Chapter 14:1–15:13

Outline (continued)

Practical Application

G. What Should Be the Attitude of the Justified Believer Toward the Weak and the Strong

“Him who is weak in faith accept”

14:1–23

“We who are strong ought to bear the failings of the weak and not to please ourselves”

15:1–13

G. What Should Be the Attitude of the Justified Believer Toward the Weak and the Strong

“Him who is weak in faith accept”

14:1–23

14 1 Him who is weak in faith accept, but not with the idea of passing judgment on (his) opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, but another, being weak, eats (only) vegetables. 3 Let not him who eats look down on him who does not, and let not him who does not eat judge him who does, for God has accepted him. 4 Who are you that you dare pass judgment on someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5 One person regards one day as being better than another; another regards every day as being good. Let each one be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who regards one day as being special, does so in honor of the Lord; and he who eats does so in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God. And he who abstains does so in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself alone, and none of us dies to himself alone. 8 If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.

10 But you, why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. 11 For it is written,

“ ‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,

‘Before me will every knee bow down,

And every tongue will acclaim God.’ ”

12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another; but rather, let this be your judgment, namely, that you should not put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way. 14 I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but if anyone considers something to be unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15 For if your brother is seriously upset because of what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not allow that which for you is a good thing to become an occasion for slanderous talk. 17 For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit; 18 for anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and respected among men.

19 Let us then pursue the things that lead to peace and to mutual edification. 20 Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. Everything, indeed, is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes (someone else) to stumble. 21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to stumble.

22 Whatever you believe (about these things) keep between yourself and God.³⁷⁰ Blessed is the person who does not need to condemn himself over what he approves. 23 But the one who has misgivings³⁷¹ when he eats is condemned, because (his eating does) not (spring) from faith; and everything (that does) not (spring) from faith is sin.

As Paul is approaching the end of this epistle he is aware that there is one important problem on which he has not yet touched, namely, that of the relation between the weak and the strong. The strong were those who were able to grasp the significance of Christ’s death for daily living; that is, for eating and drinking, etc., the weak were not.

1. Origin of the problem

God had laid down certain rules with respect to clean versus unclean animals. Only the clean were permitted to be used as food. See Lev. 11:1–45; Deut. 14:3–21. Cf. Dan. 1:8 f.; Tobit 1:10–12; I Macc. 1:62; II Macc. 7: Josephus, Antiq. IV.vi.8.

In connection with his teaching that whatever enters a person from the outside is undefiling, Jesus had pronounced all foods clean (Mark 7:15–19). But if even Peter was slow in taking to heart the full implications of this dominical pronouncement, as Acts 10:9–16; 11:1–18; Gal. 2:11–21 indicate, it is understandable that for other Jewish converts to Christianity the situation became even more difficult.

It has been suggested that in the church of Rome the clash between meat-eaters and abstainers became more explosive when Jews who had been expelled from the capital by Claudius (see p. 18) returned. During their absence the Roman church experienced no difficulty, but with their return to Rome a somewhat strained relation began to develop between the two ethnic groups. Whether this theory is correct cannot now be determined, but it may well be. The view according to which “the strong” consisted of the Gentile portion of the congregation, the majority (see pp. 21–23), while “the weak” consisted of the Jewish portion, seems to be confirmed by 15:7 f. (See on that passage). However, this does not mean that only Gentiles belonged to the strong portion, and only Jews to the weak. A Hebrew of Hebrews was Paul; nevertheless, he included himself among the strong (15:1).

But had not Christ, by his death on the cross, fulfilled and thereby abolished, the Old Testament shadows? And if even the divinely established dietary regulations had lost their validity, was not the same true, in fact more decisively, with respect to all man-made rules that had been embroidered upon them?

True indeed, but this legitimate inference was not drawn by every believer in Christ. Many, especially in Jerusalem and vicinity, but also in Rome and probably elsewhere, held fast to their “traditions.”

Now as long as no saving significance or merit of any kind was ascribed to the perpetuation of such rules and regulations, and no offense was given, such persistence in clinging to the old could be tolerated. The adherents must be treated with love and patience. This was true especially during what might be called “the period of transition.”

However, in mixed communities problems immediately presented themselves. Customs—Gentile versus Jewish—were bound to clash. The fact that the law of ordinances had been nailed to the cross, and along with it all man-made regulations had also become logically extinct, had not become clear to every believer in Christ. And the further and closely related fact that “in Christ” the wall of separation between Jew and Gentile had been broken down, never to be rebuilt, was frequently ignored, as it is even today in certain circles!

2. What the two groups—the strong and the weak—had in common

a. The members of each group must be regarded as genuine believers (Rom. 14:1–4, 6, 10, 13).

b. Each group was critical of the other (14:3, 4, 13).

c. Each group will have to give an account of itself to the Lord (14:11).

3. The points with respect to which the two groups differed:

a. The strong believed that they were permitted to eat anything (meats as well as vegetables); the weak were vegetarians (14:2).

b. The strong regarded every day as being “good.” The weak regarded one day as being better than another (14:5). The emphasis falls on a.

4. Paul’s attitude toward the two groups and his admonitions addressed to the groups and to the congregation in general

a. In at least one important point Paul agrees with the strong, namely, in believing that nothing (no food) is unclean in itself (14:14, 20; 15:1).

b. He admonishes each group not to look down on the other (14:3, 5, 19).

c. He is especially emphatic in denouncing the attitude of some strong people toward the weak (14:14–21), and he admonishes the strong lovingly to bear with the failings of the weak (15:1).

d. He stresses the fact that the matter of eating and drinking is not nearly as important as that of being a citizen of the kingdom of God, for the essence of that kingdom is not “eating and drinking but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (14:17).

e. He admonishes both groups—in fact, the entire congregation—to pursue those things that lead to peace and mutual edification (14:19; 15:2, 3).

f. He points to the example of Christ, who did not please himself, and was willing for our sake, and to the glory of God, to suffer reproach (15:3–6).

g. He summarizes his exhortations by pleading: “Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, to the glory of God” (15:7). He shows that, in Christ, Jews and Gentiles attain their unity. He states, “Christ has become a servant of ‘the circumcision’ (i.e., of the Jews) for the sake of God’s truth … but the Gentiles glorify God for the sake of (his) mercy, ” quoting passages from the Old Testament to prove what he had just now said with respect to the Gentiles (15:8–12).

h. He closes this section—and in a sense, the entire letter up to this point—with the beautiful prayer-wish, “May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace, in the exercise of (your) faith, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may overflow with hope” (15:13).

5. Similarities and differences between Paul’s teaching (with respect to diets and days), a. in Romans, and b. in other epistles

There are resemblances and there are also differences between that which Paul says about this subject here in Romans, on the one hand, and what, on the other hand, he says about it in I Corinthians, Galatians, and Colossians; differences not in doctrine but in approach and style.

a. Romans and I Corinthians

Both here in Romans and in I Cor. 8:1–13; 10:14–33 Paul teaches that the church—and of course also believers individually—should treat with consideration and tenderness those who are weak; that is, who are, or seem to be, unable to grasp the significance of Christ’s death on the cross for daily life. The strong and the weak should treat each other with kindness.

“Let not him who eats look down on him who does not, and let not him who does not eat judge him who does, for God has accepted him” (Rom. 14:3). “Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak” (I Cor. 8:9).

