Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 14:23
And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin.
23. And he that doubteth ] This verse, like the last clause, is really aimed at the “strong” Christian’s mistaken conduct. He is reminded of the real sin he may occasion in his “weak” fellow-Christian. See last note but one.
doubteth ] He whose conscience is not at ease on the question of “meats.”
is damned ] Lit. hath been condemned. The perfect gives the thought that ipso facto, then and there, he passes under God’s sentence of displeasure, as a rebellious child.
The idea of eternal doom is not, of course, at all inherent in the words; the sentence may be only one of merciful chastening. But even thus, this verse is a suggestive comment on the Divine view of the sinfulness of the lightest transgressions.
not of faith ] i.e. he “takes a liberty,” not on the right principle but on the wrong; not from clear conviction that it is authorized by his acceptance in Christ by faith, but from neglect of conscience. And all such acts, as being results of a known wrong principle, are sins.
It is plain from the context that St Paul does not assert that every act is sinful which is not directly based on conscious faith in Christ; but that every act of “liberty” of the kind in question, not so based, is sinful; for it can be based only on neglect of conscience.
for ] Lit. but, or now; the argumentative word.
At the close of this chapter many MSS. place the Great Doxology, Rom 16:25-27. See on this question, Introduction, ii. 3.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
He that doubteth – He that is not fully satisfied in his mind; who does not do it with a clear conscience. The margin has it rendered correctly, He that discerneth and putteth a difference between meats. He that conscientiously believes, as the Jew did, that the Levitical law respecting the difference between meats was binding on Christians.
Is damned – We apply this word almost exclusively to the future punishment of the wicked in hell. But it is of importance to remember, in reading the Bible, that this is not of necessity its meaning. It means properly to condemn; and here it means only that the person who should thus violate the dictates of his conscience would incur guilt, and would be blameworthy in doing it. But it does not affirm that he would inevitably sink to hell. The same construction is to be put on the expression in 1Co 11:29, He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself.
For whatsoever … – Whatever is not done with a full conviction that it is right, is sinful; whatever is done when a man doubts whether it is right, is sin. This is evidently the fair interpretation of this place. Such the connection requires. It does not affirm that all or any of the actions of impenitent and unbelieving people are sinful, which is true, but not the truth taught here; nor does it affirm that all acts which are not performed by those who have faith in the Lord Jesus, are sinful; but the discussion pertains to Christians; and the whole scope of the passage requires us to understand the apostle as simply saying that a man should not do a thing doubting its correctness; that he should have a strong conviction that what he does is right; and that if he has not this conviction, it is sinful. The rule is of universal application. In all cases, if a man does a thing which he does not believe to be right, it is a sin, and his conscience will condemn him for it. It may be proper, however, to observe that the converse of this is not always true, that if a man believes a thing to be right, that therefore it is not sin. For many of the persecutors were conscientious Joh 16:2; Act 26:9; and the murderers of the Son of God did it ignorantly Act 3:17; 1Co 2:8; and yet were adjudged as guilty of enormous crimes; compare Luk 11:50-51; Act 2:23, Act 2:37.
In this chapter we have a remarkably fine discussion of the nature of Christian charity. Differences of opinion will arise, and people will be divided into various sects; but if the rules which are laid down in this chapter were followed, the contentions, and altercations, and strifes among Christians would cease. Had these rules been applied to the controversies about rites, and forms, and festivals, that have arisen, peace might have been preserved. Amid all such differences, the great question is, whether there is true love to the Lord Jesus. If there is, the apostle teaches us that we have no right to judge a brother, or despise him, or contend harshly with him. Our object should be to promote peace, to aid him in his efforts to become holy, and to seek to build him up in holy faith.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 23. And he that doubteth] This verse is a necessary part of the preceding, and should be read thus: But he that doubteth is condemned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith. The meaning is sufficiently plain. He that feeds on any kind of meats prohibited by the Mosaic law, with the persuasion in his mind that he may be wrong in so doing, is condemned by his conscience for doing that which he has reason to think God has forbidden.
For whatsoever is not of faith is sin.] Whatever he does, without a full persuasion of its lawfulness, (see Ro 14:22) is to him sin; for he does it under a conviction that he may be wrong in so doing. Therefore, if he makes a distinction in his own conscience between different kinds of meats, and yet eats of all indifferently, he is a sinner before God; because he eats either through false shame, base compliance, or an unbridled appetite; and any of these is in itself a sin against the sincerity, ingenuousness, and self-denying principles of the Gospel of Christ.
Some think that these words have a more extensive signification, and that they apply to all who have not true religion, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; every work of such persons being sinful in the sight of a holy God, because it does not proceed from a pure motive. On this ground our Church says, Art. xiii, “Works done before the grace of Christ and the inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they are not of faith in Jesus Christ; yes, for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but they have the nature of sin.” To this we may add, that without faith it is impossible to please God; every thing is wrong where this principle is wanting.
There are few readers who have not remarked that the last three verses of this epistle (Ro 16:25-27) appear to stand in their present place without any obvious connection; and apparently after the epistle is concluded. And it is well known to critics, that two MSS. in uncial letters, the Cod. A and I, with upwards of 100 others, together with the Slavonic, the later Syriac and Arabic, add those verses at the end of the fourteenth chapter. The transposition is acknowledged by Cyril, Chrysostom, Theodoret, OEcumenius, Theophylact, Theodulus, Damascenus, and Tertullian; see Wetstein. Griesbach inserts them at the end of this chapter as their proper place; and most learned men approve of this transposition. It may be necessary to repeat the words here that the reader may see with what propriety they connect with the subject which terminates the fourteenth chapter as it now stands.
Ro 14:23: And he that doubteth is condemned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
Ro 16:25: Now, to him that is of power to stablish you according to my Gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, (according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began,
Ro 16:26: But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith;)
Ro 16:27: To God only wise be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen.
Ro 15:1: We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, c.
These words certainly connect better with the close of the fourteenth chapter and the beginning of the fifteenth than they do with the conclusion of the sixteenth, where they are now generally found but I shall defer my observations upon them till I come to that place, with only this remark, that the stablishing mentioned Ro 16:25, corresponds well with the doubting, Ro 14:23, and indeed the whole matter of these verses agrees so well with the subject so largely handled in the preceding chapter, that there can be very little doubt of their being in their proper place if joined to the end of this chapter, as they are in the preceding MSS. and versions.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In this verse is another aphorism, respecting especially the weaker Christian.
