Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 14:14
I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that [there is] nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him [it is] unclean.
14. by the Lord Jesus ] Lit. in the Lord Jesus; i.e. as one who is both a “member of Christ” and acts under His special influence.
unclean ] Lit. common (as margin E. V.); i.e. ceremonially unclean. Cp. Act 10:15.
of itself ] Lit. by means of itself; i.e. per se: “nothing makes itself unlawful” for food.
but to him, &c.] Lit. unless to him, &c. But the Gr. idiom is rightly rendered in E. V. So Rev. 20:27, where lit. “ unless they which are written, &c.”
Here St Paul appeals to the feet that individual conscience, however misguided, must never be violated by its possessor. Mistaken conscience calls for correction by better light, but never for violation. To follow conscience is, in itself, no security that we are doing what is per se right; but to violate conscience, which is our actual view of right and wrong, is always wrong. Here, for instance, the “weak brother,” so long as his conscience scrupled about a certain sort of food, would do wrong to eat it, though his scruple was an error; and the “strong brother” would be really tempting him to sin by not patiently explaining the error and leaving him to reflection on it, but rudely, sarcastically, or slightingly, inducing him to override his unchanged convictions. Cp. the instructive language of 1Co 8:10.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
I know – This is an admission made to the Gentile convert, who believed that it was lawful to partake of food of every kind. This the apostle concedes; and says he is fully apprized of this. But though he knew this, yet he goes on to say Rom 14:15, that it would be well to regard the conscientious scruples of others on the subject. It may be remarked here that the apostle Paul had formerly quite as many scruples as any of his brethren had then. But his views had been changed.
And am persuaded – Am convinced.
By the Lord Jesus – This does not mean by any personal instruction received from the Lord Jesus, but by all the knowledge which he had received by inspiration of the nature of the Christian religion. The gospel of Jesus had taught him that the rites of the Mosaic economy had been abolished, and among those rites were the rules respecting clean and unclean beasts, etc.
There is nothing unclean – Greek common. This word was used by the Jews to denote what was unclean, because, in their apprehension, whatever was partaken by the multitude, or all people, must be impure. Hence, the words common and impure are often used as expressing the same thing. It denotes what was forbidden by the laws of Moses.
To him that esteemeth … – He makes it a matter of conscience. He regards certain meats as forbidden by God; and while he so regards them, it would be wrong for him to partake of them. Man may be in error, but it would not be proper for him to act in violation of what he supposes God requires.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 14. I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus] After reasoning so long and so much with these contending parties on the subject of their mutual misunderstandings, without attempting to give any opinion, but merely to show them the folly and uncharitableness of their conduct, he now expresses himself fully, and tells them that nothing is unclean of itself, and that he has the inspiration and authority of Jesus Christ to say so; for to such an inspiration he must refer in such words as, I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus. And yet, after having given them this decisive judgment, through respect to the tender, mistaken conscience of weak believers, he immediately adds: But to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean; because if he act contrary to his conscience, he must necessarily contract guilt; for he who acts in opposition to his conscience in one case may do it in another, and thus even the plain declarations of the word of God may be set aside on things of the utmost importance, as well as the erroneous though well-intentioned dictates of his conscience, on matters which he makes of the last consequence; though others who are better taught know them to be indifferent.
It is dangerous to trifle with conscience, even when erroneous; it should be borne with and instructed; it must be won over, not taken by storm. Its feelings should be respected because they ever refer to God, and have their foundation in his fear. He who sins against his conscience in things which every one else knows to be indifferent, will soon do it in those things in which his salvation is most intimately concerned. It is a great blessing to have a well-informed conscience; it is a blessing to have a tender conscience; and even a sore conscience is infinitely better than none.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Here he obviates an objection. Some might say, they were thoroughly persuaded, that no meat was unclean in itself, and therefore they might, and would, use their liberty in eating any thing that was before them. To this the apostle answers, first, by way of concession; he grants what they say is true, and tells them, that for his own part he knew it full well, and was himself assured of it; and that he had this assurance from
the Lord Jesus; i.e. that he was instructed therein by his word and Spirit.
