Let us no longer therefore judge one another; but judge ye this rather, not to put a stumbling-block or a fall-trap before his brother.
Paul has been dealing with believers who disagreed about food and holy days. He has just pointed them to a judgment still to come. Verse 13 now turns the word "judge" around: the Christian is to judge his own conduct, not his brother's.
The first half of the verse closes a door. One writer compares our verdicts with the judgment still to come:
The instruction that rests on this comes in verse 13, and it has two parts — the negative and the positive. The negative side is this: "Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer." There is no need to. Our judgments are at best partial and imperfect. His judgment, which is still to come, is complete and perfect.
Neither side of the dispute is exempt. The two groups fail in different ways, yet both need the same settled decision:
This principle is as true for the strong as for the weak. The weak were more likely to judge, and the strong to look down on others. But both must settle this in their own minds, if they do not want to become a cause of stumbling or offence, whether in what they do or in what they think.
The verse names two things, and they are not the same picture. The first is simply an obstacle left lying where someone walks:
Anything put in another person's way that he might trip over and fall. The law forbade it, and such things had to be taken out of Israel's path. Lev. 19:14; Isa. 57:14… In the church, everyone should take care to do nothing that might make another person stumble. Rom. 14:13; 1 Cor. 8:9.
The second word is sharper. It is the word for a trap:
The Greek word skandalon means a trap or a pit, into which animals are drawn by bait. But this word is used in many passages where "snare" would not work as the translation.
The second half of the verse does not end judgment — it redirects it. A different motive now drives it:
So far, the Apostle has shown us that plain duty would keep us from interfering with one another about food and holy days. Now he shows another motive that would keep us from judging one another in such matters: we are to walk according to love (15). Moved by love for our brother, we should be careful not to put any stumbling block in his way.
A person can claim to answer to the Lord alone and still not care about the people around him:
Someone can boast that he is subject to the Lord while showing no real concern for the blessing of God's people. This is a hollow sham. If anyone says he loves God, let him love his brother also.
The practical outcome is that liberty is real but not unlimited. What settles the question is not what I am entitled to do, but what my doing it will do to someone else:
In such a case I must keep my hands off you. I must not drag you before my judgment seat and demand that you agree with my thoughts. In other matters you may be the weak brother and I the strong. Then I must be careful again, in case I look down on you and insist on going my own way… I may be sure that the thing in question is the will of the Lord, and something I would normally do. But if doing it here would harm you, then it is the will of the Lord that I hold back.
My brother's path is part of my own responsibility. One thing keeps me from blocking it:
He has to make straight paths for those who are off the road (Heb. 12:13). He is to watch his own way with care, in case a careless use of his liberty makes him a hindrance in his brother's path without his knowing it… Meanwhile there is only one way to avoid causing someone to stumble. Love for one's brothers, if it is real, is a sure safeguard against giving offence (1 John 2:10).
- Stop judging. Your brother's case belongs in a better court. Our judgment is partial; His is complete.
- Start judging. The same word comes back, now aimed at yourself. Judge whether your freedom leaves obstacles where your brother walks.
- Two dangers. A stumbling block is an obstacle left in the path. The second word means a baited trap. The harm can be careless or deliberate.
- Both sides. The weak judge and the strong look down on others. This verse calls both to the same resolve.
- Love decides. Duty keeps you out of your brother's business. Love keeps you out of his way. To claim you serve the Lord while ignoring his welfare is a hollow sham.
I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself; except to him who reckons anything to be unclean, to that man [it is] unclean.
Paul states his own conviction: no food carries defilement in itself. Yet the same verse gives the weaker believer's own judgment real weight. What he counts unclean is unclean for him, and the strong cannot overrule it.
Paul does not offer this as a private opinion. He is persuaded "in the Lord Jesus." But being clear about the truth does not settle how a strong believer should treat a weaker one.
The question here is not really about food, which never profited those who lived by such rules. It is a good thing for the heart to be established by grace. The Lord Jesus is also the truth, and He has put everything in the light of God. But we must respect conscience, and the strong must be careful not to weaken or wound another's conscience, whatever his own conviction may be.
