ROMANS CHAPTER 14

If someone spends a lot of time talking about a particular subject, it is usually because the person is interested in it and thinks it's important. So apparently Paul is very interested in the way Christians treat other Christians, since he writes on the subject at length. Romans 14 begins a new section (Romans 14:1-15:13), and it is one of the book's longest parts - certainly the longest single part of the closing application portion of the letter (Romans 12:1-16:27). Why does Paul give so much space to discussing why Christians need to accept those with whom they disagree on less than essential matters? What about matters that in our judgement are much more important, like Christian economics, politics, ecology, or the emancipation of oppressed peoples? Is something as insignificant as accepting and getting along other Christians really that important? Apparently Paul thought so. His instruction about developing a Christian mind, which I personally think is very important, was completed in two verses. To discuss a right estimate of one's self and others and the need to encourage others took six verses. A call to love one another took thirteen verses; material on the question of church and state, seven verses; right conduct in the light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ, seven verses more. But now this discussion about how Christians are to accept and support other Christians when they do not think or behave as we think they should fills all of chapter 14 and the first half of chapter 15, a total of thirty-five verses. Moreover, this is the last major subject Paul discusses, since following this he begins to talk about his own future plans and sends his final greetings. Apparently this is a matter he wants to leave before our minds in closing. There are two major parts in this section: (1) how people with tender consciences are to be treated (14:1-12), and (2) how the "strong" are to use their liberty (14:13-15:13). (Boice, pp. 1723-1724)

Verse 1
"Accept him whose faith is weak without passing judgment on disputable matters." - The discussion begins a broad thematic statement. In the Greek text the phrase begins with the transitional conjunction "de" which is translated "now" or "but." The conjunction expresses a sense of continuity with the preceding section. The manner in which the statement is posed, addressed to the strong in reference to the weak, suggests that the strong are the dominant element in the congregation while the weak are in the minority. The imperative verb "accept" (Greek - "proslambanesthe") means "to receive or accept into one's society, home, or circle of acquaintances." This is not so much a matter of official action or formal membership but the everyday recognition and practice of brotherhood. The weak are not simply to be tolerated or put up with but are to be fully treated as brothers and sisters in Christ within the intimacy of the family of God. To some extent, the examples which follow , dietary rules and the observance of Sabbaths and holy days, define the sense in which "him whose faith is weak" is to be understood. This is not primarily a matter of weakness in personal faith and trust in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. Instead, the implications of the faith are involved, specifically in terms of Christian freedom and what is permitted and forbidden. "The faith with respect to which these people are weak therefore, is related to their basic faith in Christ, but one step removed from it. It involves their individual outworking of Christian faith, their convictions about what faith allows and prohibits." (Moo, p. 836) The choice of terms clearly indicates Paul's sympathies in these matters. The verb "is weak" is a Greek present participle which suggests a brief temporary condition. The scruples of the weak should gradually be overcome as they grow more mature in the faith and come to recognize the full implications of their relationship with Christ for their attitudes and behavior. "The brother is to be welcomed as he is, in his weakness, and he is to borne in his weakness until his weakness has been overcome." (Franzmann, p. 245)

Not only are the strong to cordially accept and welcome the weak within the life of the congregation but they are to do so in the right spirit and with the right motivation - "without passing judgment on disputable matters." The Greek phrase begins with the preposition "eis" which literally means "for the purpose of." The concern appears to be that the majority might view the reception of those who opinions in these matters are deficient as an opportunity for debate and intimidation. These differences of opinion must not be allowed to spark quarrels and mutual recrimination within the church. "The church is not called upon to whip the weak man into shape forthwith with arguments, even though they may be well-intentioned arguments. Faith is not fed by logic." (Franzmann, p. 245) This should not be construed as an absolute "gag rule," prohibiting the strong from any expression of their opinions. Those who are more mature must hold to their convictions and humbly express them as the opportunity presents itself. The weak must eventually be won over. This is a delicate matter. The difference between fraternal discussion, motivated by loving concern, and intellectual jousting, motivated by ego and a sense of superiority, is oftentimes a subtle thing. Patience, humility, and love are ultimately much more convincing that clever arguments and sharp words. "The weak ought to grow strong. The way to make them strong is not to offend them nor to contend with them in debate; but to show them forbearance and loving consideration, theerby enabling the weak to build up their strength." (Lenski, p. 813) The NIV's translation "passing judgment" reflects the Greek verb "diakrisis" which denotes a process of deliberation whereby a decision is reached. The prohibition does not refer to "passing judgment" as such, which the NIV translation seems to suggest. Instead, the point is that unanimity should not be required in "disputable matters." (Greek - "dialogismon"). In Lutheran theology, the classic term for such matters is "adiaphora" (from the Greek - "indifferent things"). Adiaphora are matters of ethics, morality, or ceremony neither commanded nor prohibited in Scripture whose appropriateness must be determined on an individual level, based on the particular circumstances of the situation. Where Holy Scripture does not speak - there the church must remain willing to tolerate a diversity of opinion and lifestyle.

Verses 2-3
"One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him." - Paul proceeds to cite an example of one such disputed matter. The context of the situation appears to be the dietary laws of the Old Testament. None of those regulations required vegetarianism. However, on occasion, when Jews found themselves living in circumstances where they could not be sure that food or wine had been prepared in a "kosher" manner, they would avoid meat and wine altogether. The practice of Daniel during the Babylonian captivity illustrates this pattern (Daniel 1:8). It may be that some Jewish Christians in Rome, perhaps cut off from their own community because of their conversion to Christianity, found themselves in a similar situation. Others within the church, perhaps both former Jews and Gentiles, felt no such constraint, because they recognized that as Christians they were no longer obligated to observe the Mosaic law. Their view was in fact correct. However they are warned not to look down on (literally - not to hold in contempt or despise) those who have not yet come to recognize that freedom. "Despise connotes a disdainful, condescending judgment an attitude that we can well imagine the strong majority, who prided themselves on their enlightened liberal perspective. Taking toward those who they considered to be foolishly hung up on the trivia of a bygone era." (Moo, p. 838) The weak, on the other hand, are also warned not to criticize those who do not consider themselves obligated to continue to observe the laws of Moses. The Greek verb is "krinein" which means to criticize in contrast to the much stronger "katakrinein" which means to condemn or damn. "The weak, Paul suggests, responded in kind, considering themselves to be the righteous remnant who alone upheld true standards of righteousness and piety and who were standing in judgment over those who failed to meet these standards." (Moo, p. 838) These people are not Judaizers. They did not believe or teach that obedience of Old Testament law was necessary for salvation in addition to faith in Christ. They do not condemn those who fail to meet their standards as damnable sinners. If they had, the condemnation which fell upon the Galatians and the Colossians would also have fallen upon them. "They were not legalists who has false doctrinal views, made no demands on others, started no so-called reforms, segregated themselves into no party. If they had done so, Paul would have treated them in a different fashion." (Lenski, p. 816) They are simply weak Christians who do not yet feel comfortable changing the habits and patterns of the past. Both sides are clearly told to stop criticizing and looking down on the other.