That there is nothing unclean of itself; i.e. that no meat was unclean in itself; it was not so in its own nature: see Gen 1:31; 9:3. Some creatures might be unwholesome, but none were in themselves unclean: to the Jews they were not unclean by nature, but by a positive law, which law was now antiquated and out of doors: see Col 2:16,17; 1Ti 4:3,4.
But to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean: this he adds by way of restriction, that though no meat was unclean in itself, yet it was so to him that thought it to be unclean. If a man shall believe that there is yet a difference in meats, that some are still unclean, and that by virtue of Gods prohibition, it would be evil in him to eat such meats, because he therein acts against his conscience, and doth that which he himself thinks to be a sin: see Rom 14:23.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
14, 15. I know, and am persuadedbyor rather, “in”
the Lord Jesusas”having the mind of Christ” (1Co2:16).
that there is nothing uncleanof itselfHence it is that he calls those “the strong”who believed in the abolition of all ritual distinctions under theGospel. (See Ac 10:15).
but“save that”
to him that esteemethanything to be unclean, to him it is unclean“andtherefore, though you can eat of it with out sin, hecannot.“
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus,…. As for the apostle’s own sense and judgment about the distinction of meats, it was this,
that there is nothing unclean of itself; that every creature, as originally made by God, is good; that what is eatable, or fit for food, may be eaten, whatever the Mosaic laws, being now abrogated, say to the contrary; and that whatever physical or natural difference there may be between the creatures of God, one being naturally fit for food, and another not; yet there is no moral distinction between them, there is nothing in any of them that can morally defile a man by eating them; nor indeed is there now any ceremonial distinction between them, and so no ceremonial pollution by them. This was not a bare conjecture, nor a mere opinion, but a point of certain knowledge, a matter of faith, and of full assurance of faith; the apostle was thoroughly persuaded of the truth of it, and had not the least doubt nor difficulty in his mind about it; he was as fully assured of it, as he was of his salvation by Christ, and of his interest in the love of God, from which he could never be separated, and therefore expresses it in language equally as strong; and this he came to the knowledge and persuasion of, “by the Lord Jesus”; by his express words, Mt 15:11; or by a revelation from him, in which way he had the whole Gospel: he might be informed of this matter in like manner as Peter was, by a vision from heaven,
Ac 10:10, or he knew this through the abrogation of the whole ceremonial law by Christ, who abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances, and so these laws relating to the difference of meats among the rest; and he knew, that all the creatures in their original creation were good, and though cursed, for man’s sake yet Christ had removed the curse, and sanctified them for the use of his people, who, under the Gospel dispensation, might make use of them at pleasure, without distinction: and the Jews themselves own, that what before was unclean, shall in the days of the Messiah be clean: so they explain Ps 146:7; “the Lord looseth the prisoners”, which they would render, “the Lord looseth that which was forbidden”; and give this as the sense r
“every beast which was unclean in this world (the Jewish state), ” , “God will cleanse it in the time to come” (in the times of the Messiah), when they shall be clean as at the first, to the sons of Noah.”
So they observe, that the Hebrew word for a hog, , comes from
, which signifies to return; because, say they s, hereafter God will cause it to return to the Israelites; and even now, as formerly, they allow of eating anything that is torn, or dies of itself, or hog’s flesh to an army entering into a Gentile country, and subduing it, where they can find nothing else t:
but to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean; such a man that thinks the laws concerning clean and unclean meats are still in force, and binding upon him, ought to refrain from eating them; because he would act contrary to his conscience, and so violate and defile it; wherefore though the apostle was so fully satisfied in his own, mind, yet he would not have weak and scrupulous consciences do themselves any hurt through his faith; for if they ate doubtingly, and without faith, it was an evil. Capellus u mentions a rule laid down by the Jews, but does not direct where it is to be found, nor have I yet met with it, very agreeable to this of the apostle’s, which runs thus:
“this is the grand general rule in the law, that every thing which thou dost not know,
, “whether it is lawful or unlawful, to thee it is unlawful”, until thou hast asked a wise men concerning who may teach thee that it is lawful.”
r Bereshit Rabba in Maji Synops. Jud. Theolog. p. 224. R. Moses Hadarsan in Galatin. de Arcan. Cathol. ver. l. 11. c. 12. p. 699. s Abarbinel. Rosh Amana, c. 13. fol. 18. 2. t Maimon. Hilch. Melacim, c. 8. sect. 1. u In loc.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus ( ). He knows it and stands persuaded (perfect passive indicative of , to persuade), but in the sphere of the Lord Jesus (cf. 9:1), not by mere rational processes.