In the Corinthian passages Paul speaks about food that had been offered to idols (I Cor. 10:20, 28). This feature is not mentioned in Romans, though it may be implied. Also, in Romans (14:5 f.) there is a reference to the observance of special days. This item is absent from I Corinthians.

b. Romans and Galatians

Also between what Paul says here in Rom. 14:1–15:13 and what he says in Gal. 4:10, 11 there is a resemblance. In both letters reference is made to the observance of certain special days. But the manner in which the apostle refers to these days differs widely in these two epistles. In Galatians the reference is to sabbath-days, days of the new moon, festival seasons belonging to the Jewish cycle, and either (1) the sabbath and jubilee years, or (2) the New Year (Rosh Hashana) on the first day of the month Tishri. Paul is saying that strict observance of such days and festivals has nothing whatever to do with securing divine favor. As a foundation upon which to build one’s hope of being justified in the sight of God such observance is merely a superstition. It is utterly futile, nothing but sinking sand. Paul, as it were, shakes his head in utter disgust when he reflects on the fact that rigid, painstaking adherence to the Mosaic law regarding stated days was actually being substituted for simple faith in Jesus Christ. He even states, “I am afraid about you, lest somehow I have labored among you in vain” (Gal. 4:11).

Here, in Rom. 14:5, Paul simply says, “One person regards one day as being better than another; another regards every day as being good. Let each one be fully convinced in his own mind.” The sharply critical and denunciatory style that characterizes the Galatian passages is completely absent from Romans, the reason being that by the weak brothers in Rome the observance of certain days was not viewed as having anything to do with obtaining salvation. So in Rom. 14:1, 5, 19; 15:1, 7 the apostle expresses himself in a very gentle and subdued manner.

c. Romans and Colossians

There are also similarities and differences between Rom. 14:1–15:13 and Colossians. In Col. 2:16, 17 Paul writes, “Therefore allow no one to pass judgment on you by what you eat or drink, or with respect to a (religious) festival or a New Moon celebration or a sabbath day.” And in 2:20, 21 he asks, “If with Christ you died to the rudiments [or: basic principles] of the world, why, as though you were still living in the world [or: as though you still belonged to the world], do you submit to its regulations ‘Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!’ ”?

It is clear that here, in Colossians, Paul again sharply rebukes those whom he addresses, the reason now being that these people were giving heed to false teachers who were telling them, “Faith in Christ will not give you fulness of knowledge, wisdom, power, salvation. Therefore you must follow our rules concerning days and diets.” At bottom this was an attack on the supremacy and all-sufficiency of Christ, “in whom all the fulness of the godhead dwells bodily” (Col. 2:9).

As has been indicated, the treatment of the same general theme—days and diets—in Romans differs sharply, since the weak ones addressed in this epistle did not attach any saving significance to their eating, drinking, and abstaining, and to their observance of certain special days.

1. Him who is weak in faith accept, but not with the idea of passing judgment on (his) opinions.³⁷²

Paul is telling the members of the Roman church, whom he regards as being “strong”—he evidently is thinking of the majority—that they must not commit the moral error of passing judgment upon those who are “weak” in faith, must not condemn them for refusing to eat any meat.

The “weak” members probably reasoned as follows: “In this pagan city how do we know whether any meat at all is really ‘clean’? How do we know whether the animal from which it came was actually a ‘clean’ one? How do we know whether it was slaughtered in the prescribed manner? And how do we know whether it was not first of all offered to idols?”

The apostle reasoned that as long as the vegetarianism of these people did not result from the conviction, “By becoming vegetarians we are putting God in debt to ourselves,” they must be viewed as believers, brothers and sisters in Christ. They must be fully “accepted,” that is, not only should they be formally recognized as members in good and regular standing of the church but they must also be heartily welcomed into daily fellowship with all other believers. From every aspect the welcome extended to them must be warm and genuine. The very suggestion of “accepting” (?) them with the purpose of adversely criticizing them for their “opinions” (or “scruples”) must not even occur to anyone.

2, 3. One person believes he may eat anything, but another, being weak, eats (only) vegetables. Let not him who eats look down on him who does not, and let not him who does not eat judge him who does, for God has accepted him.

One person, namely, the strong, is convinced that there is no valid restriction on the kinds of food he may eat and enjoy. Another person, being weak—for explanation of “strong” and “weak” see p. 453—eats only vegetables. The strong one, or eater, should not look down with contempt on the weak one, or abstainer.

Nevertheless, this is exactly what the strong one would be inclined to do. As was explained earlier (p. 452) the strong ones or eaters were mostly converts from the world of the Gentiles, and in the church of Rome constituted the majority (pp. 21–23). “Why bother with those few vegetarians?” might well be their contemptuous outcry—the Jerusalem Council had been far more conciliatory (Acts 15:20).

The weak or abstainers, on the other hand, might be tempted to derive satisfaction from the very fact that they were in the minority—is not one on God’s side a majority?—and might therefore begin to pass judgment on the eaters.

The apostle condemns both attitudes, that of contempt and that of condemnation. Though he desires that the rights of the weak shall be fully respected and that the vegetarian shall be treated with sympathetic regard and genuine deference, he is no less insistent on demanding that the weak refrain from condeming the strong, the eater, stating as his reason “for God has accepted him.” It should be clear that in the present context the pronoun “him” can refer only to the eater, the strong one.³⁷³ This view receives further confirmation from the next verse:

4. Who are you that you dare pass judgment on someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls.

The form of the question reminds us of 9:20, “But who are you, O man, to talk back to God?” What Paul is saying is that the eater or strong one is answerable only to “his own master,” namely, the Lord Jesus Christ; just as, by way of illustration, a servant or slave would be answerable only to his own master. The eater is certainly not obliged to give an account to the abstainer. The latter has no right to condemn him. Paul continues: And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

It should be borne in mind that the “eater” or “strong one” is the person who has, by God’s sovereign grace and the enlightening power of the Holy Spirit, gained an insight into the meaning of Christ’s death for daily living. Better than the “weak” person or “abstainer” he has grasped the truth expressed so beautifully in Col. 2:14, namely, that Christ “blotted out the handwritten document that was against us, which by means of its requirements testified against us, and he took it out of the way by nailing it to the cross.”

The question, then, is this, “When a person, by the grace of God, has taken this lesson to heart, will he surrender this precious jewel?” To be sure, he cannot remain standing in his own power. But he has a Savior who said, “My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give them everlasting life, and they shall certainly never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand” (John 10:27, 28). Or, as Paul expresses the same truth here in Rom. 14:4, “And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.” The further question, namely, whether the term “the Lord” refers, in the present instance, to Christ, or to God, is academic. A good answer might well be, “It refers to Christ, and therefore to God.”

In the introduction to this chapter—see above, p. 453—we took note of the fact that in addition to a difference of opinion, between the strong and the weak, with respect to eating, there was also a difference with respect to the observance of special days. Turning now to this subject Paul says:

5. One person regards one day as being better than another; another regards every day as being good.³⁷⁴

What was the day which “one person,” that is, this or that convert to Christianity, regarded as more sacred than another day? According to some it must have been the seventh day of the week, the Jewish sabbath.³⁷⁵ Even though such an individual would join with the other members of the church in worship on the first day of the week (cf. Acts 20:7), he would close shop and cease to work on Saturday. Other commentators, however, call attention to the fact that the law of Moses not only distinguished between meats as being either clean or unclean, but also prescribed the observance of certain specific days as religious festivals. So, these people would continue to adhere to the Mosaic legislation on this point.³⁷⁶ Again, since the very subject of foods, to which Paul made reference in verses 2–4, brings up that of fasting, it has been suggested that the apostle is here referring to days of fasting, after the manner indicated in Luke 18:12.³⁷⁷

On the other hand, the idea that in the present context Paul was distinguishing between lucky and unlucky days³⁷⁸ must be rejected. If that had been the case Paul would certainly have condemned such a practice in no uncertain terms. He would not have written, Let each one be fully convinced in his own mind.³⁷⁹

Also, since the New Testament does indeed ascribe very special significance to the first day of the week (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2, 9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; I Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10), it is indeed very doubtful that the apostle would have expressed himself in such moderate terms if the “weak” members of Rome’s church had been indifferent about setting this day apart from all the others (as far as practical in those days) as a day of rest and worship.