He that doubteth of the lawfullness of any meat, whether he may or may not eat it,
is damned if he eat, i.e. His own conscience condemns him, or he makes himself liable to damnation,
because he eateth not of faith. The word eateth is not in the original, but it is aptly inserted by our translators. What a man doth doubtingly, he doth sinfully: he showeth a wicked heart, that is not afraid of sin, but in great readiness to commit it.
For whatsoever is not of faith is sin; this is a confirmation of the foregoing assertion. By faith here is meant knowledge, or full persuasion, as Rom 14:22; q.d. Whatever a man doth with a wavering mind, without being persuaded that it is pleasing to God, and warranted by his word, he sinneth in the doing of it. Though we may not nourish doubts and scruples, yet we must not act against them. An erring conscience binds us to act nothing contrary to it: he sins that doth any thing against it, though the fact or thing done should not be sinful. Nature itself teacheth as much: that is a known saying of Cicero: Quod dubitas, aequum sit an iniquum, ne feceris: If thou doubtest whether a thing be lawful, or not lawful, thou shalt not do it. See Heb 11:6.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
23. Andrather, “But”
he that doubteth is damnedOnthe word “damnation,” see on Ro13:2.
if he eat, because he eatethnot of faithOn the meaning of “faith” here, see onRo 14:22.
for whatsoever is not offaith is sina maxim of unspeakable importance in the Christianlife.
Note, (1) Some points inChristianity are unessential to Christian fellowship; so that thoughone may be in error upon them, he is not on that account to beexcluded either from the communion of the Church or from the fullconfidence of those who have more light. This distinction betweenessential and non-essential truths is denied by some who affect morethan ordinary zeal for the honor and truth of God. But they mustsettle the question with our apostle. (2) Acceptance with God is theonly proper criterion of right to Christian fellowship. Whom Godreceives, men cannot lawfully reject (Rom 14:3;Rom 14:4). (3) As there is muchself-pleasing in setting up narrow standards of Christian fellowship,so one of the best preservatives against the temptation to do thiswill be found in the continual remembrance that CHRISTis the one Object for whom all Christians live, and to whom allChristians die; this will be such a living and exalted bond of unionbetween the strong and the weak as will overshadow all their lesserdifferences and gradually absorb them (Ro14:7-9). (4) The consideration of the common judgment-seat atwhich the strong and the weak shall stand together will be foundanother preservative against the unlovely disposition to sit injudgment one on another (Ro14:10-12). (5) How brightly does the supreme Divinity of Christshine out in this chapter! The exposition itself supersedes furtherillustration here. (6) Though forbearance be a great Christian duty,indifference to the distinction between truth and error is notthereby encouraged. The former is, by the tax, made an excuse for thelatter. But our apostle, while teaching “the strong” tobear with “the weak,” repeatedly intimates in this chapterwhere the truth really lay on the points in question, and takes careto call those who took the wrong side “the weak” (Rom 14:1;Rom 14:2; Rom 14:14).(7) With what holy jealousy ought the purity of the conscience to beguarded, since every deliberate violation of it is incipientperdition (Rom 14:15; Rom 14:20)!Some, who seem to be more jealous for the honor of certain doctrinesthan for the souls of men, enervate this terrific truth by asking howit bears upon the “perseverance of the saints”; theadvocates of that doctrine thinking it necessary to explain away whatis meant by “destroying the work of God” (Ro14:20), and “destroying him for whom Christ died” (Ro14:15), for fear of the doctrinal consequences of taking itnakedly; while the opponents of that doctrine are ready to ask, Howcould the apostle have used such language if he had believed thatsuch a catastrophe was impossible? The true answer to both lies indismissing the question as impertinent. The apostle is enunciating agreat and eternal principle in Christian Ethicsthat the wilfulviolation of conscience contains within itself a seed of destruction;or, to express it otherwise, that the total destruction of the workof God in the renewed soul, and, consequently, the loss of that soulfor eternity, needs only the carrying out to its full effect of suchviolation of the conscience. Whether such effects do takeplace, in point of fact, the apostle gives not the most distant hinthere; and therefore that point must be settled elsewhere. But, beyondall doubt, as the position we have laid down is emphaticallyexpressed by the apostle, so the interests of all who call themselvesChristians require to be proclaimed and pressed on every suitableoccasion. (8) Zeal for comparatively small points of truth is a poorsubstitute for the substantial and catholic and abiding realities ofthe Christian life (Rom 14:17;Rom 14:18). (9) “Peace”among the followers of Christ is a blessing too precious tothemselves, and, as a testimony to them that are without, tooimportant, to be ruptured for trifles, even though some lesser truthsbe involved in these (Rom 14:19;Rom 14:20). Nor are those truthsthemselves disparaged or endangered thereby, but the reverse. (10)Many things which are lawful are not expedient. In the use of anyliberty, therefore, our question should be, not simply, Is thislawful? but even if so, Can it be used with safety to a brother’sconscience?How will it affect my brother’s soul (Ro14:21)? It is permitted to no Christian to say with Cain, “AmI my brother’s keeper?” (Ge4:9). (11) Whenever we are in doubt as to a point of dutywhereabstinence is manifestly sinless, but compliance not clearlylawfulthe safe course is ever to be preferred, for to do otherwiseis itself sinful. (12) How exalted and beautiful is the Ethics ofChristianityby a few great principles teaching us how to steer ourcourse amidst practical difficulties, with equal regard to Christianliberty, love, and confidence!
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And he that doubteth,…. Or makes a difference between meats and meats, or is in suspense whether any difference should be observed or not,
is damned; not with everlasting damnation, which is not the consequent of, nor connected with such an action, as eating of a thing indifferent, with a scrupulous conscience; but such an one is condemned in his own conscience; he is self-condemned, his conscience condemns him for what he himself does; and he is self-condemned in judging and censuring others, for the same things: so the Syriac renders it, , “he becomes guilty”, or he contracts guilt to himself, or is self-condemned; and so the Arabic, “he is already condemned”,
because [he eateth] not of faith: or of a full persuasion in his own mind that he is right in eating; he halts between two opinions, and is doubtful in his own mind what is best to do, and therefore, whilst this is his case, he ought to refrain:
for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. This is a general rule, or axiom, which is not only applicable to the present case, but to any other, whether of a natural, civil, moral, or evangelic kind: “whatsoever does not spring from faith”, as the Arabic version renders it, cannot be excused of sin; whatever is not agreeable to the word and doctrine of faith, ought not to be done; whatever is done without faith, or not in the exercise of it, is culpable, for without faith nothing can be pleasing to God; and whatever is contrary to the persuasion of a man’s own mind, is so far criminal, as it is a violation of his conscience; whatever men do, especially in a religious way, they ought to make faith of it, or to be fully persuaded of it in their own minds, or they act amiss: in the Arabic version, the Complutensian edition, the Alexandrian copy, and some others, Ro 16:25, “now to him that is of power”, c. are here added which have induced some to think, that the apostle intended to have finished his epistle here; but having more time, and other things occurred to write of, he proceeded.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
He that doubteth ( ). Present middle participle of , to judge between (), to hesitate. See Jas 1:6f. for this same picture of the double-minded man. Cf. Rom 4:20; Mark 11:23.