Unclean of itself ( ‘ ). So Paul takes his stand with the “strong” as in 1Co 8:4f., but he is not a libertine. Paul’s liberty as to food is regulated by his life in the Lord. For this use of , not as common to all (Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32), but unhallowed, impure, see on Mark 7:2; Mark 7:5; Acts 10:14; Acts 10:28. God made all things for their own uses.
Save that ( ). The exception lies not in the nature of the food (‘ ), but in the man’s view of it (to him, , dative case).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
I know – am persuaded [ – ] . “A rare conjunction of words, but fitted here to confirm against ignorance and doubt” (Bengel). For I know, see on Joh 2:4. The persuasion is not the result of his own reasoning, but of his fellowship in the Lord Jesus. So Rev, for by the Lord, etc.
Unclean [] . Lit., common. In the Levitical sense, as opposed to holy or pure. Compare Mr 7:2, “With defiled [ ] , that is to say, with unwashen hands.” See Act 10:14.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) I know, and am persuaded of the Lord Jesus,” (oida kai pepeismai en kurio desou) I perceive and have been persuaded in the Lord Jesus,” for reason from what he taught teaches it, Mat 5:17-18; Gal 1:12.
2) That there is nothing unclean of itself,” (hoti ouden koinon di heautou) “That there is not even one thing common through or by itself,” Rom 14:2; Rom 14:20. Nothing formerly regulated by the law exists as unclean in itself alone, Act 10:28; Tit 1:15.
3) “But to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean,” (ei me to logizomeno ti koinon einai) “Except to the one reckoning, calculating, or considering in his judgment, it to be common,” or unclean. The idea is that if one is persuaded to act against his conscience, it weakens his conscience and is wrong. All matters of moral decisions by responsible people should be on the basis of conviction from enlightened conscience, based on a knowledge of God’s Word on all matters of action, Rom 14:5; Rom 14:22-23.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
14. I know, etc. To anticipate their objection, who made such progress in the gospel of Christ as to make no distinction between meats, he first shows what must be thought of meats when viewed in themselves; and then he subjoins how sin is committed in the use of them. He then declares, that no meat is impure to a right and pure conscience, and that there is no hindrance to a pure use of meats, except ignorance and infirmity; for when any imagines an impurity in them, he is not at liberty to use them. But he afterwards adds, that we are not only to regard meats themselves, but also the brethren before whom we eat: for we ought not to view the use of God’s bounty with so much indifference as to disregard love. His words then have the same meaning as though he had said, — “I know that all meats are clean, and therefore I leave to thee the free use of them; I allow thy conscience to be freed from all scruples: in short, I do not simply restrain thee from meats; but laying aside all regard for them, I still wish thee not to neglect thy neighbor.”
By the word common, in this place, he means unclean, and what is taken indiscriminately by the ungodly; and it is opposed to those things which had been especially set apart for the use of the faithful people. He says that he knew, and was fully convinced, that all meats are pure, in order to remove all doubts. He adds, in the Lord Jesus; for by his favor and grace it is, that all the creatures which were accursed in Adam, are blessed to us by the Lord. (427) He intended, however, at the same time, to set the liberty given by Christ in opposition to the bondage of the law, lest they thought that they were bound to observe those rites from which Christ had made them free. By the exception which he has laid down, we learn that there is nothing so pure but what may be contaminated by a corrupt conscience: for it is faith alone and godliness which sanctify all things to us. The unbelieving, being polluted within, defile all things by their very touch. ( Titus 1:15.)