"For God has accepted him." - The final statement is, in effect, the "theological bottom line." No man may reject or criticize that which God has accepted. The church may not establish standards more stringent or more lenient than those which God Himself has established in His Word. "A Christian is one who stands before God not on the basis of his or her own righteousness but because of the work of Jesus Christ. Since the other believer has been accepted and not rejected by Jesus, you should accept him or her too." (Boice, p. 1736) This is the same verb used in Romans 15:7 to describe that which God in Christ has done for each and every believer. ""Accept one another, then, just as Christ has accepted you in order to bring praise to God."

Verse 4
"Who are you to judge 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." - This verse completes and amplifies the thought of the preceding phrase. This strongly worded rebuke seems to be pointed more in the direction of the self-righteous weaker brethren. The inherent self-righteous of the man who presumes to judge his neighbor in such matters is quickly revealed. The question is abrupt and harsh. In effect - "Who do you think you are, butting in where you have no business?" The Lord God is the sole master here and every Christian is His servant. Your fellow Christian does not belong to you but to God. When you judge him you put yourself in God' s place. Your judgment here matters not at all, but only that of the Master. Ultimately we must all answer to Him and to Him alone (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:3-5). The analogy ends on the confident note of God's grace - "And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand." Our standing before God depends not upon us nor upon our deeds. If it did we would all, strong and weak alike, be lost and fallen creatures. Our standing before God depends completely upon what He has done for us in the blood of Christ, His Son - "He is able to make him stand." It must be strongly emphasized that the judgment here forbidden applies only to matters of adiaphora where God's Word has not spoken. It is sadly ironic that very often the over-regulation of the Christian life and the rigorous infliction of man-made rules and standards is perpetrated by those who are, in fact, weak in the faith, as an unconscious expression of that very weakness.

"We must, of course, distinguish in our criticism. It is not presumption, but the very best service we can render each other to point out each others deviations from the Master's will and His Word and to remind each other what His will and His Word really require. It is an entirely different matter and the height of presumptuousness to go beyond this and to judge another where the Lord has laid down no requirements, misread His Word as if He had, or just add requirements we deem excellent. It is again paradoxical; the tyranny of the weak often exceeds the tyranny of the strong." (Lenski, pp. 818-819)

Verses 5-6
"One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God." - The point is reiterated, this time in reference to the observance of holy days and festivals rather than in regard to foods. Here too, the "weak" and the "strong" have occasion to disagree with one another. Although the text does not explicitly indicate the nature of the disagreement, since the argument is advanced in a manner very similar to the preceding statement on dietary restrictions, it is safe to assume that the issue once again focuses on the continuing observance of Old Testament rules and regulations. The Sabbath, with its complex restrictions and limitations, no doubt figures prominently in the debate (cf. Galatians 4:10; Colossians 2:16). In traditional Hebrew piety, the observance of the Sabbath as a sacred day of rest, set aside for the Lord, was of crucial importance.

"It is not difficult to see that a few Jewish Christians, some of them who perhaps came from the old mother church in Jerusalem, still clung to the Sabbath, much as the Christians did after Pentecost. This does not imply that they insisted on this day or on any legal observance, but only that they closed their shop or their store, ceased work and kept the day holy." (Lenski, p. 821)

Once again, Paul does not take sides in this matter. This is an adiaphoron. In the absence of command or prohibition from the Lord, his apostle remains silent. He lays out both positions and simply encourages that "Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." That is not to say that each one should be complacently convinced that he is right and the other is wrong, while tolerating the wrong-doing of the other. Convenient permissiveness of this sort is the way of the world, not the way of Christian love. It is not toleration, but careless, self-serving indifference to look the other way when another is involved in sin or caught up in error. If the issue is a matter of moral right or wrong or of Biblical truth or falsehood, then it must be confronted. Our loving responsibility to one another as brothers and sisters in Christ demands no less. Instead, the apostolic exhortation urges all parties to recognize that this is a matter of personal preference which does not involve obedience to the Word of God. Each is to hold to his own opinion in this matter, as that which is best for him, without casting aspersions upon those who may disagree and act differently. The argument which earlier (vss. 3-4) was directed primarily toward the weaker brother is now broadened to apply to the strong and the weak alike. Both positions are mentioned as viable ways to live out the faith and serve and glorify God. In matters of adiaphora the issue is often not what you do but why or how you do it. Those on both sides of these issues can be properly motivated in their contrasting actions by a desire to serve and glorify the Lord. The noun "kurio" ("Lord") occurs three times in these two verses. The noun "theo" ("God") occurs twice. The repetition serves to emphasize the proper focus. Concentrate on God and His will, not man and his. The repeated phrase "to the Lord" is called a "dative of advantage." The phrase means "in the interest of" or "to the benefit of" the Lord.

Verses 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 whether we live or die we belong to the Lord. For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that He might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

"For none of us lives to himself alone..." - These verses are "the heart of Paul's rebuke of the Roman Christians for their judgmental attitudes." (Moo, p. 844) The basic principle which has been presented, applies not only in these matters of adiaphora, but to the entirety of the Christian's life and death. "None of us" indicates that this is true of all Christians, both weak and strong. The language is deliberately comprehensive. "We are never autonomous - our whole living is a lving to the Lord...And the Lord's lordship over us does not cease at death...in dying we belong to Him. He never lets us go. No power, not even the power of that last enemy death can loose the power of His almighty hand." (Franzmann, p. 247) For the Christian believer every dimension of life takes place in the context of our relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Our motive should never be simply self-interest, living for ourselves alone. All of our thoughts, actions, ambitions, and decisions are to be carried out from the perspective of that which serves and glorifies our Lord. That which is true of our life is also true of our death. The meaning of the phrases - "none of us dies to himself alone" and "we die to the Lord" is clearly defined in verse 8 - "So whether we live or die we belong to the Lord." The physical death of every believer occurs in the context of our faith. Death does not break that relationship, nor even interrupt it. Death for the believer is transformed into the blessed doorway to life eternal and an enhanced experience of the presence and love of Jesus. "Our lives do not end in futility, like water seeping away into the sand; they end in personal communion with Him who is in life and death our Lord." (Franzmann, p. 247). This becomes possible only because of the death and resurrection of Christ. By His death He has overcome death for us, and by His resurrection from the dead, He has irrefutably demonstrated His lordship over life and death. The phrase "returned to life" refers precisely to the "vivification" of our Lord, the instant in which His body and soul were reunited on the thrid day after His physical death. The term "resurrection" refers more broadly to Christ's departure from the tomb and subsequent appearances. All this took place so that "He might be the Lord of both the dead and the living."