Is condemned (). Perfect passive indicative of (note –), “stands condemned.”
If he eat ( ). Third class condition, and second aorist active subjunctive. If in spite of his doubt, he eat.
Whatsoever is not of faith is sin ( ).
Faith () here is subjective, one’s strong conviction in the light of his relation to Christ and his enlightened conscience. To go against this combination is sin beyond a doubt. Some MSS. (A L etc.) put the doxology here which most place in 16:25-27. But they all give chapters 15 and 16. Some have supposed that the Epistle originally ended here, but that is pure speculation. Some even suggest two editions of the Epistle. But chapter 15 goes right on with the topic discussed in chapter 14.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Faith. In Christ. “So far as it brings with it the moral confidence as to what in general and under given circumstances is the right christian mode of action” (Meyer).
Some authorities insert here the doxology at ch. 16 25 – 27. According to some, the Epistle to the Rom. closed with this chapter. Chapter 16 was a list of disciples resident at different points on the route, who were to be greeted. Phoebe is first named because Cenchreae would be the first stage. Ephesus would be the next stage, where Aquila and Priscilla would be found. Chapter 15 was a sort of private missive to be communicated to all whom the messengers should visit on the way. The question seems to be almost wholly due to the mention of Aquila and Priscilla in ch. 16, and to the fact that there is no account of their migration from Ephesus to Rome, and of an after – migration again to Ephesus (2Ti 4:19). But see on ch. Rom 16:14.
Others claim that chs. 1 – 11, 16. were the original epistle; that Phoebe’s journey was delayed, and that, in the interval, news from Rome led Paul to add 12 – 15.
Others again, that ch. 16 was written from Rome to Ephesus.
Against these theories is the stubborn fact that of the known extant MSS. of Paul (about three hundred) all the MSS. hitherto collated, including all the most important, give these chapters in the received connection and order, with the exception of the doxology. See on the doxology, ch. 16.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And he that doubteth,” (ho de diakrinomens) “Yet he who doubts or the one continually doubting, uncertain,” 1Co 11:31-32. Self-control, restraint, and abstinence in doubtful or questionable matters is always a commendable Christian virtue, 1Co 9:26-27.
2) “Is damned if he eat,” (ean phage katakekritai) “Has been condemned if he eats;” is condemned if he eats as in Rom 14:22, he is subject to punishment of a guilty conscience if he eats or does something he doubts to be right or believes that it is wrong.
3) “Because he eateth not of faith,” (hoti ouk ek pisteos) “Because it is not out of faith,” that he eats. He has no persuasion or belief that what he is doing is lawful, 1Co 10:23-24; 1Co 10:32.
4) “For whatsoever is not of faith, is sin”, (hamartia estin pan de he ouk ek pisteos hamartia estin) “And all which is (exists) not out of faith is sin, exists as sin”; Though it be what would otherwise be lawful and right, Heb 11:6; Tit 1:15.
The central thought of this chapter is that all who are “in the faith”, though weak, are to be received into the membership of the church by the congregation, Rom 14:1. Thereafter they are to be taught the word of truth as babes with weak consciences; those who are stronger in faith and knowledge should restrain themselves, even in doing right, from anything that might be an offence to or cause a weaker Christian to stumble, fall, quit or go back into his own ways of sinful indulgence.
BETTER BE SURE THAN SORRY
“Better be sure than sorry!” said a garden-worker, when his employer expressed a doubt whether it was necessary to cover a certain vegetation to protect it from frost. A man who is not sure is very likely to be sorry. It would be a terrible thing to be mistaken in the final day; it is better to be sure here than to be sorry at the judgment-seat of Christ.
-Christian Journal
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
23. But he who is undecided, etc. He very fitly expresses in one word the character of that mind which vacillates and is uncertain as to what ought to be done; for he who is undecided undergoes alternate changes, and in the midst of his various deliberations is held suspended by uncertainty. As then the main thing in a good work is the persuasion of a mind conscious of being right before God, and as it were a calm assurance, nothing is more opposed to the acceptance of our works than vacillation. (435) And, oh! that this truth were fixed in the minds of men, that nothing ought to be attempted except what the mind feels assured is acceptable to God, men would not then make such an uproar, as they often do now, nor waver, nor blindly hurry onward wherever their own imagination may lead them. For if our way of living is to be confined to this moderation, that no one is to touch a morsel of meat with a doubting conscience, how much greater caution is to be exercised in the greatest things?
And whatever is not from faith, etc. The reason for this condemnation is, that every work, however splendid and excellent in appearance, is counted as sin, except it be founded on a right conscience; for God regards not the outward display, but the inward obedience of the heart, by this alone is an estimate made of our works. Besides, how can that be obedience, when any one undertakes what he is not persuaded is approved by God? Where then such a doubt exists, the individual is justly charged with prevarication; for he proceeds in opposition to the testimony of his, own conscience.
The word faith is to be taken here for a fixed persuasion of the mind, or, so to speak, for a firm assurance, and not that of any kind, but what is derived from the truth of God. Hence doubt or uncertainty vitiates all our actions, however specious they may otherwise be. Now, since a pious mind can never acquiesce with certainty in anything but the word of God, all fictitious modes of worship do in this case vanish away, and whatever works there may be which originate in the brains of men; for while everything which is not from faith is condemned, rejected is whatever is not supported and approved by God’s word. It is at the same time by no means sufficient that what we do is approved by the word of God, except the mind, relying on this persuasion, prepares itself cheerfully to do its work. Hence the first thing in a right conduct, in order that our minds may at no time fluctuate, is this, that we, depending on God’s word, confidently proceed wherever it may call us.