(427) To elicit this meaning, which is in itself true, [ Calvin ] must have construed the sentence thus, “I know, and I am persuaded, that through the Lord Jesus nothing is of itself unclean:” but this is not the meaning. What the Apostle says is, that he knew, and was fully assured by the Lord Jesus, that is, by the teaching of his word Spirit, that nothing was in itself unclean, all ceremonial distinctions having been now removed and abolished. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(14) I know, and am persuaded.The Apostle clearly identifies himself with the less scrupulous party. For one of his intense penetration and grasp on the realities of things, any other position was impossible. But while these essential features in the Apostles character find the noblest expression, we cannot but note his attitude of gentle forbearance towards those whose faith is less deep and less robust than his own. This comes out especially in that pathetic and pregnant appeal, Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
By the Lord Jesus.Rather, in the Lord Jesus. A solemn form of asseveration. The Apostle is speaking from the very depths of his Christian consciousness as one who knows that he has himself put on the Spirit of Christ.
To him that esteemeth.This would mean, in philosophical language, that the quality of uncleanness was not an objective property in the thing itself, but a subjective quality in the mind of the person regarding it as such. Still, this subjective quality is for the individual a real one, and should be treated as real. (Comp. Mar. 7:15.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
14. Unclean In the Greek, common; a word derived from Old Testament use as a term antithetic to consecrated or set apart. The term being Jewish, might seem to imply that the weaker brethren were Jews. But in New Testament use it came to signify impure or profane in general. Thus in Heb 10:29, it is applied to the despised blood of Christ, and translated unholy; and in Rev 21:27, it is applied to any thing too impure to enter heaven. It is the word which the apostle, with his Jewish training, would use to designate that impurity which Orientalism attributed to all matter.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself, except that to him who accounts anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.’
Paul states his own position quite clearly. He knows in his heart, and is persuaded as a result of his experience with the LORD, Jesus, that there is nothing that is ritually unclean of itself. On the other hand he stresses that where someone does believe in ritual uncleanness, then to him such things as he ‘believes are unclean’, are unclean. In other words they are such that if he ate of them he would be sinning, simply because he would be doing what he saw as wrong.
‘And am persuaded in (by) the Lord Jesus.’ Paul may here have in mind the teaching of Jesus as recorded in Mar 7:14-19. On the other hand he may simply be indicating that in consequence of his closeness to the LORD Jesus he had become convinced of it.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Rom 14:14 . Discussion of the preceding injunction, giving information regarding it. Paul grants, namely, in principle , that the freer brethren are right , but immediately adds an exception which arises in practice , and, in assigning the reason for this addition, declares (Rom 14:15 ) the not attending to the exception a proof of want of love.
. .] More precise definition of the preceding .
.] i.e. in my fellowship with the Lord ; , Chrysostom.
] corresponding to the of the Greeks: profane , (Chrysostom), Act 10:14 ; Act 10:28 ; Act 11:8 ; Heb 10:29 . Thus the eating of flesh was held to be unholy and unclean, and therefore a thing at variance with the holiness of a Christian’s position. Comp. Eze 42:20 ; 1Ma 1:47 ; 1Ma 1:62 .
] Since the reflexive (with the rough breathing) is generally doubtful in the N. T. (comp. Buttmann, neut. Gr . p. 97 f.), and here the personal (with the soft breathing) is quite sufficient and appropriate in sense, the latter is to be preferred (Bengel, Matthaei, Lachmann, Tischendorf, 7, Hofmann); not, however, to be referred to Christ (Theodoret, Bisping, Jatho, and others), but to be explained: through itself, i.e . through its nature . In is thus implied the objectively existing uncleanness, in contrast (see below) to that which subjectively accrues per accidens . On account of the laws relating to food of the O. T., Olshausen thinks that the thought of the apostle is intended to affirm that “ through Christ and His sanctifying influence the creation has again become pure and holy .” This arbitrary importation of a meaning (followed by Bisping) is overthrown by the very circumstance that the abstinence of the Roman ascetics was by no means founded on the law which did not in fact forbid the use of flesh generally but was of a supra-legal Essenic character. Moreover, Paul was clear and certain, so far as concerns the O. T. laws of food, that they had outlived the time of obligatoriness appointed for them by God, and were abolished by God Himself, inasmuch as in Christ the end of the law had come, and the temporary divine institute had given place to the eternal one of the gospel as its fulfilment, Mat 5:17 . Comp. on Rom 10:4 ; Col 2:16 ff.; also on Act 10:15-16 .