Why did he not simply settle the dispute and move on?
He was clear about the Lord's mind, but he would not insist on it at first. He cared more that the affections should be right than that he should lay down an accurate judgment. In truth, only this way can anyone reach soundness in settling every question. Wrong feelings falsify the judgment.
The clean-and-unclean food laws were not woven into creation from the start. One writer traces the whole statement back to Noah, before Israel existed.
These distinctions were not made in Noah's day — see Genesis 9:2-3. This fact, we believe, lies behind Paul's statement that "nothing is unclean in itself" (Rom. 14:14); and again, "all things are lawful for me" (1 Cor. 10:23). In Noah's day all men were in view. In Moses' day only Israel was in view. These special laws had two aims: to impress the holiness of God on the people, and to help keep them distinct and separate from the nations.
If defilement is not in the food, the question is where it does sit. The answer given is that a taught soul can tell the difference between the thing and the person handling it.
As far as God's creation goes, a soul taught by God can see that these things have no moral evil in them. The evil is of course in the heart of man, who corrupts these things. But if a Christian lacks the discernment Paul had, then whatever he regards as unclean is unclean to him. If he indulges in it, he cannot help defiling his conscience.
The second half of the verse is not about the object at all, but about the effect on the one acting. Going against your own light damages you, even when your light is dim.
This shows how important it is to act in line with the light you have. The question here is not the Lord's will in itself, but the effect on your own conscience. If I believe a certain thing is unclean or wrong and still indulge in it, my conscience is defiled. It is unclean to me, whatever it may be in the Lord's estimation.
Scripture itself sets this up, so conscience is not being raised above the Bible here.
The word is, of course, the test of truth. But in certain cases the word itself makes the conscience or judgment of the believer the rule of conduct (Rom. 14:14). This gives individual conscience or private persuasion a high authority.
So pressure is dangerous. Talk a man into an act he still doubts, and you do him harm.
Paul was fully persuaded that no meat in itself was unclean. But if eating meat gave a brother a bad conscience, it would become an occasion of defilement to him. So we must be careful not to use our liberty to persuade a brother to do something his conscience is against. We are persuading him to act beyond his faith. As far as the effect of our act goes, we are leading him to violate his conscience and so drive him from Christ.
Knowing which side is right is not Paul's first concern.
Paul's primary question is not "Who is right?" or even "What is right?", but: "How can we deal with our brothers and sisters in a Christian and Christ-honouring way?"
This patience has a limit. Bearing with a brother's scruple is one thing; letting anyone make that scruple a rule for all is another.
Suppose someone tried to force the eating of herbs, abstinence from meats, or the keeping of days as a yoke on the necks of the disciples. Then it would be our place to resist without compromise.
- Clean. Nothing in God's creation is defiling in itself. The food laws marked out Israel for a time; they were not there from the beginning.
- Corrupted. Where evil exists it is in the heart of man who spoils these things, not in the thing he handles.
- Conscience. A believer's own persuasion becomes his rule. Act against it and you defile yourself, whatever the thing may be in the Lord's estimation.
- Care. Since that is so, arguing a brother into acting beyond his faith wounds him and can drive him from Christ.
- Christ. Paul's leading question is not who is right, but how to treat a brother in a way that honours the Lord. Even then, no scruple may be made binding on all.
For if on account of meat thy brother is grieved, thou walkest no longer according to love. Destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ has died.
The word translated grieved is not about hurt feelings over a difference of taste. It describes what happens inside a believer who is pushed to act against what he believes is right.
Paul was fully persuaded that no meat in itself was unclean. But if eating meat would give a brother a bad conscience, it would become a cause of defilement to him. So we are to be careful not to use our liberty in trying to persuade a brother to do something he has a conscience about. We are persuading him to act beyond his faith. As far as our act goes, we are leading him to violate his conscience and so drive him from Christ.
The freedom Paul defends earlier in the chapter is real, and he never withdraws it. But a believer holds that freedom in his own heart. Among others, love governs how he uses it.