We must admit that we cannot now determine in what sense the weak members of the Roman church regarded one day as being better than another, while they still observed and honored the Lord’s Day, that is, the first day of the week. That this ignorance on our part is not very serious is shown by the fact that, after verses 5, 6, in this entire epistle the apostle never again refers to this difference about days. He does insist, however, that “each one be fully convinced in his own mind” that what he is doing is right. No one must do what is contrary to the dictates of his own conscience as illumined by the Word! Let not the weak condemn the strong; but also, let not the strong look down on the weak; for:

6. He who regards one day as being special, does so in honor of the Lord; and he who eats does so in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God. And he who abstains does so in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

As a comparison with verse 5 shows, “He who regards one day as being special” is the weak person. Now Paul states that the person who makes this distinction between days, a distinction which strong persons would not make, must not be looked down upon for doing so, for he does so with the purpose of honoring the Lord.³⁸⁰ Similarly, the one who eats, paying no attention to the Mosaic distinction between clean and unclean, cannot be accused of being indifferent to the will of God. On the contrary, he too honors the Lord by doing what he does. Both the weak and the strong, in this matter of indifference, are honoring the Lord; the weak, by giving thanks to him for their vegetarian meal; the strong, by giving thanks for their meat, etc.

7–9. For none of us lives to himself alone, and none of us dies to himself alone. If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and lived, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.

Note the following:

a. “For none of us lives to himself alone,” etc.

The fact that “we,” both kinds of Christians, the strong and the weak, behave as we do, is because none of us lives a self-centered life. On the contrary, while still alive on earth we live for the Lord Jesus Christ. Cf. Phil. 1:21. Our basic aim is to please him. When we die we strive, even by means of our dying, to glorify the Lord.

b. “So then … we are the Lord’s.”

It is, after all, this Lord whose servants we are, and to whom we belong. Did he not purchase us with his precious blood? (I Cor. 6:20).

c. “For to this end Christ died and lived …”

Not here “lived and died” (Phillips), as if “lived” referred to Christ’s life on earth before his death by crucifixion, but “died and lived.” He died, and afterward, having risen from the dead, he went to live in heaven. Note the parallel:

	Christ died and lived
that he might be Lord of both	the dead and the living.

As our Mediator, Christ secured the indisputable right to exercise lordship over both those believers who have already died and those who are still alive on earth. This mediatorial lordship was the reward for the price he paid, the death he died. By means of his substitutionary death, followed by his intercessory life in heaven (Heb. 7:25), he sees to it that whatever he has merited for us, his children, is bestowed on us. Cf. II Cor. 4:10, “We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may be revealed in our bodies.” Cf. Rom. 6:4; Phil. 3:10.³⁸¹

10–12. But you, why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written,

“ ‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,

‘Before me will every knee bow down,

And every tongue will acclaim God.’ ”

So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

In verse 3 Paul had warned the strong not to look down on the weak, and the weak not to condemn the strong. That this was nevertheless actually occurring and is an inexcusable sin he makes clear in verse 10, where, in reverse order (now referring to the weak first of all) the apostle accusingly asks why one church member is sinning against another. These critics should bear in mind that the one whom they condemn or despise is, after all, a brother. Note how this term of endearment, which has not been used since 12:1, indicates the seriousness of the sin that was being committed. See further on pp. 52, 214, 215.

Also, those who are passing judgment, or are looking down on a brother, must remember that not they are lords, but Christ is the Lord; and accordingly, that not they are the legitimate judges, but Christ is the Judge. They are therefore arrogating to themselves a prerogative that belongs to Christ and to God alone.

Says Paul, “We shall all stand before the judgment seat of God.” In confirmation of this fact he quotes from the Old Testament. As happens frequently, so also here, the quotation is composite: the first part, “ ‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,” may be regarded as taken from Isa. 49:18 (cf. Num. 14:28; Deut. 32:40; Ezek. 33:11); the rest of the quotation, “Before me will every knee bow down, and every tongue will acclaim God,” is from Isa. 45:23, according to the LXX text, with transposition of two words,³⁸² but without change in meaning.

The quoted words do indeed confirm the thought Paul has expressed, namely, that in the end every person, without exception, will pay homage to God (cf. Phil. 2:10, 11), recognizing him as Sovereign over all, and acclaiming him as being the righteous Judge of all.

That there will indeed be a universal judgment is the teaching of Scripture (Eccl. 12:14; Eph. 6:8; Rev. 20:11–15). That believers as well as unbelievers will stand before the throne of judgment is also clear from Acts 10:42; I Cor. 3:8–15; 4:5; II Cor. 5:10, and from the teaching of Jesus (Matt. 16:27; 25:31–46). That it is, indeed, God who through Christ will judge is taught in Matt. 16:27; 25:31–46; John 5:22; Acts 10:42; I Cor. 4:5; II Cor. 5:10. It is as stated in Rom. 2:16 (see pp. 98, 99), “God, through Jesus Christ, will judge men’s secrets.”

Repeating the thought of verse 10 (“For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God”), Paul concludes his reflection on this theme by stating, “So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.” Note: each of us! Not a single one will be exempted. Also, the account will have to be given not to men but to God, the Omniscient, the Holy and Righteous One, who is also the God of Love.

Summarizing the main idea of verses 10–12—and in a sense even of 1–12 (see especially verses 1, 3, 4, 10–12)—Paul, addressing both the strong and the weak (note: “on one another”), but probably especially the strong, and drawing a conclusion, continues with the following exhortation:

13. Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another; but rather, let this be your judgment, namely, that you should not put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way.

Note the word-play: passing judgment … your judgment or decision.³⁸³

Paul urges the weak to stop criticizing the strong, and the strong to cease finding fault with the weak. Both parties should decide not to place any hindrance in the way of their brothers. On the contrary—for the negative implies the positive—each group should help the other to become a more effective witness for Christ.³⁸⁴

In view of the fact that both parties love the Lord, repose their trust in him, and wish to walk in his way, it would be wrong to hurt one another’s feelings by insisting that there be absolute unanimity with respect to every aspect of the practice of religion.

If, on a Sunday evening, perhaps after the church service, you invite six people to your home, but you happen to know that three of them have objections to the singing of a certain hymn, then, even though the other three plus yourself consider that hymn unobjectionable, you are not going to include that particular number in your evening social program. Instead, you are going to see to it that everybody receives a blessing and is happy. The same principle should be applied to ever so many similar situations. If an important religious principle is at stake, you are not going to be silent about your convictions, but in all circumstances you will observe the rule: “In things essential unity; in doubtful (or indifferent) liberty; in all things charity” (identity of the author of this motto not entirely certain). See also what has been said about Paul’s flexibility (pp. 12, 13).

The substance of this exhortation is certainly entirely in line with, and may even have been induced by, the teaching of Christ (Matt. 18:1–9; Mark 9:42–48; Luke 17:1, 2).

14. I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself …

Paul’s language is very emphatic.³⁸⁵ His conviction is firm, deep, and unshakable Cf. Gal. 5:10; Phil. 2:24; II Thess. 3:4; II Tim. 1:5, 12. It amounts to a persuasion that is based not only on the teaching of Jesus but also on the apostle’s spiritual closeness to his Lord and Savior. For the teaching of Jesus on this subject see Matt. 15:10, 11, 16–20; Mark 7:14–23. For Paul’s similar teaching see also I Tim. 4:4 “Everything God created is excellent, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving.” Add Titus 1:15, “All things are pure to those who are pure.”