(435) The Greek is ὁ διακρινόμενος, “he who discerns,” that is, a difference as to meats; so [ Doddridge ], [ Macknight ], and [ Chalmers ] regard its meaning. [ Beza ] has “ qui dubitat — who doubts,” and so our version. The word used by [ Calvin ] is dijudicat , which properly means to judge between things, to discern, but according to his explanation it means to judge in two ways, to be undecided.
The verb no doubt admits of these two meanings; it is used evidently in the sense of making or putting a difference, but only, as some say, in the active voice. There are indeed two places where it seems to have this meaning in its passive or middle form, Jas 2:4, and Jud 1:22. But as Paul has before used it in this Epistle, Rom 4:20, in the sense of hesitating, staggering, or doubting, we may reasonably suppose that it has this meaning here, and especially as in every place where he expresses the other idea, he has employed the active form. See 1Co 4:7; 1Co 11:29; etc. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(23) And he that doubteth.The one thing which justifies a man in neglecting such nice and punctilious distinctions is a faith so strong that it can afford to make light of them. Where faith is not strong enough for this, and where the conscience deliberately approves one course, and the other course is chosen, this alone stamps the act as wrong. He who hesitates as to what he ought to do is condemned, or does wrong, if he eats (in opposition to his conscience), for he has not the one faculty which can overrule the decisions of conscience, and give them a different direction.
Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.This is intended as a general principle, but only as a general principle covering this particular kind of case. Where the conscience is in doubt, faith alone can make it right to choose the side against which conscience inclines. Nothing is said about those cases in which conscience is either not appealed to at all, or approves what is done. Hence St. Augustine was wrong in arguing from this passage that even good actions, when done by unbelievers, were of the nature of sin.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
23. And Rather, but. He whose obscure faith in Christ allows him to believe meat a criminal matter, and so both doubts and eats, is not happy, but self-condemned. His conscience and conduct are at war, and he is wretched, though not perhaps as bad as he thinks himself. Yet his case is bad. He has intended to do wrong. And even though the objective act was not intrinsically wrong, its rightness was an accident; the unhappy man has really in his heart purposed to violate the law of right. Dr. Hodge pertinently says, “It is wrong to do any thing which we think to be wrong. The converse of this proposition is not true. It is not always right to do what we think to be right.”
Damned Is here used in its old English sense, condemned; that is, condemned by himself and condemned by God; not necessarily eternally ruined.
Eateth not of faith He eats not according to the clear free faith of the strong man, for that would have banished his doubt and reconciled his conscience and conduct. He eats not according to his own feeble faith, for that authorizes the doubt by which he is self-condemned. He acts from no Christian or moral faith or principle at all, but from an unholy impulse.
Not of faith is sin The Christian’s whole true life is a life of faith which faith authorizes every innocent act. Whatever comes not from that is transgression. The Augustinian argument (noticed by Alford, and in Lange’s Commentary on the passage) drawn from this clause, showing the non-salvability of infidels and heathen, has no force. We do not, nevertheless, obviate it by the methods of the commentators just named. The faith described in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews was a faith of those who never knew Christ, yet was a faith intrinsically equivalent to a faith in Christ. Faith, through all the dispensation of mankind, (and in some sense every man is by himself a dispensation,) is intrinsically and essentially the same principle. (See note on Rom 2:6.) And whatever is not of this faith is sin, and whose hath not this faith is eternally damned.
There is a formidable authority of manuscripts in favour of inserting here the doxology which stands at the end of the Epistle. This is obviously a most unsuitable place, as there is nothing here in the train of thought to awaken so lofty a strain. The most natural solution of the fact of its being here placed is that the customary reading of the Epistle in the Churches (see page 5) ended here, (the remainder of the Epistle being held of a less edifying character and so not read,) with the closing doxology superadded. A few manuscripts have the doxology in both places, and a few others entirely omit it.
Upon the fact of its prevalent insertion here, Renan, following in the train of adverse German criticism, founds the assumption that the Epistle properly terminates here, and that the after parts are but partially genuine. But as he feels obliged to admit the genuineness of several passages in this portion of the Epistle, his picking and culling other parts for opinions become so capricious and artificial that his whole criticism breaks down.
He furnishes a theory of his own, that Romans is truly an Encyclical Epistle. That is, the body of it was written for and sent to several of the principal Churches, with different Introduction and Conclusion in each, suited to its particular Church, and that “the editors” have appended several different conclusions to the existing copy. But these “editors,” we have given reason to believe, are imaginary beings. (See p. 5.) If they existed soon after the writing of the Epistle, both they and their readers would have seen the mistake; if long after, they could never have called in the various copies scattered through the Christian world, so but that a variety of introductions as well as terminations would have been extant at the present day.
Renan says there are properly four endings of the Epistle, namely, at Rom 15:33; Rom 16:20; Rom 16:24 and Rom 16:27. But Renan is too parsimonious. If a doxology or a benediction closing up a topic, with, perhaps, an Amen, is an ending of the Epistle, there are no less than seven such endings. And this calls to view the fact that Romans is not only the most climactic and triumphal, (see note Rom 8:39,) but the most doxological of all Paul’s Epistles. God the Creator wakes a doxology at Rom 1:25; Christ the Redeemer at Rom 9:5; God the divine Governor at Rom 11:36. A benediction upon his entire audience of Roman readers is pronounced at Rom 15:33; upon his circle of saluted brethren at Rom 16:20; and upon the double circle of saluters and saluted at Rom 16:24. Then, with all suitableness, the whole is closed with the grand doxology of Rom 16:26-27. This survey of the whole entirely dispenses with all the theories of “separate pieces of parchment,” “various times of writing,” “fourfold endings,” “encyclical epistles,” etc., which commentators, critics, and sceptics have so needlessly invented.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because (it is) not of faith, and whatever is not of faith is sin.’