A Christian always holds this sense of liberty firmly in his heart. But where he is with others, the mightier principle of love is to temper it in practice. He is not to think of himself, but to have regard to the state and needs of those he is with, or before whom he walks.
The same action can be right in one setting and wrong in another. The difference is the brother standing next to you.
I may be convinced that the thing in question is the will of the Lord, and one I would usually do. But if, in these circumstances, doing it would damage you, then the will of the Lord is that I refrain from doing it.
This is the strongest word in the verse, and commentators handle it carefully. One writer stresses that the ruin is what our action tends toward, not something we can achieve.
The importance of this principle cannot be overestimated. The apostle does not mean that we can bring about the destruction of a brother. He means that, as far as we are concerned, we act by asserting our liberty in a way that would tend to damage him eternally.
Another writer draws the line more sharply still.
Do not for a moment suppose that the words "do not destroy" can mean the destruction of eternal life. Scripture cannot contradict itself. If it appears to, then clearly we have not got the true sense of at least one of the texts. If the eternal life we have in Christ could be destroyed, then it would not be eternal.
Yet the warning still stands. Another writer refuses to let the reader stop at what the word rules out:
How terrible it is that we can destroy, or cause to perish, our brother. Do not say, This does not mean this or that; think of what it does mean, rather than the opposite. Surely it means at least this much: a wasted life that might have been fragrant with Christ. A missing of the mark God desired for him. A grieving of the heart of the Christ who died for him.
Paul does not argue from the weak believer's merits. He names the price Christ paid for him, and that price settles how you treat him.
Christ died so that he might be your brother, and that you might be his brother. How are you treating him — as a brother, or as a criminal? He may be weak in the faith, and ignorant of much knowledge that has made you proud; he may be anything you care to call him, but Christ died for him. He could not have done more for him than that. What value the Lord has set on him! To die for him!
One writer weighs what Christ gave up against what we refuse to give up.
"By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died." The attitude of disregard for a brother's conscience is the very principle of destroying him. But Christ died for him! — what a contrast. He sacrificed His life to save him from destruction. Shall we sacrifice nothing for the blessing of the saints of God?
- Grieved — the issue is a brother's conscience, not his taste. Push him past his own faith and you lead him to violate himself.
- Love — liberty is real, and a believer holds it firmly in his heart. Among others, love tempers it. A weaker brother nearby can make it the Lord's will that you refrain.
- Cost — the brother's worth is measured by the death of Christ; Christ could have done no more for him than He did.
- Contrast — Christ sacrificed His life to save that man from ruin. Will we not sacrifice a meal for him?
- Restraint — "destroy" never means lost eternal life. What is at stake is a wounded conscience, a wasted life, and grief to the Christ who died for him.
Let not then your good be evil spoken of;
Paul is writing to Christians who disagree about what they may eat and drink. Here he warns the ones who are right: they can use their freedom in a way that gives it a bad name.
The "good" here is the freedom Christians already enjoy. The danger is that their own use of it creates the scandal.
So the liberty of Christianity is something we may rightly enjoy. Yet it may become an occasion for stumbling others, and so be spoken of as evil.
Freedom is real, but love has the higher claim on the one who holds it.
Besides, love demands that we should respect our brother. The more right a man is, the more he can afford to be gracious. "So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men." We have been called to liberty, but true liberty proceeds by love.
There is a specific way the good turns evil: by talking a brother into an act his own faith cannot support. What looks like setting him free wounds him.
Paul was fully persuaded that no meat in itself was unclean. But if eating meat would give a brother a bad conscience, it would become an occasion of defilement to him. So we are to be careful not to use our liberty in trying to persuade a brother to do something he has a conscience about. We are persuading him to act beyond his faith. As far as our act goes, we are leading him to violate his conscience and so drive him from Christ.
There is a reason these disputes are worth losing.
The apostle insists that the kingdom of God cannot be lowered to what perishes with the using. It is righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, the inward spirit and practical power of the Christian. "Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men." In short, this is walking in the Spirit, the true guard against fulfilling any desire of the flesh.
This kingdom is not only something to wait for.