Accordingly, the impurity pertains not to the food as such but to the person who questions whether or not he should eat it: but if anyone considers something to be unclean, then for him it is unclean.This does not mean that sin is wholly a matter of subjective opinion or of conscience. No, there are indeed many things that are definitely forbidden. No mere opinion on man’s part, or even the silence of conscience, can make right what God has declared to be wrong. But it does mean that even a human activity—in the present case eating meat a person considers to be unclean—is wrong for those who consider it to be wrong.

By expressing himself as he does the apostle accomplishes two things: (a) He encourages the strong by clearly showing that he takes their side; see verse 14a; (b) he helps the weak by reminding the strong that the weak are right in refusing to eat that which they (the weak) consider to be unclean (verse 14b). Should not this consummate, exquisite tact be a lesson for everyone; especially also for every pastor? What a loving heart, this heart of Paul, and how wise a disposition! No wonder that he continues as follows:

15. For if your brother is seriously upset because of what you eat, you are no longer walking in love.

The word “For” shows that the clause it introduces links with verse 13b rather than with verse 14. (Verse 14 can best be regarded as a parenthesis.) So what Paul is saying is really, “… Do not put a stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way, for if your brother is seriously upset,³⁸⁶ you are no longer walking in love.” Paul now uses the 2nd per. sing., you, driving home this urgent lesson, impressing it upon each of the addressed, one by one. He returns to the very subject, love for one another, on which he had expatiated with such warmth and eloquence in 12:9, 10; 13:9, 10, and even earlier (I Cor. 13). Love was the theme close to the heart not only of Paul but also of Peter (I Peter 4:8) and of John (I John 4:8); of God (John 3:16) and of Christ (I John 3:16)!

Paul continues: Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. The apostle is, as it were, saying, “Consider what you are doing! So dear is that brother of yours to Christ that he died for him. Nevertheless, you, by means of your unbrotherly conduct, are treating him in a manner which, were it not for God’s irresistible grace, would destroy him. Immediately stop doing what you are doing, and do the very opposite!”

16. Therefore do not allow that which for you is a good thing to become an occasion for slanderous talk.

Paul realizes that if in the presence of the weak a strong individual eats that which by the weak is considered “unclean,” he will be hurting that weak person. This would be even more true if, due to the insistence of the strong, the weak fellow-Christian would finally surrender and do what his conscience forbids him to do. Moreover, open quarrels between the two groups would certainly result in slanderous talk on the part of outsiders.

So the apostle warns the strong that they should not allow that which for them is “a good thing” to become an occasion of slanderous talk. But what is meant by “a good thing”? Opinions differ widely, as the footnote shows.³⁸⁷

What, then, does Paul mean when he, addressing the strong, says, “that which for you is a good thing”? In view of the immediately preceding context, the natural answer might seem to be “your Christian liberty.” The possibility that this answer is correct must be granted. Nevertheless, a good argument can be advanced for No. 4, the gospel. Would an outsider not be more likely to slander the gospel itself than to take sides in this debate between the strong and the weak? Besides, the apostle certainly regards the gospel as being a very good thing indeed. He uses the term “gospel” about 60 times in his epistles. He is so fond of it that he calls it “my gospel” (Rom. 2:16; 16:25), and even tells us that he is willing to put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ (I Cor. 9:12). What he considers a good thing for himself he must also have considered a good thing for others.

As to answers 2 (the kingdom or kingship of God) and 3 (salvation), if the correct answer is “the gospel,” this surely is “the gospel of salvation,” and if we look carefully at the meaning of the term “kingdom” or “kingship,” as defined by Paul himself in verse 17, namely, “righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit,” we will probably have to conclude that this description makes “kingdom” (or “kingship”) of God equivalent to “salvation.”

There is merit, therefore, in all four answers, though personally, if a choice must be made, I would still give a slight edge to “the gospel of salvation”; that is, of the realization of the kingship of God in the lives of God’s children.

Having said, “Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. Therefore do not allow that which for you is a good thing to become an occasion for slanderous talk,” the apostle continues,

17. For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit;

The essence of God’s royal reign, the evidence of that blessed reign in your midst, says Paul, as it were, is not affected by the kind of food a person consumes, whether ceremonially clean or unclean, whether only vegetables or also meats, but is attested by one’s possession of the state of righteousness before God, consciousness of peace with God, a peace resulting from reconciliation with God (5:1, 10). It is characterized by the experience of Spirit-wrought joy, a joy inexpressible and full of glory (I Peter 1:8).

It is immediately apparent that this answer is in complete accord with the words of Jesus, “The kingdom of God does not come with outward display; nor will people say, ‘Look, here (it is)!’ or ‘There (it is)!’ for, note well, the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21).³⁸⁸

18. for anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and respected among men.

Note: “serves Christ in this way”; that is (as the preceding verse makes clear), in the consciousness of having been justified by God, having peace with God, and experiencing the joy that was imparted to him by the Holy Spirit.

Such a person is, first of all, “pleasing to God.” He is truly living for God, to God’s honor and glory. See 14:6–8 and earlier, 6:22.

Note also the phrase, “and respected³⁸⁹ among men.” Those who say, “I don’t care at all what people think of me,” may be guilty of an other-worldliness that is not exactly pious. Paul had already written, “Always see to it that your affairs are right in the sight of everybody” (12:17b). Calvin was certainly correct when, commenting on Rom. 14:18, he wrote, “That man is acceptable to God, because he obeys his will; he testifies that he is approved by men, because they cannot do otherwise than bear testimony to that excellence which they see with their eyes; not that the ungodly always favor the children of God; on the contrary, when there is no cause, they often pour forth against them many reproaches … but Paul speaks here of honest judgment, blended with no moroseness, no hatred, no superstition.”

19. Let us then pursue the things that lead to peace and to mutual edification.³⁹⁰

Note the following:

a. Peace is a gift which God in Christ imparts to the church (John 14:27; 16:33; 20:19, 21, 26; Rom. 15:33; 16:20: II Cor. 13:11). He is “the God of peace” (Phil. 4:9; I Thess. 5:23; II Thess. 3:16). Therefore genuine peace is “the gift of God” (Phil. 4:7).

This does not mean, however, that we can take this peace for granted. On the contrary, here in 14:19 we are being reminded that it is our duty to “pursue the things that make for peace.” This is in line with the thinking of Peter (I Peter 3:11), of the author of the epistle to the Hebrews (12:14), and, much earlier, of the Psalmist (34:14).

b. Mutual edification. This expression shows that Paul conceives of the church as being an edifice. This implies that it is a united body. However, this edifice or building must not be thought of as being finished. No, it is constantly rising (Eph. 4:16). Even the individual stones are anything but static. If matters are as they should be, the stones are in the process of being made more and more beautiful. Moreover, they are living stones! (I Peter 2:5).

The main building material is love (Eph. 4:16). This is even more important than liberty. “Be careful that the exercise of your liberty does not become a stumbling block to the weak” (I Cor. 8:9). In fact, love is even better than knowledge. “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (I Cor. 8:1).

20. Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. Everything, indeed, is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes (someone else) to stumble.

We have already taken note of the fact that in verse 16 Paul was addressing the strong. There is no reason to believe that in the immediately following verses—including verse 20—he is directing his words of warning and exhortation to a different group. The first part of the passage causes no difficulty. Paul returns to the second person singular, last used in verse 15. This increases the forcefulness of his admonitions.