But if someone who wavers over whether it is right to eat meat, on the grounds that it may be unclean, does eat of such meat, he brings himself into condemnation. And the reason why he does so is because his act is not one carried out in joyous faith, but is one carried out fearing that it might be sinful. He is doing what he fears might be wrong. Indeed, anything that we do fearing that it might be wrong is sin, for ‘whatever is not of faith is sin.’ So important is ‘not sinning’ that the Christian says, ‘if I am not sure it is right I must not do it. I must only do what I know to be right’, and this because of his hatred of sin and his fear lest he be defiled by it.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Rom 14:23. And he that doubteth, is damned, &c. Is convicted [of sin] if he eat, because it is not according to his belief: for whatsoever [a man doeth] not according to his persuasion, is sin. The word rendered doubteth, is translated staggered, ch. Rom 4:20 and is there opposed to strong in the faith, and being fully persuaded, as it follows in the next verse. In reading this verse, the emphasis should be laid upon is. Rom 14:22. Happy is he that condemns not himself in that thing which he allows. Rom 14:23. But he that doubts is condemned; “He that really in his conscience makes a difference between one sort of food and another, is condemned by God as a sinner, if he eat out of unbridled appetite, vain complaisance, or weak shame. It must in such a case be criminal, because he eateth not with faith: that is to say, with a full satisfaction in his own mind, that God allows and approves the action:” for it may be laid down as a general maxim in all these cases, that whatsoever is not of faith is sin; since the divine authority ought to be so sacred with every man, as to engage him not only to avoid what is plainly and directly contrary to it, but what he apprehends or even suspects to be so, though that apprehension or suspicion should be founded on his own ignorance or mistake. See Locke, Doddridge, Mill, Wetstein, Calmet, and “The Case of a doubting Conscience,” p. 169.
Inferences.How ready should Christians be to hold communion one with another, notwithstanding little differences between them, like those that relate to ceremonial days and meats, which are set aside by the Gospel dispensation, and do not affect the vitals of religion! They should take heed of an uncharitable, disdaining, and censorious spirit; but the sincere believer may comfort himself in this, that God has received him, and is able to make him stand, though others may despise, or judge him. How much better therefore is it to approve ourselves to God and our own consciences, than to be approved of men! For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ. And, oh! what awful thoughts should we have of the Lord Jesus, as the great God, as well as Judge of all, who has sworn by himself, that every knee shall bow to him; and to whom every one must give an account of himself! And in the view of an impartial and decisive judgment to come, how tender and condescending should we be to our brethren that are apt to be offended, on every little occasion, for want of better light! It is a high aggravation of guilt to do any thing that, in its own nature, tends to the discomfort and ruin of the weakest believers, and to the disconcerting or destroying of the work of God in them. The weak believer should not judge the strong, nor the strong despise the weak; each remembering that what is not of faith is sin: nor should either of them behave so imprudently as to give occasion for their good to be evil spoken of; but happy is he, who condemns not himself in that which he allows himself to do. How concerned should Christians of all ranks and denominations be, to act upon principles of faith, and a good conscience in all things, and to promote each other’s edification and peace! Oh, how excellent are the blessings of Christ’s kingdom, which consists not in external ritual things, like meats and drinks, but in righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost! And how preferable is his service to all others! It is acceptable to God, and approved of all good men; and, in the performance of this, we are called to live and die, not to ourselves, but to Christ, whose we are, and whom we ought to serve, in consideration of his having died and risen, and now living in heaven, that he might be Lord both of the dead and the living.
REFLECTIONS.1st, As many of the Jewish converts still retained a high veneration for the Mosaical institutions, and were scrupulous in observing a distinction of meats and days, from which the Gentile Christians justly apprehended themselves entirely at liberty; the Apostle therefore recommends a kind condescension towards the Jewish brethren in regard to the prejudices of education; and that there should be no coolness or distance between them on account of these different matters. Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, heartily embracing and welcoming him, but not to doubtful disputations, nor perplexing him with useless disputes about things of a trivial nature.
1. Respecting meats. One believeth that he may eat all things; and, satisfied about the abolition of the ceremonial law, counts nothing any longer common or unclean, eating, without scruple, whatever kind of wholesome food is set before him. Another who is weak, through the prejudice of education, or want of light, fearful of using any meat but what is permitted by the law of Moses, and killed according to the manner there prescribed (Lev 17:10-14.), when he is invited to eat with Gentiles, lest he should incur ceremonial defilement, abstains from their victuals, and eateth only herbs. Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not, as weak and superstitious, priding himself on his superior knowledge and clearer views of his Christian liberty: and, on the other hand, let not him which eateth not, judge him that eateth; and being prejudiced and narrow in his own conceptions, dare uncharitably to censure his brother as a loose liver, and irreligious professor, because he has no such scruples about indifferent matters; for God hath received him into his favour, and therefore, whom he accepts, none should condemn. Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. It is the highest arrogance to usurp God’s throne, and sit in judgment on our brother, who is responsible to God alone, and uses only that liberty which he is in conscience satisfied God allows. Yea, and whatever rash censures the weak and superstitious may cast upon him, he shall be holden up; the Lord will strengthen and preserve the faithful soul unto salvation, for God is able to make him stand, is able and willing to preserve the believer that continues to cleave to him, till he appear with boldness in the day of judgment. Note; (1.) Nothing is more contrary to the spirit of charity than rash and hasty censures. (2.) We are to leave every man to the great Judge, nor should pretend to decide upon his everlasting state without the clearest warrant of God’s word.
2. Respecting days. One man esteemeth one day above another, as the Jewish converts did, who paid a particular regard to the passover, pentecost, new-moons, and other feast and fast days of the law, as more sacred than others: another esteemeth every day alike, counting all these Jewish distinctions as abolished. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind; and, being satisfied in his own conscience, be content that others should judge for themselves, allowing them the same liberty that we claim ourselves; charitably concluding, that he that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord, intending therein to glorify the Lord Jesus, who on mount Sinai at first enjoined the ceremonial law; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it, from the same principle, and with a view to the Redeemer’s glory, by whose authority he supposes the Mosaical institutions are laid aside. He that eateth, as the converted Gentile, every kind of meat without scruple, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks, and is persuaded that all the creatures of God are good, when sanctified by the word of God, and by prayer: and he that eateth not, supposing that the prohibition of a variety of meats enjoined by Moses is still in force, to the Lord he eateth not, persuaded in conscience that he ought to obtain, and giveth God thanks for the food which he is allowed under the law. In these points, therefore, we should bear and forbear; and not, for such trifles, dispute, and break the bands of Christian love.