The Christian lives now in advance of the day when God's kingdom will be set up publicly under Christ. So he is personally a righteous man, a peaceful man, and a happy man, because the Holy Spirit brings him under God's rule even now.
This freedom is a privilege, and privilege brings obligation.
It is a great favour to enjoy the liberty of Christ in the smallest matters of everyday life. But whoever has entered into this is all the more bound to consider the believer who is still held back by doubts.
Paul does not cancel freedom. He changes where you use it.
"Are we then never to exercise our undoubted liberty?" Yes, says the apostle. If you have faith — faith to use it — keep it to yourself before God. Use it in private, but not in public, when using it might make a weak brother stumble.
So one question is not enough.
In the light of this we must ask ourselves not only "Have I liberty to do this thing?" We must also ask, "Is it wise for me to claim and use my liberty in this case?"
This safeguard runs both ways, because each believer stands before God alone.
Each of us shall give account of himself to God, not of his brother. So let us always keep a good conscience before Him, and allow others to do the same. Then our good will not be spoken of as evil. We should not knowingly offend a weak brother.
- The good — the thing to guard is your own freedom in Christ. It is real, but you do not prove it by using it.
- The good misused — press a brother to act beyond his faith and you defile the conscience you meant to free.
- The good surrendered — being right is what gives you room to be gracious. True liberty moves by love.
- The good relocated — keep your freedom between yourself and God. Ask not only "May I?" but "Is it wise here?"
- The good approved — the kingdom of God is righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Serve Christ there and you are acceptable to God and approved by men.
for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in [the] Holy Spirit.
Believers in Rome were quarrelling over food and drink. Paul settles it by telling them what God's kingdom is made of, and it is not the thing they were arguing about.
The kingdom is bigger than the plate in front of you. One writer shows where it does show itself: in daily conduct that keeps the flesh in check.
The apostle insists that the kingdom of God cannot sink to the level of things that perish as they are used. It is righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. It is the inward spirit and practical power of the Christian. "Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men." In short, it is walking in the Spirit, and that is the true guard against fulfilling any lust of the flesh.
What replaces the food rules? One writer points to conduct that pleases God:
Judaism had much to say about what people should eat and should not eat. But Christianity is not occupied with rules that command and forbid. It consists of what is moral, of what pleases God in the lives of His own. We are to show what is right in the eyes of God. Peace is to mark every step we take. Our joy is to come from the Holy Spirit, who lets us enter into what is found in Jesus.
Paul lists the three in an order. One writer shows why each one has to come before the next:
Righteousness is, and ever must be, the only basis of peace. That is true for the individual soul and for God's government… God declared His righteousness in the blood of Christ. In it He laid the unchangeable basis of peace for ever. Then, once we have peace and enjoy it, joy in the Holy Spirit springs up. It fills the soul and overflows without end in praise and adoration.
What does this righteousness look like on a normal day? One writer answers in terms of what we owe — to God, to Christ, and to the people around us:
Righteousness is not so much about my demanding what is due to me. It is about my paying to all others what is due to them. We must give God all that is His due, and give Christ the place that is His. Then we must practise everyday righteousness with all our neighbours, both saved and unsaved. Peace and joy in the Holy Spirit are then the practical outcome. Righteousness is the foundation on which they rest.
These same three marks will one day cover the whole earth. One writer describes that day, and then brings it home:
One day Christ will come as God's King over the whole earth. Then the kingdom of God will be on open display, with three great marks which everybody can recognise. (1) It will be a righteous rule, and all wrongs will be put right… (2) There will be peace. The nations will not learn war any more… (3) There will be joy. The ransomed will return with songs to Zion, everlasting joy will be upon their heads, and every sound of sorrow will fall silent… But the Holy Spirit dwelling in you sets up the rule of God in your heart, and the Christian shows these three marks now.
Why do believers fight over small things? One writer points to the state of the soul:
It is so easy to slip into outward religion and lose sight of the state of our souls. We can even grow zealous for Christian liberty while our souls dry up for lack of divine nourishment. The truth is this: if we cultivate the enjoyment of righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit, our hearts will overflow with love to our brothers and sisters. Then we will act by instinct, with proper regard for their weakness.