"The Death of the Believer and the Unbeliever" by Hans Vogtherr the Younger, 1540 - This 16^th century woodcut dramatically depicts the diametrically different significance of physical death for the believer and the unbeliever. Two emaciated figures are presented sharing a death-bed- the believer at the head, the unbeliever at the foot. On the right side of the bed, the unbeliever dies, contorted in agony and fear. The candle stick burning at his bedside signifies that he dies in darkness. The skeletal specter of death (German - "todt") approaches the unbeliever on the back right side of the image, bearing the skull and cross bones banner of death's victory and displaying the hourglass in which the sands of time have run out. In the moment of his triumph, death leers down upon the dying man. The female personification of the world (German "Die Welt") flees in terror. During his life, he lavished his love and attention upon her, living for the things of this world, but now, she abandons the dying man at his moment of greatest need. In the right foreground the jaws of hell gape open to receive the damned soul. Hell is labeled with the text of Job 18:21 - "Surely such is the dwelling of an evil man, such is the place of one who knows not God." The monstrous figure of the devil, depicted as a chimera of various fierce animals, surges up out of the flames to seize the arm of the dying man and drag him down into hell. The text of 1 Peter 5:8 identifies the Adversary - "Be sober, be vigilant, for your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour." In the right background, behind the dying unbeliever a herd of goats contend with one another on the rugged crags of a mountainside. The goats represent the damned who will be segregated from believers to stand at the left hand of Christ on the great day of judgment (cf. Matthew 25:31-46). The left side of the woodcut presents the blessed death of the believer. The saint rests comfortably upon his death bed, his hands folded in prayer. He is surrounded by three ladies, personifying Faith (German - "Glaub"), Hope (German - "Hoffnung"), and Love (German - "Liebe"). Faith kneels in humility her hands outstretched over the open Bible. Hope gazes expectantly upward toward an angel beckoning toward heaven. Love looks toward her two counterparts , holding heart aflame with passion in her hands. A second angel, identified as "Thanksgiving" (German - "Danksagung"), holds the crown of victory over the dying believer. In the left background, the flock of the Good Shepherd grazes in secure contentment on a lush pasture. They represent the redeemed who will stand at the right hand of God to inherit the kingdom on the Last Day. This classic example of Reformation era art powerfully presents the vast difference in the significance of death for the believer and the unbeliever.

Verses 10-12
You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. It is written: "'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'Every knee will bow before Me; every tongue will confess to God.'" So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

"You, then, why do you judge your brother? - The discussion now becomes more pointed as Paul addresses the members of the congregation in Rome directly - "You, then..." The rebuke is addressed first to the weaker brother - "Why do you judge your brother?" The temptation for those who do not participate in these things is to judge and condemn those who do. We cannot condemn an action as sin when the Bible does not condemn it. We may believe such action to be unwise or inappropriate. Martin Luther once noted: "You can't stop the birds from flying over your head, but you can stop them from building a nest in your hair." We may believe such action is prone to abuse, can easily lead to sin, or could be sinful in certain circumstances. But nothing can be judged to inherently sinful, sinful in and of itself in every situation without specific Biblical warrant. We cannot see into the heart of another. We dare not judge their motives. Wherever possible, we must always put "the best construction on everything." In this instance, those who continued to keep Sabbath and observe the dietary laws are called upon to refrain from rendering negative judgment upon those who no longer feel bound by such constraints. The following phrase - "Or why do you look down on your brother?" shifts the rebuke from the weak to the strong. The temptation in this case is for the stronger brothers who recognized their Christian freedom to look down with condescending disdain upon those who have not yet come to that point. Both sides are urged to leave the judgment to God before whose "judgement seat" all men, weak and strong alike, will one day appear. The point is reinforced with the citation of Isaiah 49: 18 and 45:23 - ""As surely as I live, says the Lord, every knee will bow before Me; every tongue will confess to God." The introductory formula from Isaiah 49 serves to add the magisterial title "Lord" (Greek - "kyrios") to the quotation. The core of the text, drawn from Isaiah 45, stresses the unique and unparalleled authority of God - "I am God, there is no other." (Vs. 22) When judgment is rendered on the solid basis of the divine Word, the judgment is in effect God's. When the Christian presumes to judge a fellow believer without a clear Word from God, he has in fact usurped the position of authority which belongs to God alone. This applies to each and every believer, weak and strong alike, for - "each of us will give an account of himself to God."

"We must all face Him together with the marks of our graceless squabbles graven on our faces. When the Lord, the Creator of the world and the Ruler of all history, shall receive the homage of all men, when all shall bow the knee and praise their God, then it will be terrifyingly clear that those differences which seemed so great and so intolerable when we were all cooped up in the cramped chambers of our time were in reality no real differences at all. It therefore behooves each man, whether his sin be passing judgment or contempt, to learn these differences in that perspective now; for God will take us one by one, and each of us shall give an account to God, not his contemptible brother, or of his loose-living callous brother, but of himself." (Franzmann, p. 248)

Verse 13
Therefore, let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way.

"Therefore, let us stop passing judgment on one another." - Up to this point, the admonition has basically focused on the weaker brethren urging them to avoid the temptation of entering into self-righteous judgment over against those whom they perceive to be involved in inappropriate activity. With verse 13, the apostle's basic emphasis now shifts to the strong and their responsibility to their weaker brethren in these matters. The desire to criticize and condemn must give way to a loving concern for one another within the body of Christ. In the Greek text, the symmetry of this thought is expressed by the repeated use of the same verb, "krino," in both sentences - literally: "Therefore, let us not judge each other but make this your judgment..." In the first phrase, the verb carries the negative connotation of judgmentalism, while in the second it simply refers to a decision or determination. The point of the exhortation is that stronger brothers should not use their Christian freedom in such a way that they would cause spiritual to weak. Paul does not deny that they have that freedom, as the following verse will clearly indicate, but he does urge that Christian freedom be used in a conscientious and considerate way. The potential peril to the weaker brother is described with two words - 'stumbling block" (Greek - "proskomma") and "obstacle" (Greek - "skandalon"). The former refers to that which causes someone to trip or to suffer injury. The latter, "skandalon" is a much more powerful word, referring originally to the trigger that sets off the death trap. It suggests the ominous possbililty that the weaker brother may fall from the faith altogether and be lost.