3. Our grand end and aim in these things, and all others, should be the glory of God. For none of us liveth to himself; we are not our own, and must not live as self-seekers, or self-pleasers; we are bought with a price, that we should glorify God in our bodies and in our spirits, which are his: and no man dieth to himself, wishing to get rid of his troubles, or to gain a name; or selfishly desiring his crown before the time when God shall appoint him an end to his warfare; for whether we, who are truly the servants of Jesus, live, we live unto the Lord, desirous to be, and do, and suffer according to his holy will and pleasure; and whether we die a natural, lingering, sudden, or violent death, we die unto the Lord, resigned to his will, committing all our concerns into his hands, and with our departing breath desiring to exalt his great and glorious name, and to commend the goodness of our God: whether we live therefore or die, we are the Lord’s; belong to him as his devoted servants; as his inseparable property depending on him, and singly aiming at his glory. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, having made the great atonement, and being raised in token of God’s approbation of his undertaking, and seated on the mediatorial throne, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living, as head over all things to his church; invested with universal dominion and authority; to rule the living, to revive the dead; and when, in the day of his appearing and glory, the dead shall rise, and the living be changed, he will be the object of the everlasting praises of his saints. Since then we are Christ’s, and he alone has dominion over us, it becomes us never to usurp authority over the consciences of our brethren, or to pass censures on the dead or the living. We have one Master only, whose approbation we need be solicitous to secure.
4. We must each, shortly, answer for ourselves before God; and therefore to his judgment all should be referred. But why dost thou judge thy brother, as lax and latitudinarian, because thou art rigid and scrupulous? or why, on the other hand, dost thou set at nought thy brother, as an ignorant, weak, and despicable bigot, because he thinks that evil, which you know to be innocent? This is to take the matter out of God’s hands, and to erect an unhallowed tribunal; for we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, and by his sentence, and no other, must stand or fall for ever. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God; owning me the eternal Jehovah, acknowledging my eternal glory and Godhead, and bowing before the sceptre of my judgment, as accountable to me alone, and expecting from my lips the decision of their eternal state for happiness or misery: so then every one of us shall give account of himself to God, to Christ, to whom all judgment is committed, and who is essentially very God. Let us not therefore judge one another any more with any rash and precipitate censures; but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block, or an occasion to fall, in his brother’s way: and whatever knowledge he may have of Christian liberty, let him be careful so to use it, as not willingly to grieve or ensnare his brother, by tempting him to sin, by giving a handle for censure, or emboldening him to do what his conscience may not be satisfied is right. Note; Our great concern is, to prepare for a judgment-day, and the best means to be ready for it is, to keep it often in our view, and to bring ourselves thither in self-examination, before the Lord shall cite us to his bar.
2nd, The Apostle had just intimated, that they should desire mutual edification, and not abuse their Christian liberty to the detriment of others.
1. As to his own sense of these ceremonial things, he says, I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself; the ceremonial law concerning meats being wholly abrogated, and that these communicate no moral defilement to the conscience: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean, as he would act against his conscience if he should eat; and though his conscience be erroneous, he would do evil.
But, 2. Whatever conviction any man may have of the lawfulness of all kinds of food, yet, if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, through the prejudices of education, and you unkindly persist in the use of your liberty, and eat before him what he esteems forbidden, now walkest thou not charitably; destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died; destroy not the peace of his mind, by giving him unnecessary offence; or, at least, be not the means of stumbling such as, in the judgment of charity, we may reckon among true believers.
3. Another reason why you should abridge yourself of something of your Christian liberty, is this: Let not your good be evil spoken of; do not provoke those who are misinformed to speak evil of you, for that which is itself lawful; nor do any thing, as far as is consistent with conscience, which may lessen you in men’s esteem, and prevent your usefulness; or give occasion to the enemy, by needless contentions, to speak evil of Christianity itself.
4. As the greatest points of Christianity stand distinct from all these trivial matters, no stress should be laid upon them. For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; consists not in using or abstaining from the ceremonial institutions which the law prescribed concerning these things; but it is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. These are the grand essential matters: Righteousness, genuine holiness, the image of God, or the love of God and man; peace with God through Jesus Christ, and the sense of his love kindling ours, and engaging us to live peaceably with all men; and joy in the Holy Ghost, which this divine Spirit communicates to our souls, making us happy in God and his holy ways. For he that in these things serveth Christ; faithful to his cause, and in simplicity designing his honour, whatever his practice or sentiments may be in unessential matters, is acceptable to God; his person and services are accepted in the Beloved, and he is approved of men, as a sincere convert, at least by all those of sound judgment and solid experience.
He therefore exhorts, 5. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, laying aside all uncharitable contentions;and things wherewith one may edify another; not seeking our own pleasure merely, but others’ good. For so trivial a consideration as this or that kind of meat, destroy not the work of God, nor disturb the peace, and love, and harmony, which should subsist between fellow-Christians, and which it is the great design of God in his Gospel to produce in the hearts of believers. All things indeed are pure, I will admit, to those who have knowledge; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence; and the liberty of using any meat, which in itself is lawful, becomes practically criminal, when we choose rather to offend a weak brother, than forego the gratification of our appetite for his sake. In such a case, it is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. It would be right and prudent to abstain from any of these creatures, however good in themselves, and lawful to be used, rather than be a hindrance to the weak, grieve or discourage the less enlightened, or tempt our brother rashly to censure us, or with a doubting conscience to follow our example. Hast thou faith, and art satisfied concerning the abrogation of the ceremonial institutions; have it to thyself before God, and use thy liberty to God’s glory on proper occasions. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth, and never exposes himself to the just reproaches of his conscience by warping his better judgment to gratify his covetousness, his pleasure, or his pride. And, on the other hand, he that doubteth about the propriety of what he is going to do, and supposes that there may be a difference between meats lawful and unlawful, and therefore hesitates whether he shall eat or not, is damned if he eat; his conscience will condemn him, because he is not sure that he has God’s warrant for what he does, and eateth not of faith; for whatsoever is not of faith, is sin. The word of God must be our rule; we must ever from that divine code receive our directions; and, where our minds are not fully satisfied concerning his will, nothing must tempt us to take one step farther. We are safe, though mistaken, when we through jealousy abridge ourselves of our liberty; but where we presumptuously act, though doubts remain, we shew an evident disregard to God’s authority, and violate the sacred dictates of conscience.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