] not equivalent to , but nisi , which, without taking also into account, applies merely to . Comp. on Mat 12:4 ; Gal 2:16 .
] . with emphasis, as in 2Co 10:18 , Mar 7:15 ; Mar 7:20 , and very frequently in John. The uncleanness is in such a case subjective , coming into existence and subsisting actually for the individual through the fettered condition of his own conscience.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
Ver. 14. I know and am persuaded ] Many, on the contrary, are persuaded before they know; and such will not be persuaded to know. The Valentinian heretics had a trick to persuade before they taught, as saith Tertullian. The old sectaries had their pithanology, insinuative and persuasive language; so have the modern; and hence so many dissonant opinions among us. If ye speak with several tongues (so hold several opinions) will not he that comes in think ye are mad? 1Co 14:9-11 Dii boni, quomodo hic vivunt gentes! How strangely do people live here, said a stranger, observing our divisions in Henry VIII’s time, which (alas) were nothing comparable to these of our days, and all because simple men and silly women are soon persuaded to that which they understand not. The silly simple believeth everything: weak as water on a table, which with a wet finger may be led any way. Pethi, Pro 14:15
By the Lord Jesus ] Who hath pulled down the partition-wall, and purchased our Christian liberty.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
14. ] The general principle laid down , that nothing is by its own means , i.e. for any thing in itself ( , Chrys.), unclean, but only in reference to him who reckons it to be so .
. . .] These words give to the persuasion the weight, not merely of Paul’s own , but of apostolic authority. He is persuaded, in his capacity as connected with Christ Jesus, as having the mind of Christ .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 14:14 . In principle, the Apostle sides with the strong. He has no scruples about meats or drinks or days. : it is as a Christian, not as a libertine, that Paul has this conviction; in Christ Jesus he is sure that there is nothing in the world essentially unclean; all things can be consecrated and Christianised by Christian use. : cf. Act 10:14 ; Act 10:28 , Rev 21:27 . It is the opposite of , and signifies that which is not and cannot be brought into relation to God. . . . Though there is nothing which in itself has this character, some things may have it subjectively, i.e. , in the judgment of a particular person who cannot help (from some imperfection of conscience) regarding them so; to him ( emphatic) they are what his conscience makes them; and his conscience (unenlightened as it is) is entitled to respect. For cf. Mat 12:14 , Gal 2:16 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
know. App-132.
persuaded. See Rom 8:38.
Lord Jesus. See Rom 10:9.
there is nothing = nothing (Greek. oudeis) is.
unclean. i.e. ceremonially unclean. See Act 2:44 (common).
but = except. Literally if (App-118) not (App-105).
esteemeth = reckoneth. See Rom 2:3; Rom 4:3.
him = that same.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
14.] The general principle laid down, that nothing is by its own means,-i.e. for any thing in itself (, Chrys.),-unclean, but only in reference to him who reckons it to be so.
. . .] These words give to the persuasion the weight, not merely of Pauls own , but of apostolic authority. He is persuaded, in his capacity as connected with Christ Jesus,-as having the mind of Christ.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Rom 14:14. , in the Lord Jesus) All cases are best and most certainly resolved in the face of Christ; I know and am persuaded, a rare conjunction of words, but adapted to this place for confirmation against ignorance and doubt.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 14:14
Rom 14:14
I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself:-Everything created by God is for a good purpose and will bring good to man if used as God intended it should be.
save that to him who accounteth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.-A man must act according to his best judgment. To do this is to be conscientious, or to keep a clean conscience. Conscience does not determine things to be right or wrong. The judgment determines this, and the conscience is the feeling or principle within that demands that a man shall act according to it and bears witness if he does or does not. A man who esteems a thing unclean, and yet uses it, goes contrary to his own judgment. His conscience bears witness to this fact, and he is untrue to himself. A man untrue to himself cannot be true to any being in the universe. God demands that a man shall be true to himself, live in all good conscience as Paul did, then with a good conscience he shall serve him. God will not accept service from a defiled or debauched conscience, and to know the right and follow the wrong defiles it.