"The same principle applies to any activity or practice that is not inherently sinful...The loving, caring Christian will determine in his mind and heart to be sensitive to any weakness in a fellow believer, and avoid doing anything including what is innocent in itself and otherwise permissible, that might cause him to morally or spiritually stumble.(MacArthur, p. 291)

Verses 14-15
As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died.

"As one who is in the Lord Jesus..." - Paul speaks as one who was rigorously trained in the most scrupulous school of Judaism, " a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee," (Acts 23:6). No one observed the dietary laws more carefully than they. But now, "in the Lord Jesus," Paul has been led to a different conviction. This is not a matter of rational deduction, but divine revelation. This phrase points to "the enlightening, convincing, persuading connection of His Word." (Lenski, p. 834) Through Christ and His Word, Paul has come to recognize that the ancient regulations of the law concerning food, drink, and festivals were but a pale shadow of greater things to come. The reality is Christ. The shadows have no further meaning of their own and can no longer bind the consciences of men.

"When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code with its regulations...Therefore, do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a new moon celebration, or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ." (Colossians 2:13,16-17)

The phrase "no food is unclean" recalls Peter's vision at Simon the Tanner's house where the voice from heaven declared: "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean!" (Acts 10:15). The problematic uncleanness is not objective, it is subjective; it exists only in the mind of individual who continues to consider the food unclean. The food is not, in fact, unclean. Paul declares to Timothy; "God has created all foods to be shared in by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it is received with gratitude; for it is sanctified by means of the Word of God and prayer." (1 Timothy 4:3-5; cf. 1 Corinthians 8:4-7). But the problem remains, nonetheless, in the immature and incomplete understanding of the weaker brother - "But if anyone regards something as unclean, for him it is unclean.". The conscience of the weaker brother is in error, but to act contrary to one's conscience is in itself sinful. Therein lies the dilemma.

"The simple principle here taught is, that it is wrong for any man to violate his own sense of duty. This being the case, those Jewish converts who believed the distinction between clean and unclean meats to be still in force, would commit sin in disregarding it; and, therefore, should not be induced to act contrary to their own consciences." (Hodge, p. 666) The attempt by the strong to compel the weak to recognize and practice their liberty in these matters trapped the weak believer, with his erring conscience, between two sinful alternatives. Luther categorizes the problem in this way:

"Not that there was any wrong in the act so far as the food was concerned; the wrong consisted in the indiscretion of the strong in causing the weak to err through the act. For the weak could neither agree with the strong nor dissent from them. Had they thought to consent, their weak consciences would have interposed, protesting, "It is sinful. Do it not!" Had they thought to dissent, their conscience again would have interposed, objecting, "You are not Christians, for you do not as other Christians do; your faith must be false!" Thus they could neither do one thing nor the other without opposing conscience. Now to violate conscience is the equivalent of violating faith, and is a grievous sin." (Lenker, VI, p. 30)

Our sensitivity to the erring consciences of our weaker brethren must recognize the dilemma in which their weakness has placed them. For the weak believer to act against his conscience is, in effect, to act against what he wrongly perceives to be the will of God. Accordingly, even though his perception is in error, his disobedience of his conscience places him in violation of the First Commandment. That is sin. Phillip Melancthon explains: "It is truly a sin to act against one's conscience...To do something when he is in doubt, or when his conscience disapproves, is an act of contempt of God and without faith." (Melancthon, p. 234) In his classic book on the topic of adiaphora, Dr. Theodore Graebner places the issue in a more contemporary context.

"But there are people who have a weak conscience. They consider these things wrong. Now regarding these, our verse says to them that such things become sinful indeed! The Roman Catholic who eats meat on Friday against his conscience sins, not because he eats meat, but because he acts contrary to his conscience. He does what he believes to be contrary to the will of God. He lacks the fear of God to that extent and to that extent, sins against the First Commandment." (Graebner, The Borderland Between Right and Wrong, p. 24)

Similar difficulties were often experienced at the time of the Reformation, as Biblical worship was restored in place of the traditional rites and practices of Roman Catholicism. The restoration of both kinds in the Sacrament of Holy Communion, that is, the distribution of both the bread and the wine to all communicants, was a particularly difficult issue. In his Instructions to the Visitors of Parish Pastors in 1528, Luther emphasized the importance of distinguishing between the "obstinate" who denied and defied the clear teaching of Scripture in this matter, and the "weak" who did not challenge the doctrine, but whose erring consciences were sincerely troubled by such a basic departure from their traditional practice. In dealing with the weak, the Reformer allowed for the temporary continuation of the traditional practice, on the basis of Romans 14.

"First, as indicated above, in every way and manner the doctrine itself shall be firmly held and positively preached and made known that according to the institution of Christ both kinds are to be used in the Sacrament. This teaching shall be presented without compromise to everyone, including the weak and the obstinate. Secondly, where there are weak Christians, who as yet have not heard, or been sufficiently instructed and strengthened by the Word of the Gospel, and so out of weakness and terror of conscience rather than obstinacy cannot receive both kinds, one may allow these to take communion in one kind for the time being and where they ask for it the pastor or preacher may so administer it. The reason is this: In this way the doctrine of both kinds will not be weakened or compromised, but only the application or use of the doctrine will be temporarily postponed through Christian patience and love... Even nowadays God tolerates much in us and in others which is wrong and insufficient, as a weak faith and other defects, according to Romans 14 and 15. If despite all this, the doctrine nevertheless is maintained and in no wise contradicted, love forgives and endures its inadequate application. Furthermore, it is uncharitable, even unchristian to force those weak ones to receive the sacrament in both kinds or to withhold it in one kind. For thus they feel they are made to sin. We have often experienced that they make confession and do penance for gross heresy when they have taken both kinds against their conscience. Also they think themselves guilty of heresy when they do not receive the one kind as has been their inclination. In both cases, the weak faith burdens itself with grievous sin such as heresy, though falsely. This is much worse than for a while not practicing full obedience to the doctrine of both kinds. St. Paul in Romans 14 says: "He who judges himself in that he eats is condemned." Thirdly, as for the obstinate who will neither learn nor practice this doctrine, one should simply offer them neither kind, but let them go...For such obstinate ones are not only imperfect in the practice of the doctrine, but also want to pervert and condemn the doctrine. This we should not suffer nor tolerate. For the doctrine must run straight and clear, even if the deed and practice creep and crawl, run or leap, after it. The pastor who knows his people, and daily associates with them must distinguish between the weak and the obstinate. He can easily observe those folk who have a good disposition, who gladly listen to preaching and gladly want to learn and rightly guided thereby. But the rough and perverse who pay no attention to preaching are under no circumstances to be considered weak, however loudly they claim to be so." (AE, 40, pp.290-292)

"If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love." - The bottom line in these matters is not my rights as a Christian but a loving concern for the welfare of my fellow believers. William Barclay notes: "It is a Christian duty to think of everything, not as it effects ourselves only, but also as it effects others." The verb "is distressed" (Greek - "lupeisthei") means to grieve or anger another individual. In this context a stronger sense is indicated. "What Paul has in view is not merely a passing sense of irritation or momentary pang of grief, but an actual wounding of conscience which destroys the whole balance of the brother's faith." (Dune, p. 820) "Acting in love"is the key motive throughout this segment. The Greek noun for love is "agape," the selfless, giving love which Christians have experienced from God in Christ and are now called upon to practice in their dealings with one another. To act "kata agape" - literally "according to selfless love"means that every word and action must be measured in terms of its impact upon other. The exercise of our freedom in Christ cannot be allowed to harm the faith of other Christians.

"Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died." - The issue is restated as a direct command in the strongest possible language. The triviality of that which the strong are being asked to give up in comparison to that which could be lost by the weak is bluntly revealed. How important can mere eating be in comparison to the salvation or damnation of one for whom Christ died?

"The weak sees his stronger brother eating food that he hitherto has not dared to eat. He is enticed, or perhaps shamed, into eating what his conscience tells him is forbidden food. Thus he is "injured," made to sin, by what his stronger brother eats. The strong man's eating is no longer innocent, for it has become an act of ruthless lovelessness and destroys his brother. The brother is weak, wrong in his convictions, wrong as wrong can be. But Christ died for him, in his foolish weakness, a brother infinitely precious in the eyes of all for whom Christ died. To injure him is to sin against Christ Himself." (Franzmann, p. 251)

The verb "destroy" (Greek - "apollyme") should be understood in the strongest possible sense to refer to utter spiritual ruin, apostasy, and ultimate damnation (cf. Matthew 10:28). This is consistently the manner in which Paul uses the term with a personal object (cf. Romans 2:12; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 8:11; 15:18; 2 Corinthians 2:15; 4:3; 2 Thessalonians 2:10). The stakes in this matter could not possibly be higher.

Verses 16-18
Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing God and approved by men.

"Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil." - These closing remarks bring this segment of the discussion to its conclusion. They are addressed to both the strong and the weak. The Greek text actually says - "Therefore, do not let your good be brought into contempt." The "good" (Greek - "agathon") in question is God's great gift to the congregation in Rome and to His people everywhere. "The term is intended to be comprehensive...When we define this Good, various descriptions may be given: the whole Christian faith, our whole salvation in Christ, the Gospel, etc." (Lenski, p. 839) The pettiness and trivial divisions of the church bring the entire cause of Christ into disrepute in the eyes of the world. When the world fails to see Christ in us, they turn away and reject him altogether. The atheist philosopher Frederick Nietzsche once contemptuously dismissed Christianity with these words: "I will not believe in the Redeemer until his people start acting more redeemed." The verb"be spoken of as evil" is the Greek "blasphemeistho." literally "to blaspheme against." It is a strong word which serves to indicate the urgency of the apostle's concern in this matter. By our selfish actions God is brought into disrepute.

"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking..." - The heat of controversy has a way of distorting ones priorities. The apostle now returns to first principles to place these issues in their proper perspective. "Righteousness," the most important word in the Epistle to the Romans occurs here for the last time in the letter. Our Lord had promised His disciples, "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things (the material needs and necessities of this world) will be added unto you." (Matthew 6:33) In comparison to the wondrous blessings of citizenship in His kingdom of grace these matters "of eating and drinking" are revealed as insignificant trivialities. The "kingdom of God" consists, instead, of three substantive realities - "righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." God's righteousness, the declaration of full and free forgiveness in Christ, is the God's gracious gift to every believer. The result of that divine declaration of "Not Guilty!" is "peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." The same combination is found in Romans 5:1-2 - "Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God." "Peace" is the sense of well-being and security that comes from the knowledge that everything that God has done everything that needed to be done to restore my relationship with Him in time and in eternity. The result of that wondrous peace is "joy," the cheerful confidence which God can sustain even in the face of persecution and pain. As the children sing: "Happiness is to know the Savior, living a life within His favor, having a change in my behavior, happiness is the Lord! Real joy is mine, no matter if the teardrops start. I've found the secret, it's Jesus in my heart!" These blessings come to the believer through the work of the Holy Spirit. The prepositional phrase "in the Holy Spirit" is instrumental. In indicates that these blessings occur through the work of or in connection with the Holy Spirit.

"Because anyone who serves Christ in this way..." - When one retains and focuses upon these first principles rather than wandering off down the byways of trivial controversy the result is "pleasing to God and approved by men." This is the way God would have us live, in perfect harmony with one another as sinners redeemed in Christ's blood at the cross. Such a life pleases and glorifies God, exemplifying the message of the Gospel before the world. Instead of blasphemy the result of such a life is approval from men. These results are exactly the opposite of the negative consequences described in the preceding verses.

Verses 19-21
Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

"Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification." - Having outlined the first principles of Christianity, the apostle proceeds to admonish the congregation in Rome to conduct themselves in conformity with those principles. The original text literally reads - "so then, let us pursue what makes for peace." The peace at issue is clearly harmony among the members of the congregation, specifically between the weak and the strong despite their differences on the subjects of dietary rules and holy days. The phrase "to mutual edification" (Greek - "oikodomes tes eis allelous" - "the building up of one another" introduces the basic theme of this segment.. This is the first occurrence of this crucial New Testament term in the letter to the Romans. The word appears eighteen times in the New Testament, fifteen of them in the writings of St. Paul. This term pictures the church as a building which must be carefully constructed and meticulously maintained. Jesus introduces the concept in His comment to Simon Peter; "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build My church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18) The image of the church as a building serves to emphasize our interdependence upon one another, just as the various components in a physical building are constructed upon one another. Much of the activity to which God calls His people within the church is specifically designed to enable us to edify, to build up, one another (cf. Hebrews 10:24-25) Paul details the idea in Ephesians:

"Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the chief Cornerstone. In Him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in Him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by His Spirit." (Ephesians 2:19-22)

"Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food." - To selfishly insist upon one's own way in matters of genuine adiaphora is not edification but destruction. The language in this phrase deliberately and directly contrasts that of its predecessor. The NIV translates the Greek verb "katalue" as "Do not destroy." The verb in this context more accurately means "Do not tear down." This is precisely the opposite of the building up which Paul encouraged. The admonition is repetition of Verse 15 -"Do not by your eating destroy your brother..." - in the context of edification imagery. Note that it is God's work that is being torn down. God creates faith in the hearts of His people. God calls His people together around Word and Sacrament to form the Church. When I demand my own way in matters of dietary preference, regardless of the damage caused to other believers and to the Church, then I have become guilty of tearing down "the work of God for the sake of food." "This calls for self-sacrifice on the part of the strong; their love must be a self-denying love...The weak whom they despise are God's own workmanship created by Him in Christ Jesus (Eph.2:10). The clean food which they confidently eat will turn to poison in their mouths if by their eating they make others fall and sin." (Franzmann, p. 253) The juxtaposition of destroying the work of God and food is designed to highlight the relative importance of these two matters in relation to one another.