REFLECTIONS
Reader! In all the circumstances of life we may well bear with the weak in faith, and receive none to doubtful disputations, while earnest in the grand points of the cross to contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints. In meats, and drinks, and inventions of men, and carnal ordinances, there is nothing worth contending for. But while all outward things, though they make a great shew of will-worship, satisfy the unawakened; let it be my pursuit, the things of inward peace. For the Lord’s kingdom is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Blessed Lord Jesus! grant that my life may be a life of faith on thee; and then will my death, be a death of security in thee; for living, or dying, I shall be thine. And to all the lesser circumstances of life, may my walk through the world, in the unavoidable intercourses of it, be conducted with love to thy people from love to thee. Never to wound one of Christ’s little ones here below, much less to destroy his comfort, though nothing can destroy his everlasting happiness for whom Christ died. And do thou, dearest Lord, grant me increasing faith in thee, since all, and every act, without an eye to thee, and thy righteousness, is sin.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
Ver. 23. Is damned ] Both of his doubting conscience, which soundeth heavily, as a shaulm; and of God, who is greater than his conscience.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
23. ] but he that doubteth (the situation just described not being his), incurs condemnation if he eat (the case in point particularized), because (he eats) not from faith (i.e. as before, see Chrys. above, from a persuasion of rectitude grounded on and consonant with his life of faith. That ‘ faith in the Son of God ’ by which the Apostle describes his own life in the flesh as being lived ( Gal 2:20 ), informing and penetrating the motives and the conscience, will not include, will not sanction, an act done against the testimony of the conscience): but (introducing an axiom , as Heb 8:13 ) all that is not from (grounded in, and therefore consonant with) faith (the great element in which the Christian lives and moves and desires and hopes), is sin . Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, al., have taken this text as shewing that ‘omnis infidelium vita peccatum est.’ Whether that be the case or not, cannot be determined from this passage, any more than from Heb 11:6 , because neither here nor there is the ‘infidelis’ in question . Here the Apostle has in view two Christians , both living by faith, and by faith doing acts pleasing to God: and he reminds them that whatever they do out of harmony with this great principle of their spiritual lives, belongs to the category of sin. In Heb 11 the Writer is speaking of one who had the testimony of having (eminently) pleased God: this, he says, he did by faith; for without faith it is impossible to please Him. The question touching the ‘infidelis,’ must be settled by another enquiry: Can he whom we thus name have faith , such a faith as may enable him to do acts which are not sinful? a question impossible for us to solve.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 14:23 . : such, on the other hand, is the unhappy situation of the weak a new motive for charity. For . cf. Rom 4:20 , Jas 1:6 , Mar 11:23 . The weak Christian cannot be clear in his own mind that it is permissible to do as the strong does; it may be, he thinks one moment, and the next, it may not be; and if he follows the strong and eats in this state of mind, he is condemned. The condemnation is absolute: it is not only that his own conscience pronounces clearly against him after the act, but that such action incurs the condemnation of God. It is inconsistent with that conscientiousness through which alone man can be trained in goodness; the moral life would become chaotic and irredeemable if conscience were always to be treated so. , sc. , . The man is condemned because he did not eat : and this is generalised in the last clause . All that is not of faith is sin; and therefore this eating, as not of faith, is sin. It is impossible to give here a narrower sense than Christianity: see Rom 14:1 . Everything a Christian man does that cannot justify itself to him on the ground of his relation to Christ is sin. It is too indefinite to render omne quod non est ex fide as Thomas Aquinas does by omne quod est contra conscientiam : it would need to be contra Christianam conscientiam . All a man cannot do remembering that he is Christ’s all he cannot do with the judgment-seat (Rom 14:10 ) and the Cross (Rom 14:15 ) and all their restraints and inspirations present to his mind is sin. Of course this is addressed to Christians, and there is no rule in it for judging the character or conduct of those who do not know Christ. To argue from it that works done before justification are sin, or that the virtues of the heathen are glittering vices, is to misapply it altogether.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
And = But.
doubteth. See Rom 4:20.
damned = condemned. App-122.
if. App-118.
of, of. App-104.
for = and.
whatsoever . . . sin. i.e. whatever is done by the believer that does not proceed from the faith-principle by which he was saved, and is not in accordance therewith, is sin.
sin. App-128. Here some MSS. insert Rom 16:25-27. See p. 1694.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
23.] but he that doubteth (the situation just described not being his), incurs condemnation if he eat (the case in point particularized), because (he eats) not from faith (i.e. as before,-see Chrys. above,-from a persuasion of rectitude grounded on and consonant with his life of faith. That faith in the Son of God by which the Apostle describes his own life in the flesh as being lived (Gal 2:20), informing and penetrating the motives and the conscience, will not include, will not sanction, an act done against the testimony of the conscience): but (introducing an axiom, as Heb 8:13) all that is not from (grounded in, and therefore consonant with) faith (the great element in which the Christian lives and moves and desires and hopes), is sin. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, al., have taken this text as shewing that omnis infidelium vita peccatum est. Whether that be the case or not, cannot be determined from this passage, any more than from Heb 11:6, because neither here nor there is the infidelis in question. Here the Apostle has in view two Christians, both living by faith, and by faith doing acts pleasing to God: and he reminds them that whatever they do out of harmony with this great principle of their spiritual lives, belongs to the category of sin. In Hebrews 11 the Writer is speaking of one who had the testimony of having (eminently) pleased God: this, he says, he did by faith; for without faith it is impossible to please Him. The question touching the infidelis, must be settled by another enquiry: Can he whom we thus name have faith,-such a faith as may enable him to do acts which are not sinful? a question impossible for us to solve.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Rom 14:23. ) The reason, why the stronger ought not to induce the weak to eat.- , if he eat) This must be understood both of a single act and much more of frequent eating.-, is condemned) Comp. Gal 2:11, note.- , of faith) of which Rom 14:2; Rom 14:5 at the end, 14 at the beginning, 22. Therefore it is faith itself that is indicated, by which men are reckoned to be believers, informing and confirming, as it does, the conscience, and constituting partly the foundation and partly the standard of upright conduct.-, sin) and therefore obnoxious to condemnation.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 14:23
Rom 14:23
But he that doubteth is condemned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith;-He who eats the meat offered to an idol, or does anything else that he doubts whether it be of God, is condemned in so doing. The convictions of our hearts must be respected, must be honored. God accepts nothing as worship that is not done heartily with full faith. One who habitually violates his convictions of right soon loses all sense of right, hardens his heart, and makes his reformation impossible. When we do things not commanded by God as service to him, we act on our own human wisdom, or from human tradition, and substitute this for the will of God. This is sin. He who has a doubt about any service being required of God must refrain from it. He must keep on the safe side. To substitute the will and appointments of man for the will of God is the unpardonable sin.