Having just a moment ago encouraged the work of building up, the apostle now warns against engaging in its very opposite, namely, tearing down or destroying (cf. Matt. 5:17; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; II Cor. 5:1; Gal. 2:18). Such tearing down is all the more wicked because it concerns the work of God in the heart and life of the weak brother, and doing this for the sake merely of something material, namely, food!

And if someone objects that it is perfectly proper for the strong person to eat whatever he likes to eat, since everything in the line of food is clean, as Paul has himself admitted (14:14; cf. Mark 7:19–23; I Tim. 4:4), the answer is, “Everything, indeed, is clean, but it is wrong—or bad, evil—for a person to eat anything that causes (someone else) to stumble.”

However, in the original this final clause of verse 20 is compressed into very few words: “but wrong for a person the eating with a stumbling block [or: with offense].”

The question arises, “Does Paul mean that the strong person should be on his guard lest by his eating he is giving offense to the weak brother?” Or is he saying, “It is wrong for the weak person to eat with a troubled conscience”?³⁹¹ For the first alternative see Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. IV, p. 415; and Cranfield, Vol. II, pp. 723, 724. For the second, Murray, Vol. II, p. 195. Of these two, the first, as this interpreter sees it, deserves the preference. Reasons: (a) Not only in the immediately preceding but even in the immediately following context (verse 21) Paul is addressing the strong. It is natural, therefore, to assume that also here in verse 20 he does so. (b) This conclusion brings the present passage into harmony with verse 13b, where Paul admonishes the strong to cease finding fault with the weak. (c) Elsewhere, in a similar context, the apostle declares, “Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to sin” (I Cor. 8:13).

After having stated what is wrong, a statement about what is right follows very naturally: 21. It is better³⁹² not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to stumble.

It is not the apostle’s intention to “lay down the law” with respect to eating and drinking. He is not issuing an order; rather, in a fatherly manner he is urging the strong person voluntarily to curtail the use of his freedom, to do this out of regard for his weak brother in Christ. In the presence of that weak person let him forego the privilege of eating meat.³⁹³ The same Paul who in verse 15 was saying, “For if your brother is seriously upset because of what you eat, you are no longer walking in love,” is speaking here in verse 21.

There are three things from which, according to verse 21, the strong person is advised to refrain, out of consideration for those who are weak:

a.     eating meat

b.     drinking wine

c.     doing anything else that will cause “your brother” to stumble.³⁹⁴

As to (a) refraining from eating meat, this follows naturally from the thought expressed in verses 2, 15, 16, 20.

As to (b), abstaining from wine, without additional information it is probably impossible to determine exactly why Paul adds this. According to some—see Cranfield, Vol. II, p. 725—this does not imply that the weak actually abstained from wine, but is simply mentioned because in verse 17 Paul made reference to eating and drinking. On the other hand, Murray’s view (Vol. II, p. 195), shared by many other commentators, namely, that drinking wine was involved in the scruples of the weak, impresses me as being preferable. The reason for this abstinence is not given. Is it possible that the weak abstained from the use of wine because wine was used as a libation in animal sacrifices? We just do not know, but see also Dan. 1:8, 16.

As to (c), the apostle “is simply commending to others what has for some time been the rule for himself” (E. F. Harrison, op. cit., p. 149). Cf. I Cor. 8:13.

The apostle was certainly giving excellent and inspired advice when he stated: 22. Whatever you believe (about these things) keep between yourself and God. Note strong emphasis on the pronoun you, in the original occurring at the very beginning of the sentence. It is as if Paul, in his imagination, is listening to a “strong” believer; one, however, who delights in hearing himself talk. That loud talker is saying, “I insist on my freedom; and I say that I will not allow anyone to interfere with that unrestrained freedom of mine, ” etc. So Paul, as it were, answers, “You better keep between yourself and God that conviction you have!” He adds, Blessed is the person who does not need to condemn himself over what he approves; meaning, Inwardly happy is that person—namely, that “strong” believer—who avoids bringing God’s judgment upon himself by insisting on the exercise of his “liberty” even though such insistence results in harming his “weak” fellow-believer.

Over against the person who does not need to condemn himself stands the one who “has misgivings,” and accordingly “is condemned.” Says Paul: 23. But the one who has misgivings when he eats is condemned, because (his eating does) not (spring) from faith …The “weak” believer—that is, the person who is not sure that he is doing the right thing but “wavers” (cf. 4:20) when he eats (meat)—stands condemned. This is true because his eating “does not spring from faith,” that is, “is not in harmony with an inner conviction that what he is doing is in line with his Christian faith.”

This person is sinning because he is trying to silence the voice of his conscience. He is convinced that what he is about to do is wrong, yet he does it. Accordingly, he is sinning. Says Paul: and everything (that does) not (spring) from faith is sin; that is, whatever thought, word, action, etc. does not spring from the inner conviction that it is in harmony with a person’s faith in God; or, stating it differently, whatever action is contradicted by one’s Christian conscience, is sin. To be sure, a person’s conscience is not the Final Judge of his actions, whether past, present, or contemplated. That Final Judge is God, or, if one prefers, the Word of God. But this does not alter the fact that even for that individual who may not have become fully informed about the will of God as revealed in his Word it is wrong by means of his actions to oppose the voice of his Christian conscience.

G. What Should Be the Attitude of the Justified Believer Toward the Weak and the Strong

(continued)

“We who are strong ought to bear the failings of the weak and not to please ourselves”

15:1–13

15 1 We who are strong ought to bear the failings of the weak and not to please ourselves. 2 Let each of us please his neighbor for (his) good, with a view to (his) edification. 3 For even Christ did not please himself but, as it is written,

“The reproaches of those reproaching thee feel on me.”

4 For whatever was written in former times was written for our instruction, in order that, through patient endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures, we might have hope.

5 May the God (who is the Source) of patient endurance and of encouragement grant you to live in harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, 6 so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

7 Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, to the glory of God. 8 For I declare that Christ has become a servant of the circumcised for the sake of God’s truth, to confirm the promises made to the fathers; 9 but the Gentiles glorify God for the sake of (his) mercy; as it is written:

“Therefore I will praise thee among the Gentiles,

and sing hymns to thy name.”

10 And again, it says,

“Rejoice, you Gentiles, together with his people.”

11 And again,

“Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles,

let all the peoples praise him.”

12 And again, Isaiah says,

“There will spring up the root of Jesse,

he who arises to rule over the Gentiles.

In him shall the Gentiles hope.”

13 May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace, in the exercise of (your) faith, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may overflow with hope.

The opening of chapter 15 looks like a new beginning. Actually the apostle summarizes what he has been saying about the weak, and indicates what should be the attitude of the strong toward them. But the opening does not stop here. It soon broadens in scope and fixes the attention of the entire congregation—and of all who will subsequently be brought into contact with this letter—on Christ, whose example of self-sacrifice in the interest of others should be followed by weak and strong alike.

1. We who are strong ought to bear the failings of the weak and not to please ourselves.

When Paul says. “We who are strong,” he classes himself with the strong. When he continues, “ought to bear the failings of the weak,” he means, “A moral-spiritual obligation rests on us strong ones; namely, not to think only of ourselves but also of the needs of others, in the present case the needs of those who are weak.” See I Cor. 10:33.