Those most offensive to God are those who compromise the truth and defile their consciences. The man who worships with an organ, believing it to be wrong, to be sin against God, is a much worse man that he who worships with it, believing it to be right. Then, a man ought to do nothing he believes wrong. Then, if a man believes an organ wrong, he debauches his own conscience in approving it by word or act and renders himself unfit for the service of God. Men that are true to their consciences are what the world needs and God delights in. A man who believes it right to meet on the and is in great danger of destroying his own soul. We ought not to countenance the wrong; we ought to practice the right.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
and am: Act 10:28
that there: Rom 14:2, Rom 14:20, 1Co 10:25, 1Ti 4:4, Tit 1:15
unclean: Gr. common, Act 10:14, Act 10:15, Act 11:8, Act 11:9
to him it: Rom 14:23, 1Co 8:7, 1Co 8:10
Reciprocal: Gen 9:3 – even Lev 7:19 – General Lev 11:2 – General Lev 11:8 – they are unclean Deu 14:3 – General Isa 52:11 – touch Mat 15:11 – that which goeth Luk 11:41 – all Act 15:29 – ye abstain Rom 14:5 – Let Rom 14:22 – thou 1Co 6:12 – things are lawful Gal 2:14 – the truth Col 2:16 – in meat 2Ti 1:5 – I am
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
:14
Rom 14:14. I know denotes that Paul is speaking by inspiration. No kind of food is unclean in fact (1Ti 4:4), but it is unclean to the man who believes it is.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 14:14. I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus. His knowledge on the point in question amounts to full conviction growing out of his fellowship with Christ. The principle which he thus prefaces is: that nothing is unclean, lit., common, impure, according to the distinction made by the Jews, and ascetics generally, of itself, i.e., by nature. (See marg. refs. on this point.) There is some doubt about the correct reading of this phrase, but the sense is well established. Paul thus declares that the freer brethren are in the right, these distinctions are not valid theoretically; but practically an exception must be made, which the Apostle enforced on the ground of love (Rom 14:15).
But, or, except. If the latter sense be accepted, the exception holds good in regard to unclean, not to unclean of itself.
To him that reckoneth, etc. Reckoneth is the word used of justification, it points to a judgment, not to moral quality.
To him it is unclean; the emphasis rests on to him; his scruple makes it so for him.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Rom 14:14-16. I know By the light of reason; and am persuaded Or assured; by the Lord Jesus Probably by a particular revelation from him; that there is nothing No kind of meat; unclean of itself Or unlawful under the gospel. But to him that esteemeth any thing unclean That in his conscience accounts it to be so; it is unclean How indifferent soever it is in itself: and he will contract guilt before God, by allowing himself in it, whether it be to indulge his own taste, or to engage the favour of others, while he hath this inward apprehension of its being unlawful. The reader must observe here, that things clean in themselves, that is, things naturally fit for food, might be made unclean by the positive command of God, as many sorts of food were to the Jews. To such of them as believed that command to be still in force, these kinds of food were really unclean, and could not be eaten without sin. But if thy brother Thy weak fellow- Christian; be grieved And thereby cast down, or prejudiced against the Christian society, of which thou art a member; with thy meat By thine eating that kind of meat, which he judges unlawful to be eaten; or if he be prevailed on by thy example to do that, the lawfulness of which he questions, and thereby his conscience be wounded; now walkest thou not charitably Tenderly and condescendingly to his infirmity, as charity requires. Destroy not him with thy meat Be not thou an occasion of sin, condemnation, and wrath to him through thy meat, thy rash and unkind use of such meat as he thinks prohibited; for whom Christ died Not only submitted to smaller instances of self-denial, but endured all the agonies of crucifixion: do not value thy meat more than Christ valued his life. Here we see that a person, for whom Christ died, may be destroyed; a sure proof that Christ died for all, even for those that perish everlastingly. Let not then your goods Your Christian liberty, a good which belongs to you; be evil spoken of Be blamed for being the occasion of so much mischief to your fellow-creatures and fellow-Christians.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vv. 14, 15. I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself:except that to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, it is unclean. Now if thy brother be grieved because of food, thou walkest no more charitably. Destroy not by thy food, him for whom Christ died.
