itself sinful. (12) How exalted and
beautiful is the Ethics of Christianity—by a few great principles teaching us
how to steer our course amidst practical difficulties, with equal regard to
Christian liberty, love, and confidence!
Excerpt from:
A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
by Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
Rick Meyers. e-Sword ®: www.e-sword.net