What Paul is saying here in Rom. 15:1 cannot be far removed from his exhortation found in Gal. 6:2, “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” The expression, “bear” the failings, does not merely mean, “tolerate” or “put up with” those failings, or even “bear with” them and “exercise patience” with those who have them. It means, “We should put our shoulders under these failings, and meaningfully help our weak fellow-believers to carry them.”³⁹⁵

Noblesse oblige! People of high birth should behave nobly toward others. This well-known motto, when applied to the present situation, would mean that those highly privileged people who are endowed with clear insight into the liberating significance of the death of Christ for daily living, so that they are correctly called “the strong,” are under obligation to deport themselves in a manner that is in keeping with their high privilege. Hence, they should vigorously, generously, and cheerfully help the (in a sense) less privileged persons, the “weak” individuals.

When Paul adds, “We who are strong ought … not to please ourselves,” he does not mean, “We, the strong, should never do anything to promote our own interests.” Pleasing God above all (Rom. 8:8), and, while doing so, also pleasing God’s image-bearers, including even ourselves, is the very purpose for which God created and redeemed us (Matt. 22:37–39; Rom. 13:9; I Cor. 10:33; Titus 2:9). It is the pleasing of ourselves regardless of how this pleasing affects others that is here condemned.

However, the divine approval does not even necessarily rest upon every attempt to please the neighbor. As Gal. 1:10 indicates, there is an attempt to please the neighbor that is evil. One who, being “nice” with a selfish purpose, trims his sails to every breeze of opinion or bias is acting wickedly. The person who, “with ulterior motive” (cf. 12:8), strives to please others is condemned. A vivid example is that of Absolom:”

“Whenever anyone came with a complaint to be placed before the king for a decision, Absalom would call out to him, ‘From what town are you?’ He would answer, ‘Your servant is from this or that tribe of Israel.’ Then Absalom would say to him, ‘Your claims are valid and proper, but there is no representative of the king to hear you.’ And Absalom would continue and say, ‘O, if only I were appointed as judge in the land! Then any man with a complaint or a case would come to me, and I would see to it that he gets justice.’ ”

“Also, whenever anyone approached him to bow down before him, Absalom would reach out his hand, take hold of him and kiss him … And so he stole the hearts of the men of Israel” (II Sam. 15:2b–7).

As has now been indicated, it is not only the deed but also—perhaps even more so—the motive and purpose that count. It is for this reason that Paul states,

2. Let each of us please his neighbor for (his) good, with a view to (his) edification. In other words, with a view to the spiritual advantage of that neighbor.

Now doing good for the benefit of others immediately reminds Paul of Christ (II Cor. 8:9), whose example we should follow. Therefore he continues,

3. For even Christ did not please himself but, as it is written, “The reproaches of those reproaching thee fell on me.” Ps. 69:9.

Meaning: Christ is addressing God, and is saying, “For the sake of my people I am taking upon myself the reproaches leveled against thee.”

The main lesson Paul is conveying is this: If Christ, the Holy One, was willing to take upon himself so much suffering, in the form of insults hurled at him by his enemies, then should not we be willing to sacrifice just a little eating-and-drinking pleasure for the sake of our fellow-believers?

Now for the details:

a. As often—see I Cor. 11:1; II Cor. 8:9; 10:1; Eph. 5:1, 2; Phil. 2:5 f.; Col. 3:13—Paul directs the attention of the addressed to Christ. In doing this, was he not copying Christ? See Matt. 11:29; 16:24; 20:27, 28; Mark 10:42–45; John 13:15. For Christ, as our Example, see also Heb. 3:1; 12:2; I Peter 2:21.

In connection with this subject two extremes should be avoided: (1) that of denying the truth that first and most of all Christ is not our Example but our Savior; and (2) that of denying that there is a sense in which our Savior Jesus Christ is indeed also our Example. Of course, he cannot be our Example unless he is first of all our Savior!

b. The words “Christ did not please himself” are a remarkable litotes or understatement for his marvelous and wholehearted self-sacrifice in the interest of sinners. See especially Isa. 53; Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; II Cor. 8:9; Phil. 2:5 f.

c. When the question is asked, “Why did the apostle refer to the insults or reproaches that were heaped upon Christ by men rather than to the far more terrible wrath of God which he suffered?” the answer might be that in so doing Paul makes his argument all the more effective, because the insults flung at Christ by men were heard, discussed, and remembered, but the wrath of God remained unseen.³⁹⁶

d. Paul quotes Ps. 69:9b. The words quoted are found in that exact form in LXX Ps. 68:10.

Psalm 69 is one of six Psalms most often referred to in the New Testament, the others being Pss. 2, 22, 89, 110, and 118.³⁹⁷

e. According to Ps. 69:9b, interpreted in light of the immediately preceding context, namely verse 9a, it was “zeal” for God’s house that consumed the Speaker, namely, Christ, as pictured in this Old Testament passage. The implied lesson is that also the “strong” believers of the new dispensation should be filled with zeal: they should be eager to make sacrifices for the sake not only of their “weak” fellow-believers, but also, and most of all, for God. They should strive to promote his glory.

f. The eyes of those who maintain that Ps. 69:9 simply records the outcry of a devout child of God, and has nothing to do with the Messiah, are covered with a veil (II Cor. 3:14). These people are forgetting two things: first, the unbreakable bond existing between the old and the new dispensation (Luke 24:27, 44; John 5:46; I Cor. 10:1–4); and secondly, the indissoluble tie between Christ and his true followers (Acts 9:4; 22:7; 26:14; Col. 1:24).

The propriety of appealing to Scripture, as Paul does frequently and has done just now, is based on the principle embodied in verse

4. For whatever was written in former times was written for our instruction, in order that, through patient endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures, we might have hope.

A very practical and unforgettable passage! In brief it informs us that if religion is going to mean anything to us we must practice it. Whatever was written in the Scriptures—which for Paul meant what we now call The Old Testament—was written “for our instruction.”

As often, so also here, that word “instruction” indicates far more than impartation of intellectual knowledge. The emphasis, in fact, is on practical knowledge, knowledge that can be, and should be, applied to living the life of a Christian.

Two things are necessary if the sacred writings are going to be of benefit to us:

a. patient endurance

Anyone who diligently studies Scripture, asking God to apply its teachings to his heart and life, will be hurt by it again and again, for he will become more and more conscious of the fact that the distance between his own conduct and the ideal held before him in Holy Writ is great indeed. Nevertheless, he must pray for strength to persist in this study, learning more and more how to apply it to his life.

b. the encouragement of the Scriptures

Those who by God’s grace and power persist in such a practical study will discover that these sacred writings, written in former times, not only hurt but also heal. In fact, they are filled with encouraging promises, which, when accepted by God-given faith, result in the birth and growth, within men’s hearts, of firmly rooted Christian hope. See on verse 12.

What Paul is saying therefore is that the way in which Scripture will become a blessing for ourselves and through us also for others, is to put it into practice.

In a thrilling conclusion to his book³⁹⁸ Col. E. W. Starling emphasizes that for the sake of the welfare of ourselves and of our nation we must begin to take to heart that Christianity is not just a theory to be believed but a living force.

5, 6. May the God (who is the Source) of patient endurance and of encouragement grant you to live in harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

In the present passage the two concepts “patient endurance” and “encouragement” are taken up again from verse 4. The apostle, addressing the membership of the Roman church and all others who then or later would be made acquainted with the contents of this epistle, utters the solemn prayer-wish that, through the practical and devotional use of the Scriptures, the addressed, being made the recipients of the aforementioned two precious blessings, may reach the goal of living in harmony with one another. Cf. 12:16.

He adds a phrase about which there has been much controversy, but which can probably best be rendered “in accord with Christ Jesus.” Just what does he mean by this?