Paul does not wish to discuss the matter; but yet he cannot conceal his conviction; and he expresses it in passing, in Rom 14:14, as a concession he must make on the side of the strong. At bottom, it is they who are right. , I know, indicates a rational, theoretic conviction, such as even a Jew, trained by the O. T. to a true spirituality, might reach. The second verb , I am persuaded, goes further; it indicates that this conviction has penetrated to his very conscience, and set it practically free from all perplexity. The words: in the Lord Jesus, remind us that it is He who has put an end to the obligations imposed by the ceremonial law. The emancipation which faith finds in Him arises not only from His doctrine (Mat 15:11, for example), but above all from the redemption wrought by Him. This clause: in the Lord Jesus, bears on the second verb; there is nothing except the possession of salvation which can practically give full liberty to the soul.
Several ancient commentators have referred the words , to Jesus Christ: Through Him there is no longer anything unclean. But the negative form of the proposition is not favorable to this sense. Paul would rather have said: everything is clean through Him. It is more natural to understand this in the sense of: of itself (as would obviously be the case with the reading ): Nothing is unclean in its own nature (in the matter of food); comp. 1Co 10:26; 1Ti 4:4-5; Tit 1:15.
The restriction , except, applies to the idea of uncleanness in general, without taking account of the limitation of itself. This slightly incorrect use of has given rise, though erroneously, to the belief that this particle might signify but; comp. Mat 12:4; Luk 4:26-27; Joh 5:19; Gal 1:19; Gal 2:16, etc.
This restriction, whereby Paul reminds us that what is regarded as unclean becomes really so to him who uses it under this idea, paves the way for indicating the voluntary limits which the strong should be able to impose on himself in the exercise of his liberty.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus [I am convinced in my apostolic capacity, as enlightened by the Holy Spirit sent of the Lord Jesus (Joh 14:26; Joh 16:13-15). Paul’s teachings in this entire section are contrary to his education and prejudice as a Jew. He is speaking as one freed and enlightened in Christ], that nothing is unclean of itself: save that to him who accounteth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. [See Mat 15:11; Mar 7:18; Act 10:14-28; 1Ti 4:4 . In the gospel all ceremonial uncleanness is abolished, so that no food is any longer unclean, but if a man acts contrary to his conscience, he defiles it: hence food, clean of itself, may work sad havoc in his spiritual nature who eats contrary to his conscience– 1Co 8:7-13]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
14. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean through itself, but to him that thinketh it is unclean, to him it is unclean. Hence, you see, we have large liberties in the gospel, there being no prohibitions as under Judaism except from hygienical considerations discretionary with the recipient. While this is true on edibles and potations, it affords no sort of apology for narcotics, such as intoxicating drinks, tobacco, opium, and all poisons and drugs indiscriminately, which must be rejected from both a moral and hygienic standpoint.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 14
To him it is unclean; that is, he ought to act in such cases according to his own convictions of duty.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
14:14 {13} I know, and am persuaded by the {n} Lord Jesus, that [there is] nothing unclean of {o} itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him [it is] unclean.
(13) The preventing of an objection: it is true that the right of the law to be schoolmaster is taken away by the benefit of Christ, to those who know it, but yet nonetheless we have to consider in the use of this liberty what is expedient, that we may have regard to our weak brother, seeing that our liberty is not lost in doing this.
(n) By the Spirit of the Lord Jesus, or by the Lord Jesus, who broke down the wall at his coming.
(o) By nature.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The Lord Jesus taught that the distinction between ceremonially clean and unclean food had ended (Mar 7:15-23). Nevertheless not all Christians had grasped this teaching (e.g., Act 10:9-15). Many still regarded the Jewish dietary laws as God’s will for them (e.g. Seventh-Day Adventists and other sabbatarian groups). Is it any wonder that many Christians even today mistakenly think that the Mosaic Code constitutes their rule of life? Defilement springs from the mind, not material objects (cf. Mat 12:34-35; Mat 15:18-19; Tit 1:15).