"All food is clean, but it is wrong to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything else that will cause your brother to fall." - Once again Paul asserts the correctness of the strong's position in these matters but insists that concern for the spiritual welfare of the weaker brother must take priority. In similar circumstances in Corinth, the specific issue was eating foods that had been sacrificed to idols. The apostle offered the same carefully balanced advice, asserting Christian liberty in this matter, while cautioning against offending the weak:

"So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in world, and that there is no God but one...But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. Be careful however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. For if anyone with a weak conscience sees you who have this knowledge eating in an idol's temple, won't he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak consciences, you sin against Christ. 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 fall." (1 Corinthians 8:4, 7-13)

Later in the same epistle, Paul restates the principles at stake even more forcefully, reminding every believer that personal freedom and the exercise of my individual rights cannot be the Christian's ultimate goal:

"Everything is permissible - but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible, but not everything is constructive. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others. Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, for "The earth is the Lord's and everything in it." If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. But if anyone says to you, "This has been offered in sacrifice," then do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience sake - the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience? If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for? So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all to the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks, or the church of God - even as I try to please everyone in every way. For I am not seeking my own good, but the good of many, so that they may be saved." (1 Corinthians 10:23-33)

My concern for the welfare of my weaker brother and for the witness of the church to the world must always take priority over the satisfaction of my desires or the assertion of my prerogatives. "Before the church and before the world it is much more important to demonstrate our love than our freedom." (MacArthur, p. 297)

Verses 22-23
So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith, and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

"So whatever you believe about these things keep it between yourself and God." - Once again, the comment is directed toward the stronger brother and the responsible exercise of his freedom in Christ. The Greek text of this intriguing phrase literally reads - "As to you, the faith that you have, keep to yourself before God." The"faith" (Greek - "pistis") in question here is both the subjective trust of the believer and "the objective faith of Christian truth, in particular also that part of it which produces liberty in all adiaphora for the believer." (Lenski, p. 851) The inability of the weaker brother to recognize that liberty in matters neither commanded nor prohibited by Scripture indicates a lack of spiritual maturity. However, the stronger brother dare not denigrate the weak for their weakness nor attempt to pressure or propagandize those who have not yet come to a comparable level of spiritual maturity. At the same time, the text is careful not to suggest that the strong should abandon their convictions in these matters. - "whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God." While the strong may forego the exercise and even the advocacy of their liberty for the sake of the weak, they may not give up that liberty which has been purchased for them in the blood of Christ.

"The freedom of faith carries with it the obligation not to force that freedom on others. The more liberal may rejoice in the freedom that they have in matters of personal conduct before God without having to parade that liberty before others. The liberty is no less real for not being exercised. Indeed it only shows itself as true liberty when it restricts its full range for the sake of another." (Dunn, p. 834)

The strong should cherish and celebrate their God-given liberty as a precious blessing. "Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves." Luther's German translation captures the sense of the phrase exceedingly well: "Selig ist, der sich selbst kein Gewissen macht in dem, was er annimmt." ("Blessed is the man whose conscience is untroubled by scruples over that which he approves.")

"But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats because his eating is not from faith, and everything that does not come from faith is sin." - In this final verse, Paul returns to the implications of these issues for the weaker brother. The "doubts" (Greek - "diakrinomenos" literally "to waver") at issue here are the conscience scruples of the believer in regard to the eating of formerly forbidden foods. The verb "is condemned" (Greek - "katakekritai") is a powerful term which is typically applied to the judgement of God upon the sinner. It serves to emphasize the profound importance of these issues. The phrase reinforces the earlier assertion that the disregard or disobedience of conscience in sinful even when that conscience is in error (cf. vs.14). It is not the eating itself which is sinful and brings condemnation but the disobedience of conscience. "By partaking they are transgressing what they believe to be absolute moral norms. Faith cannot survive if people consistently flout what they consider to be moral absolutes." (Schreiner, p. 737) The further explanation is added that such eating is sinful because it "is not from faith." As in the preceding phrase "faith" is used both subjectively - personal trust in Christ as Savior and Lord - and objectively - individual conviction stemming from one's faith in Christ. The argument concludes with the general maxim - "Everything that does not come from faith is sin." Douglas Moo explains:

"What he here labels "sin" is any act that does not match our sincerely held convictions about what our Christian faith allows us to do and prohibits us from doing. For a Christian, not a single decision and action can be good which he does not think he can justify on the ground of his Christian conviction and his liberty before God in Christ. Violation of the dictates of conscience, even when conscience does not conform perfectly with God's will is sinful." (Moo, pp.863,864)

Romans Chapter 15

Verses 1-2
We who are strong ought to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Each of us should please his neighbor for his good, to build him up.

"We who are strong ought to bear with..." - The theme of Chapter 14 continues through the first half of this chapter but in a more general way. There are no further references to dietary observance or the question of the Sabbath. This concern applies across the board, throughout the Christian life. Paul has previously indicated his agreement with the perspective of the "strong." Now, for the first time, he specifically designates them as such and exhorts them as one who shares their perspective - "we who are strong." The transition to a more general discussion is further indicated by a shift in the term for the "weak" the Greek word "astehnes" to the word "adynaton" which means to be without power or capability. The verb, "ought" (Greek - "opheilomen") is placed at the beginning of the sentence in the Greek text for particular emphasis. This is "the personal religious "ought of grace which has its basis in God's redeeming act in Christ." (Franzmann, p. 255) (cf. John 13:14; 1 John 3:16; Romans 1:5,14) It is used to describe an obligation that is incumbent upon Christians by virtue of their faith in Christ. The obligation in this instance is "to bear with the failings of the weak." The verb means to take up a load and carry it for someone else. The Revised English Bible aptly paraphrases the verse in this way: "Those of us who are strong must accept as our own burden the tender scruples of the weak." The nature of the intended support is further defined by the phrase "and not to please ourselves." Martin Franzmann explains:

"Bearing with the weak is something more positive than toleration of them or indulgence toward them; it means self-renunciation on the part of the strong. They can no longer "please themselves," look out for their own interests, even if that interest is religious self-development. They "bear with" the weak by taking the weak upon themselves as their responsibility, by existing for and serving the weak, by imparting their strength to the weak in a gracious ministry that builds him up." (Franzmann, p. 255)

"Each of us should please his neighbor for his good to build him up." Verse two restates the point. The language - "please his neighbor recalls the "Golden Rule" of Leviticus 19:18- "Love your neighbor as yourself." The term "neighbor" occurs 16 times in the New Testament, always in reference to this classic text. In Chapter 13 the apostle cited Leviticus 19:18 in discussing the primacy of love in the Christian life (cf. Romans 13:9). Mere self-satisfaction can never be the goal of the Christian. Instead, the motive of the believer must always be "to please his neighbor for his good to build him up." The "pleasing" in question certainly does not refer to a servile catering to the selfish desires and whims of others. Paul has sternly warned elsewhere that Christians are not to be "men-pleasers" (Ephesians 6:6; cf. also Galatians 1:10; Colossians 3:22; 1 Thessalonians 2:4)). The Christian seeks to "please his neighbor" in the sense of strengthening and supporting him in his faith and in his spiritual growth. "Building up" (Greek - "oikodome") is the characteristic New Testament word for such spiritual advancement. It serves to emphasize our interdependence upon one another as living stones within the temple of Christ's church.

Verses 3-4
For even Christ did not please Himself but, as it is written: "The insults of those who insult you have fallen on me." For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.

"For even Christ did not please Himself..." - Our Lord Jesus is the prime example of such selfless living. Throughout His earthly life, Christ humbly submitted to the will of the Father for the salvation of humanity. Neither the devil's subtle temptation (Matthew 4:1-11), nor the anguish in the Garden (Luke 22:39-46), nor the agony and humiliation of the cross (Matthew 27:41-44) could dissuade Him from that course. All that He did, He did for others. Paul cites the prophetic words of Psalm 69:9 and places them upon the lips of the Savior as an illustration of his point. After Psalms 22 and 110, Psalm 69 is the psalm most frequented quoted in the New Testament. The messianic nature of the Psalm is clearly attested by all of the New Testament references (cf. John 2:17; 15:25; Romans 11:9,10; Acts 1:20 Matthew 23:38) In Romans 11:9 Paul attributes the human authorship of this Psalm to David, a claim disputed by many modern commentators, including the great Lutheran Old Testament scholar Franz Delitzsch. R.C.H. Lenski defers to the apostle's opinion in this matter, ironically noting, "Paul is a much safer authority than Delitzsch." (Lenski, p. 859) David, the Messiah's ancestor and predecessor, "becomes a typical example of the things that are experienced by all who are truly zealous for the Lord's house." (Leupold, p. 501) The psalmist's experiences become the counterpart and the preview of those of the coming Messiah whom he represents. The point of the quotation is simply that those who oppose and resist God also oppose and resist His representative. Recognizing this fact, Jesus willingly endured their insults and persecution as a part of His submission to the will of the Father for the salvation of humanity. Origen, a great Bible scholar of the early church notes: "Christ did not please Himself, nor did He think it was robbery to be equal with God, but wanting to please men, that is, to save them, suffered the reproaches of those who reproached God, was it is written." (Bray, p. 354) In his commentary on this text, John Chysostom stresses the voluntary nature of Christ's suffering: "He had the power not to have been reproached, power not to have suffered what He did suffer, had He been minded to look to His own things." (Moo, p. 869)

"For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us..." - Paul explains the pertinence of the precedent by reminding his readers of the didactic purpose of Scripture. The Old Testament continues to play a crucial role in the life of the people of God in accordance with God's plan and purpose. He inspired the written record of His mighty deeds and promises so that they might serve to teach and instruct His people today. To the Corinthians Paul asserts: "These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come." (1 Corinthians 10:11) Martin Franzmann points out:

"Paul appropriates Israel's Bible for the new Israel of the last days...Through Christ the Old Testament, this dark, perplexing book, becomes clear and luminous for the eyes of faith; through Him the veil which screens its deepest and true meaning from the eyes of hardened Israel is removed (2 Corinthians 3:15-16). Then the Old Testament speaks encouragement and inspires steadfastness; it gives us hope." (Franzmann, p. 257)

The central role of Scripture in maintaining the confidence and endurance of the people of God is clearly asserted. For this very reason, God caused His book to be written - "so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope." Those who discount the Bible as an ancient book irrelevant to the cares and concerns of modern man or those who deny the Bible as an unreliable human production riddled with inaccuracies and errors both deprive God's people of that hope by depriving them of the means to obtain and sustain that hope.

The proposition "through" (Greek - "dia") is repeated in the Greek text to emphasize that both "endurance" and "encouragement" are directly linked to the teaching role of Scripture. "Endurance" (Greek - "hypomone") is the ongoing willingness to remain under the load of a heavy burden. It occurs thirty-two times in the New Testament, usually in reference to the disciple's submission to trial and tribulation. "Encourgament" (Greek - "paraklesis") is used twenty-nine times in the New Testament. Its most prominent variation is the title "Paraclete" ascribed to God the Holy Spirit by Jesus in John 16:7. It literally means one who comes alongside another to offer aid and assistance. These are the precious blessings which God offers in His Word to create and sustain the "hope" of His people. "Hope" in the Bible is never the impotent desire for change or improvement. It is the rock-solid confidence of the believer that the promises of God hold true and that although we have not yet seen the fulfillment of those promises, they will most certainly come to pass. That hope is sure because it rests completely upon God and His Word, not upon the attitude or actions of men.

Verse 5-6
May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

"May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity..." - A profound concern for the unity of the church has been Paul's underlying theme since the beginning this discussion about the strong and the weak in 14:1. That concern now comes explicitly to the fore. Here, as elsewhere in Scripture, the prayer that Christians may recognize and implement the unity which is God's gift to His people is closely linked to teaching authority of the Word (Vs. 4 - Greek - "didaskalia...ton graphon") (cf. John 17:17,21,23; Ephesians 4:1-16). Paul's prayer is that while diversity in adiaphora must be tolerated in Christ-like humility, there may be, nonetheless, complete unanimity where Scripture speaks clearly. Paul is, in effect, paraphrasing the historic slogan of the Moravian Brethren - "In essentials, unity - In non-essentials, diversity - In all things charity" - that is, if "essentials" are understood to be all Biblical doctrine and "non-essentials" are understood to be all matters of adiaphora and human opinion. As the diversity in adiaphora is motivated by love for Christ so also "a spirit of unity" is motivated by a compelling desire to "follow Christ Jesus." As God's people realize and demonstrate this unity it becomes possible to "glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" with "one heart and mouth." The opposite is, of course, also true. When God's people are divided and the church does not speak with one voice on matters of Biblical doctrine, this division and doctrinal diversity detracts from the glory of God and serves to discredit Him and His Word in the eyes of the world. Lenski explains the critical importance of this unity as a reflection of the unity and glory of God:

"As God's glory is one and unchangeable and His every deed, gift, blessing are one, so our making these manifest must be one. The Word that tells of Him is one and our apprehending and our voicing of that Word must thus also be one, whatever part of it we mention. This oneness of conviction and confession, like our mystical oneness in the Una Sancta, is far deeper than many suppose, for its ultimate basis, source, and substance are the oneness of God and of His glory. Here we have an answer to the idea that each man may have his own views and the right to his own personal views, to the idea that we may agree to disagree, that creeds and confessions are hindrances, that creedlessness is the ideal. Where oneness of mind and mouth is lost, somebody is wrong, somebody is not glorifying God but himself, is darkening the glory of God, forsaking the Word, injuring the church, putting in jeopardy his connection with the Una Sancta, perhaps tearing himself away from its spiritual bond. The clearer our view of the ultimate ground of our confessional oneness is, the more serious and dangerous our division and rents in confession will appear." (Lenski, p. 864)

Verses 7-12
Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God. For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God's truth, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs, so that the Gentiles may glorify God for His mercy, as it is written: "Therefore, I will praise You among the Gentiles; I will sing praises to Your name." Again it says: "Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people." And again, ""Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles, and sing praises to Him all you peoples." And again Isaiah says: "The root of Jesse will spring up, one who will arise to rule over the nations; the Gentiles will hope in Him."

"Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you..." - This segment of the epistle now draws to its conclusion. "Acceptance" is an active concept denoting much more than minimal toleration. It indicates the love and mutual concern which characterizes the relationships between family members. Earlier in Romans 14:3 Paul admonished the weak not to judge the strong because God had "accepted" them. The same argument is now broadened to establish Christ's acceptance of all Christians as the foundation for our acceptance of one another. We are all people whom God loves in Christ. Our acceptance of one another is the inevitable result of His acceptance of us all. The mutual love of God's people for one another serves to demonstrate the reality of His love before the world and thus glorifies Him - "in order to bring praise to God."

"For I tell you that Christ has become a servant..." - The introductory phrase, "For I tell you" signals a solemn doctrinal declaration which summarizes one of the basic theological themes of the epistle - the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant by the inclusion of the Gentiles into the people of God . As Paul asserts in Galatians 3:14 - "He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit." Christ voluntarily submitted to the servant role in order to accomplish this divine purpose - "on behalf of God's truth." By fulfilling God's promises and covenant commitments to the patriarchs, Christ vindicated the truthfulness, the faithfulness, of God. The use of the formal messianic title "Christ" rather than the personal name "Jesus" emphasizes His role as the Anointed One of God, the promised Savior. The text literally reads - "Christ has become a servant of the circumcision." The NIV offers the interpretive paraphrase - "a servant of the Jews." That is, no doubt, the intent, but the paraphrase lacks the precise emphasis of the original which focuses specifically on the ritual obligations of the Old Testament. Although Christ as the Son of God was not subject to the law, He submitted Himself to the demands of the law in order to accomplish the plan of salvation.. He was "Born under the law to redeem those under the law, the we might receive the full rights of sons." (Galatians 3:4-5) The concept of Christ taking on the role of a servant is reminiscent of Philippians 2: "Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made Himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness." (Philippians 2:5-7).

"So that the Gentiles may glorify god for His mercy..." - Even the obstinate rejection of the Messiah by the majority of Israel is transformed in God's grace to a source of blessing for the Gentile world (cf. Romans 9-11). Lenski summarizes the thrust of the argument:

"Paul's purpose is admonitory, to make the Roman Jewish and Gentile Christians be of one mind among themselves in accord with Christ Jesus and to glorify God with one mouth (vs. 5-6). Their oneness centers in Christ and in God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; four times we read "Christ," five times "God." (Vs.5-9) The glorifying with one mind and with one mouth will strike two chords: truth - mercy, but how harmoniously they accord! The Jewish Christian as well as the Gentile Christian thinks not only of himself but also of the other; each sees God's glory in what Christ has done for him, and also for the other." (Lenski, pp. 869-870)

"As it is written..." - The customary phrase introduces a series of Old Testament citations to document the point and demonstrate the united chorus of praise to the glory of God from both Jews and Gentiles. The first quotation comes from Psalm 18:49, words from the inspired pen of King David: "Therefore I will praise You among the Gentiles; I will sing hymns to Your Name." David is the greatest of Israel's historic monarchs. God had given him the victory over the Gentile nations surrounding his kingdom. David rejoices in that victory as a means of glorifying God among the nations. The second quotation is drawn from Deuteronomy 32:43 - "Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people!" The phrase celebrates what God has done and summons the Gentiles to join with the Children of Israel in rejoicing over God's mighty deeds on behalf of His own. Jews and Gentiles together singing the praises of God - that is the theme of this series of quotations. Next, the apostle turns again to the Book of Psalms, this time to Psalm 117:1 - "Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles, and sing praises to Him all you peoples." Psalm 117 is the shortest chapter in the Bible - only two verse long. The verse which follows this citation refers to the "mercy" and the "truth" of God as the basis for mankind's praise of the Lord. Finally, the prophecy of Isaiah 11:10 concludes the list of quotations: "The root of Jesse will spring up, one who will arise to rule over the nations; the Gentiles will hope in Him." The juxtaposition of the "Root of Jesse" a Messianic title which stresses Christ's identity as the scion of Israel's royal house, and the hope of the Gentiles reinforces the point that God's plan of salvation included Jew and Gentile from the very beginning.

Verse 13
May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in Him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.

"May the God of hope fill you..." - This is the first of three magnificent benedictions in the closing verses of the letter to the Romans. It is, as Donald Grey Barnhouse affirms "a great summary of the blessed life in the brotherhood formed by our oneness in Christ." (Boice, p. 1835) The words of Paul's prayer of blessing are directed to "the God of hope." The title acknowledges God as the sole source and giver of our hope. It is particularly appropriate in the aftermath of the preceding quotation's reference to the hope of the Gentiles. Four qualities are highlighted within the blessing - hope, joy, peace, and trust. Hope is given particular emphasis by its primary position and its repetition at the end. All flow from God and are graciously bestowed upon us "by the power of the Holy Spirit." Paul's prays for a superabundance of these blessings- "May the God of hope fill you...so that you may overflow." Each of these concepts has been enunciated and elucidated previously in the letter. The are now combined as the culmination of Paul's desire for the Christians in Rome.

(continue)