Some interpret the little phrase to mean “in accord with the will of Christ Jesus.”³⁹⁹ Others, “in accord with the pattern or example of Christ Jesus.”⁴⁰⁰ If a choice has to be made between these two my preference would be for the latter, since the context twice refers to Christ as the believers’ example (verses 3 and 7). However, is it not possible that “in accord with Christ Jesus”⁴⁰¹ is broad enough to comprise both ideas? Does it not mean, “in accord with that which Christ Jesus has revealed concerning himself both by precept and example”? To the present interpreter it would seem that Murray is correct when he states that what is after Christ’s example must always accord with his will.⁴⁰²

Accordingly Paul is expressing the prayer-wish that true believers everywhere and of every variety, whether “strong” or “weak,” may strive to reach the goal of living in harmony with one another and thus also with the example and will of Christ Jesus.

It is not necessary that Christians think exactly alike on every subject. But it is necessary that in the lives of all God’s children the love of Christ Jesus be reflected and his will be done. Thus all will become truly united into one holy and powerful fellowship, one body. Cf. Eph. 4:1–6. Thus, and thus alone, the stated purpose will be realized, namely, that “with one heart and mouth (cf. Acts 1:14; 2:46) you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” On glorifying God see also Ps. 150; John 17:1; Rom. 11:36; I Cor. 10:31.

The expression “The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (cf. II Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; I Peter 1:3) should present no difficulty. The title “God of our Lord Jesus Christ” places the emphasis on Christ’s human nature, and “Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” calls attention to the Son’s divine nature, for not nativistic but trinitarian sonship is referred to here, a kind of sonship in which Christ, by whatever name he is called, is placed on a par with the Father and the Spirit. For more about this see pp. 253, 254 on 8:9–11; and p. 315 on 9:5. See also Matt. 27:46 (=Mark 15:34) and John 20:17.

If we should stop at this point, we still would not have done justice to the wonderful prayer-wish found in verses 5 and 6. To catch the true meaning of the passage it should be brought into relationship with the person of Paul, the apostle; that is, with his actual situation at the time he dictated this epistle.

As was shown earlier (pp. 14, 15), when Paul composed Romans he was working in Corinth. He was by no means living on Easy Street in that city; not now (Acts 20:3), nor earlier. For the earlier situation in Corinth see Acts 18:6, 12; cf. I Cor. 1:11 f.; 2:3; 3:1; 5:1 f.; 10:14; 11:20 f. Besides, even before composing Romans the apostle had experienced a series of afflictions (see pp. 11, 12) so sharp and bitter that we may well ask whether under comparable circumstances many a present-day pastor would not have sent in his letter of resignation.

Nevertheless, so firmly fixed is Paul’s resolution to continue, come what may, that he even rejoices in the Lord, and here in Rom. 15:5, 6 speaks of God as the source of the believers’ “patient endurance and encouragement.” Moreover, when he thinks of the Savior his enthusiasm knows no bounds, so that his language builds up to the striking climax: “Christ” (15:3), “Christ Jesus” (verse 5), “our Lord Jesus Christ” (verse 6). What a marvelous Christian leader, this man Paul! Rather, what a marvelous God, this Source of patient endurance and of encouragement, this God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!

7. Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, to the glory of God.

In connection with this passage the question has been asked, “Does ‘to the glory of God’ modify ‘Christ accepted you,’ or does it go with ‘Accept one another’?” The right answer is probably, “In a sense it modifies both.” What Paul is saying amounts to this, “Just as Christ accepted you in order that by means of that acceptance God might be glorified—for he certainly is glorified by the hearts and lives of the accepted ones—so, and with the same ultimate purpose in mind, you should accept one another.”

The high ideal expressed in verses 5 and 6, namely, to live in harmony with one another and with heart and mouth to glorify God, here (in verse 7) becomes the basis for the exhortation that the addressed should accept one another. See what has been said with respect to this acceptance in connection with 14:1 (including footnote 372). However, here (15:7) the reciprocal character of this acceptance is stressed. Not only should the strong accept the weak (as in 14:1), but the weak must also welcome the strong.

Before leaving this passage it should be pointed out that between (a) Christ’s deed of accepting sinners, transforming them into beloved sons and daughters, and (b) the believers’ acceptance of one another there is an almost infinite qualitative difference. For Christ to be able to accept sinners meant nothing less than leaving the glories of heaven, entering into the miseries of earth, and undergoing a death so agonizing that words are lacking to describe it. for saved sinners to accept one another implies no such sacrifice. Hymn writers have given expression to the contrast between the divine sacrifice and human sacrifices; See especially Frances Havergal’s “I Gave My Life for Thee” and Isaac Watts’ “When I Survey the Wondrous Cross.” And as for the ultimate purpose of all human activity that is acceptable to God see Fanny Crosby’s “To God Be the Glory.”

The duty of Jew and Gentile to live in harmony with each other to God’s glory is re-emphasized in verses:

8, 9a. For I declare that Christ has become a servant of the circumcised for the sake of God’s truth, to confirm the promises made to the fathers; but the Gentiles glorify God for the sake of (his) mercy …

Verses 8, 9a indicate that not only for the Jews (lit. “for the circumcision”; cf. 3:30; 4:12; Gal. 2:7–9; and see footnote 119 on p. 149) but also for the Gentiles Christ has become and continues to be a “servant.” Cf. Isa. 42:1. It was to the Jews that, during his public ministry, Jesus turned his attention first of all (Matt. 10:5, 6; 15:24; John 1:11). To them he ministered; i.e., rendered humble, personal service (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; Luke 22:27).

He did this in order to confirm God’s truth, his reliability, his faithfulness to the covenant promise, the promise made to Abraham (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:1; 17:7; 18:19; 22:18), Isaac (Gen. 26:1 f.), Jacob (Gen. 28:13–15; 32:28; 46:2–4), and Israel as a people (Exod. 20:1; 24:8). Christ confirmed the promise by again and again causing it to be realized in hearts and lives. Note the plural, “promises,” indicating the various affirmations of the one central promise.

However, not only Jews but also Gentiles were blessed by the work of Christ, for from the very start it was the divine intention to gather his elect also from the latter. See Rom. 4:9 f., pp. 149–152; and 9:23 f., pp. 330.

Therefore, though, strictly speaking, God originally established his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the people of Israel, all of them Jews, nevertheless his mercy extended also to the Gentiles; in fact, “to the ends of the earth” (Isa. 45:22; 52:10), to all its “families” (Gen. 12:3).

For the love of God is broader

Than the measure of man’s mind;

And the heart of the Eternal

Is most wonderfully kind.

—from There’s a Wideness in God’s Mercy by F. W. Faber

So, in connection with the work of Christ for Israel it is especially God’s truth, his covenant faithfulness, that stands out; and in connection with his work among the Gentiles it is predominantly his comprehensive, condescending mercy that shines forth.

It has been suggested that the reason Paul makes this distinction between Israel and the Gentiles is that he is still thinking about “the weak” versus “the strong,” the former being mostly Jews, the latter mostly Gentiles. That suggestion may well be correct. But was there not, perhaps, a more basic reason for the distinction Paul draws? To be sure, no one is saved except through God-imparted, personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ! (John 3:16; 14:6; Acts 4:12). But the approach to one group differs from that to the other. The distinction clearly spelled out here in Rom. 15:8, 9a must not be ignored.⁴⁰³ Contrast Peter’s covenant-promise appeal, as recorded in Acts 2:38, 39, with Paul’s appeal to the kindness or mercy of God as described in Acts 14:17 and 17:24, 25. Both Peter and Paul were right in speaking as they did, but Peter was addressing a predominantly Jewish audience, while Paul, both at Lystra and in Athens, was speaking to Gentiles.