- Not on the plate — The kingdom of God is too great to sink to the level of food and drink, which perish as they are used.
- Righteousness first — God laid its foundation in the blood of Christ. It shows itself when you pay people what you owe them, not when you demand your own rights.
- Then peace — Peace is the fruit of righteousness, never the root. Give God and your neighbour their due, and peace follows.
- Then joy — Joy is not manufactured; it comes from the Holy Spirit dwelling in the believer.
- Now and then — One day the world will see this rule under Christ. The Christian is meant to show it today, and a soul enjoying these three gives way to a weaker believer without being asked.
For he that in this serves the Christ [is] acceptable to God and approved of men.
Paul has just said God's kingdom is not food and drink but righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. This verse draws the practical conclusion: give up a liberty for a weaker brother, and you are serving Christ.
The word behind "acceptable" means well-pleasing. It describes what pleases God:
The word euarestos ('well-pleasing', from eu, 'well', and aresko, 'to please') means 'acceptable' to God in Romans 14:18, 'agreeable' to the Lord in Ephesians 5:10, and 'well-pleasing' to Him in Colossians 3:20. These passages show that the old rendering of 2 Corinthians 5:9, "we may be accepted of him", is wrong: it should be "agreeable to him".
So the question is not whether God will receive you. It is whether your conduct pleases Him.
Some render the phrase "in this" rather than "in these things" — the singular pointing back to the kingdom as righteousness, peace and joy. Either way the service is not in the food or the abstaining, but in the spirit behind it:
The apostle insists that the kingdom of God cannot be lowered to things that perish as we use them. It is righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, the inward spirit and practical power of the Christian. "Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men." In short, it is walking in the Spirit, the true guard against fulfilling any craving of the flesh.
Convictions can leave a man a slave to himself, or bind him to Christ:
This is truly serving Christ. It is a poor thing to be mere slaves of our convictions. True convictions should make us bondservants of Christ. If in these things it is really Him we are serving, we shall be acceptable to God and approved of men — not of course all men, but all right-minded men.
The freedom itself stays. The believer keeps it and spends it on Christ's glory:
Here is a man who is free in his inmost soul, yet a bondservant to Christ — the apostle uses the strongest term. He will not let the freedom he really has make him forget that he is bound in every way to use that freedom to glorify Christ. This man is "well pleasing to God and approved of men."
God and men reach the same verdict, and it cuts both ways:
Both the "weak" and the "strong" should pursue these qualities. These things are acceptable to God and approved by men. If I force my liberty on another and it offends his weak conscience, God and man condemn it.
The verse also turns inward. Zeal on its own proves nothing:
Verse 18 searches the individual heart, yet also comforts it. It is well for a Christian to ask himself often how and in what things he is serving Christ. Otherwise, zeal may sometimes injure rather than profit. Nothing is either pleasing to God or profitable to men, which is not done in the power of this kingdom of God.
Caring for a weak conscience is one thing. Letting others add terms to the gospel is another:
This will lead us to do nothing, in eating meat or drinking wine, that would make a brother stumble. But it must not lead us to compromise the gospel… Suppose a group of men said: Christ alone is not enough to deliver a sinner and save him completely; you must take a pledge with us not to drink wine. To compromise the gospel like that would not be of faith, or love, or edification… If Christ has not the first place, something else soon will have. Satan always seeks to use what is good to displace Christ.
- Serve. Give up a lawful liberty for a brother, and God counts it as service to Christ. The apostle's word for such a man is bondservant.
- In this. The service is not in the food or the drink. It is in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit — walking in the Spirit, the real guard against the flesh.
- Pleasing. "Acceptable" means well-pleasing. It describes what you do, not whether God will receive you.
- Approved. God and right-minded people reach the same verdict. It works in reverse too: force your liberty on a weak conscience, and both condemn it.
- Searching. Ask often how and in what you are serving Christ. Zeal outside this kingdom can injure rather than help. But never yield so far that you give up the gospel.