and whatsoever is not of faith is sin.-Whatever we do religiously that is based on opinion and not on faith is sin. No man can perform any service or introduce any order into the service of God by faith unless it is ordained of God. To introduce anything is to act on human wisdom and opinion and not on faith in God; hence, it is sinful. The idea that man can act on his opinion in the service of God is the root of all erroneous practices in the religious world. Man is required to act on faith in religion, not on opinion.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
damned condemned, i.e. as in Rom 14:22.
sin Sin. (See Scofield “Rom 3:23”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
he that: 1Co 8:7
doubteth: or, discerneth and putteth a difference between meats
damned: Rather, is condemned, [Strong’s G2632]; which is the proper signification of damned, from the Latin damno to condemn. Rom 13:2, 1Co 11:29-31
whatsoever: Tit 1:15, Heb 11:6
Reciprocal: Lev 5:17 – though Pro 21:4 – and the Rom 14:2 – another Rom 14:5 – Let Rom 14:14 – to him it Rom 14:22 – thou 1Co 8:10 – shall not Jam 2:18 – Thou
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
:23
Rom 14:23. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. This is the same faith that is described in verse 22, namely, that which is produced by the testimony of one’s conscience. Since the Lord has not legislated far or against the observance of days or the eating of foods, a man’s conscience must be his sole guide and basis of his faith.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 14:23. But he that doubteth (in contrast with the one who judgeth not himself) is (has been and is) condemned, if he eat The act of eating itself condemns him, of course, according to the Divine ordering, so that the justice of this verdict appears not only before God, but before men, and himself also (Philippi). This guards against the extreme view, that condemned refers to eternal condemnation.
Because it is not of faith; his eating was not an ethical result of his faith in Christ; comp. Rom 14:1-2.
And (for is incorrect) whatsoever is not of faith is sin. This is the general truth underlying the previous statements. Faith here is saving faith (and not subjective, moral conviction), regarded as a principle of life, informing the morals of the Christian. It refers as always to the acceptance of the salvation obtained through Christ. That which one cannot do as his redemption and in the enjoyment of His salvation, he should not do at all, otherwise that act, of which faith is not the soul, becomes sin, and can conduct to the result indicated in Rom 14:20 : the total destruction of the work of God in us (Godet).
The conduct of Christians alone is under discussion; so that there is no direct application of the principle to unbelievers. But, making due allowance for the statements of chap. Rom 2:14-15, respecting the natural law of conscience, the passage furnishes a strong indirect proof of the sinfulness of all acts not resulting from faith; especially in view of the previous demonstration of the Apostle in chaps. Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20. The more important matter is, however, to remember that for Christians, at least, Christian ethics should have full validity, and that here the principle admits of no exception: whatsoever is not of faith is sin; genuine Christian morality is all of faith.
On the doxology inserted at this point in some authorities, see Rom 16:25-27.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
That is, “He that doubteth whether he should eat or no, and yet eats, is condemned of himself, because he doth a thing when he is not satisfied of its lawfulness; for whatsoever is not done of faith, that is, with a persuasion that it is lawful, is to him that does it undoubtedly sinful.” Whatever a man does, believing it to be a sin, is certainly a sin in him.
Here observe, That an erring conscience binds us to do nothing against it. A scrupulous conscience is a troublesome one, but it is better than a presumptuous conscience. As we must not nourish our scruples and doubtings, so neither must we act against our scruples and doubts. In short, no man is to act contrary to his conscience; but then it is as much his duty to inform his conscience, as to follow his conscience. To act against conscience is a very great sin; but a man may act according to his conscience, and yet be a very great sinner. St. Paul, when he was a bloody persecutor, tells us he acted according to his conscience; I verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things against the name of Jesus of Nazareth. Act 26:9
Pray we then for a conscience rightly informed by the word of God: and that we may so follow the dictates and directions of it whilst we live, that it may neither reprove nor reproach us when we come to die. Amen.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
But he that doubteth is condemned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith; and whatsoever is not of faith is sin. [The apostle here presents the contrast between the strong and the weak. The former is blest indeed in that he has liberty without the sense of inward disapproval, while the other, not sure of his ground, plunges recklessly on, and, acting contrary to his convictions, and hence to that respect and reverence which is due to God, sins. His eating is sinful because not of faith (faith is here used in the abstract sense, and means grounded, undoubting conviction that God approves), for whatever is done without such settled conviction is sinful recklessness, and must not be done at all, for to act contrary to the will of God is to destroy his work in us. Diakrenesthai, translated “doubteth,” means to be divided into two persons, one of whom says “yes,” and the other “no.” In the case of the weak the flesh says “yes,” and conscience cries “no.”]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
23. If any one may eat doubting, he has been condemned, because it is not of faith. For everything which is not of faith is sin. Damnation, as in E. V., does not take place in this world. The same word means condemnation here and damnation in the world to come. You see from this scripture that faith must be stalwart and conscience clear in every case. We must make it a rule to take the self-denial side in every doubtful case, even at financial cost and inconvenience. God will give us clear light on all the ground we can cultivate, His Spirit leading your spirit, His Word your intellect and His providence your body, so if true you will never lack His guidance.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 23
Is damned; is condemned; that is, he is in the wrong. The meaning is, that, if he does what is really innocent, when he supposes it not to be go, he incurs guilt and condemnation.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
14:23 And he that {s} doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin.
(s) Reasons with himself.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
This verse, in contrast to Rom 14:22, seems addressed particularly to the weak. The weak brother who eats something that he believes he should not eat stands condemned by his own conscience and by God (cf. Gal 2:11). His action is contrary to what he believes is right. "Faith" here, as in Rom 14:1; Rom 14:22, does not refer to the teachings of Christianity but to what a person believes to be the will of God for him. [Note: See Cranfield, 2:729.] If a person does what he believes to be wrong, even though it is not wrong in itself, it becomes sin for him. He has violated what he believes to be God’s will. His action has become an act of rebellion against God for him. Perhaps "he who creates divisions" would be a better translation of diakrinomenos than "he who doubts." [Note: David DeGraaf, "Some Doubts about Doubt: The New Testament Use of Diakrino," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 48:8 (December 2005):733-55.]
"Whatever is done without the conviction that God has approved it is by definition sin. God has called us to a life of faith. Trust is the willingness to put all of life before God for his approval. Any doubt concerning an action automatically removes that action from the category of that which is acceptable." [Note: Mounce, pp. 258-59.]
"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." [Note: H. Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, p. 291.]