Before conversion has occurred the initial approach to Jews differs from that to Gentiles, though Acts 4:12 holds for both. But when Jews and Gentiles have become believers, they are one people, as Paul clearly teaches (Rom. 10:11, 12) symbolized by one olive tree (11:17 f.).

In view of Christ’s mediatorial work, there is now one body of believers. The cementing of this unity (see verses 5–7) was one of the chief goals of this missionary to the Gentiles. See p. 23. Through the work of Paul and others God saw to it that also the Gentiles would be glorifying God, as 15:9b–12 is about to show.⁴⁰⁴

9b–12. as it is written:

“Therefore I will praise thee among the Gentiles,

and sing hymns to thy name.”

And again, it says,

“Rejoice, you Gentiles, together with his people.”

And again,

“Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles

let all the peoples praise him.”

And again, Isaiah says,

“There will spring up the root of Jesse,

he who arises to rule over the Gentiles.

In him shall the Gentiles hope.”⁴⁰⁵

Again, as so often, Paul appeals to Scripture for corroboration of what he has just now said (see verses 8, 9a). He quotes four very appropriate passages. The first and third are from the book of Psalms; the second is from the Law; the fourth, from the Prophets, so that the three main divisions of the Old Testament are all represented here. Note “as it is written”; also “And again it says,” where “it” means Scripture.

The four quotations are not selected at random, but form a striking climax.⁴⁰⁶

In the first quotation (verse 9b; cf. Ps. 18:49) the Psalmist states that he will declare God’s name among the Gentiles. In the second (verse 10; cf. part of Deut. 32:43) the Gentiles are summoned to join in praising God. In the third (verse 11; cf. Ps. 117:1) the Gentiles are called upon independently to praise God. And in the fourth (verse 12; cf. Isa. 11:10) the attention is fixed upon the (Shoot springing up from the) Root of Jesse, who will rule over the Gentiles, and in whom they will hope. He is the One apart from whom the promises made to the fathers (verse 8) would remain unfulfilled, and without whom the Gentiles (verse 9a) would never be able to glorify God.

With Paul “hope” is justifiable expectation. It is the solid foundation for future bliss. It is the mainspring of the believers’ courage and stick-to-it-ive-ness. Not only for the writer of the letter to the Hebrews but certainly also for Paul Christian hope is “an anchor for the soul, firm and secure, and entering into the inner sanctuary … where Jesus is” (Heb. 6:19, 20). This very Jesus is the One apart from whom the promises made to the fathers (Rom. 15:8) would remain unfulfilled, and without whom the Christians from among the Gentiles (verse 9a) would never be able to glorify God.

It is not surprising, therefore, that hope is a subject on which Paul loves to dwell (Rom. 4:18; 5:2, 4, 5; 8:20, 24, 25; 12:12; 15:4; II Cor. 3:12; Gal. 5:5; Eph. 1:18; Col. 1:5, 23, 27, etc.). In fact, in the very next verse the apostle directs the attention of the hearers and readers once more to hope and to its Source.

13. May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace, in the exercise of (your) faith, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may overflow with hope.

Note the following:

a. Another earnest and impressive prayer-wish. Cf. verse 5.

b. “the God of hope.”

This “hope” does not indicate a weak aspiration but a firmly rooted expectation. See Heb. 6:19, 20. The phrase “the God of hope” means: the God who is the Source of hope and imparts it to those who trust him.

c. The object of this hope is God Triune as revealed in the Shoot springing up from the Root of Jesse; in other words, as disclosed in the Lord Jesus Christ. See also above, on verse 12.

d. “joy and peace.” This is the “joy unspeakable and full of glory” (A.V. I Peter 1:8), and the “peace of God that surpasses all understanding” (Phil. 4:7). See pp. 169, 249.

Paul was well aware of the fact that in the presence of such joy and peace no room would be left for quarrels between “the weak” and “the strong.”

e. “in the exercise of your faith.”

Faith is God’s gift, indeed, but that does not cancel the fact that man must exercise it. See Luke 8:50; Phil. 2:12, 13; II Thess. 2:13.

f. Though it is man who must exercise faith, he cannot do so by his own power but “by the power of the Holy Spirit.”

g. “you may overflow with hope.”

In Paul’s writings we find a constant emphasis on the overflowing or “super” character of redemption in Christ. See Rom. 5:20, p. 184; further also II Cor. 7:4; Phil. 4:7; I Thess. 3:10; II Thess. 1:3; I Tim. 1:14; etc. In our present passage note

“fill … all … overflow.”

h. “with hope.” See above, under b.

And will Christian hope “be emptied in delight”? Will it vanish at the moment when the soul enters heaven? The answer is found in I Cor. 13: “Now abideth faith, hope, and love, these three …”

What a marvelous prayer-wish!

Practical Lessons Derived from Romans 14:1–15:13

Verse 14:1

“Him who is weak in faith accept, but not with the idea of passing judgment on (his) opinions.” Time flies. Elimination of quarrels about non-essentials would conserve time and energy for proclaiming the good news of salvation to a world lost in sin. Also, if you wish to cure a person of his error, first of all make him feel “accepted.” If his error is not basic, he may see it and, with the help of God, correct it before you even mention it.

Verse 4

“Who are you that you dare pass judgment on someone else’s servant?” See also Matt. 7:1. That brother on whom you pass judgment is not your servant but God’s. Besides, it is God alone who knows all that needs to be known before a judgment can be pronounced. We have no right to try to play God!

Verse 15a

“For if your brother is seriously upset because of what you eat, you are no longer walking in love.” Always bear in mind: One loving deed is more valuable than a hundred correct opinions.

Verse 15b

“Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died.” Remember: that brother whom you are offending is a very valuable person. He was bought with Christ’s own blood! Be careful, therefore, how you treat him!

Verse 19

“Let us then pursue the things that lead to peace and to mutual edification.” Before I make an attempt to argue with my brother about eating and drinking or any other matter of secondary religious significance, I should ask myself the following questions:

a.     Am I sufficiently well-informed about this matter?

b.     Will this debate be helpful to the brother? Will it really edify him?

Verse 21

“It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to stumble.” What you are doing or are about to do may be ever so lawful. The question, however, is, “Is it helpful?” See I Cor. 6:12; 10:23.

Verse 15:7

“Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, to the glory of God.”

A very appropriate text for a sermon … on any Sunday of the year, but perhaps especially at the beginning of a new year.

Theme: ACCEPT ONE ANOTHER

1. Universal Need

2. Generous Provision

3. Resulting Obligation

4. Ultimate Purpose

The first two points would be mainly introductory. See Rom. 3:10, 23 for point 1; and 3:24 for point 2. The main thrust of the sermon would center on point 3 (see Rom. 15:7a) and point 4 (see 15:7b).

Verse 13

“May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace, in the exercise of (your) faith, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may overflow with hope.”

Even though, strictly speaking, this is not a prayer but a wish, this wish can easily be changed into a prayer, since it certainly implies the prayer, “O God of hope, fill us with all joy and peace … so that by the power of the Holy Spirit we may overflow with hope.”

Note the following:

a. What kind of joy and peace? See I Peter 1:8 and Phil. 4:7. Why are these gifts very important? See 15:13d.

b. How are these blessings obtained? Answer: by exercising faith, which implies the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts.

c. How generously are they supplied? Note: “fill,” “all.” In fact, God grants us even more than we ask. We ask for joy and peace. He grants us joy and peace and hope; in fact, a hope so abundant that it overflows the boundaries of our hearts and minds … and will never cease to do so. In this connection see my book The Bible on the Life Hereafter, pp. 70–74.

Summary of Chapter 14:1–15:13