The Weak and the Strong (Romans 14:1–15:13): Part 6 of 7

Unity of the Strong and Weak

“We who are strong have an obligation to bear with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let each of us¹ please his neighbor for his good, to build him up. For Christ did not please himself, but as it is written, ‘The reproaches of those who reproached you fell on me’” (Romans 15:1-3, ESV).

To the “strong” [οἱ δυνατοί], among whom Paul includes himself,² the exhortation is given: “We [emphatic!] … have an obligation” [ὀφείλομεν … ἡμεῖς] or “our duty is …” (Weymouth), the present tense conveying what is current and continuous.³ Only here in Romans is this special use of the first person plural “we,”⁴ unlike any of the others,⁵ where the focus is on just a segment of the community. Paul is saying that those of us who are spiritually mature have the responsibility “to bear with” [βαστάζειν] (cf. Gal. 6:2), an active infinitive (from βαστάζω), which the more reserved rendering “put up with” (NAB, NRSV) or “be patient with” (CEV, ISV) softens to passive inactivity. The strong ones are to actively “help” (GNT) “the weak” [τῶν ἀδυνάτων]⁶ in bearing—present tense (currently and continually)—“the failings” (ESV, NET, NIV, N/RSV) [τὰ ἀσθενήματα], the lone occurrence of this noun in the NT,⁷ lit. “the infirmities” (ASV, KJV), also translated “the weaknesses” (CSB, NASB, WEB), “the scruples” (NKJV), “the shortcomings” (MSV), “the doubts and qualms” (J. B. Phillips).

As an extension of 12:3-8, Paul is essentially reiterating what he had already communicated to the Corinth church: the body is not one member but many, every member is necessary, the very existence of the body depends on unity of diverse members and mutual dependence, and discord among members is an unhealthy body (1 Cor. 12:14-27). “The weaker members of the church actually are indispensable for the proper functioning of the body, just as the human body is dependent upon its weaker internal organs (heart, lungs), whose only protection is that which the stronger members afford.”⁸

Striving to “please” [ἀρέσκω] ought to be directed beyond “ourselves” (cf. 12:10).⁹ Instead, we aim to please the Lord, first and foremost (cf. 2:29; 8:8; 12:1-2),¹⁰ and secondarily our “neighbor” [πλησίον] in the sense of other persons (cf. 13:9-10),¹¹  especially in the church. This is not done as men-pleasers¹² but to “build up” [οἰκοδομή] for “edification” (NASB, N/KJV) (cf. 14:19). 

The supreme example is “Christ” (cf. 4:23-25; 5:6-11), typified in the words of Psalm 69:9 (LXX), “as it is written.”¹³ Traditionally considered a psalm of David, the distressing cry is characteristic of Jesus’s own suffering (cf. also John 2:17). The point of Paul’s argument is more elaborately laid out in Philippians 2:1-11, “the greatest possible incentive to unity and humility in the picture of the Lord himself …”¹⁴ (cf. also Heb. 12:2-3). The kind of life Jesus lived on earth and willingly sacrificed teaches us that personal liberty is subservient to love (cf. v. 8),¹⁵ “a continuous act of self-limitation for the sake of [others].”¹⁶ Paul appeals to scripture rather than citing an episode from the Lord’s earthly ministry, perhaps to reaffirm that Christ’s sufferings were always a necessary part of God’s infinite plan.¹⁷

The Role of Scripture

“For whatever was written in former days was written for our¹⁸ instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope” (Romans 15:4). 

“For” [γάρ], validating the use of the passage just quoted, as well as the copious scripture references throughout the letter,¹⁹ the apostle alludes to “whatever” [ὅσα] was written in the past [προεγράφη],²⁰ still serving a practical purpose.²¹ As “a brief detour from his main argument,”²² it seems that for Paul, “if you can cite Scripture for a fact, you show, not only that it was so, but that it must have been so, in the eternal purpose of God.”²³

While other inspired documents were being produced during the NT era,²⁴ “the Scriptures” referred to here are those “written in former days,” applicable to particular texts (4:3; 9:17; 10:11; 11:2) as well as the entire collection (1:2; 16:26; cf. 2:17-20; 3:2, 21; 9:4), a.k.a. the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament.²⁵ Although no longer binding as a set of ordinances and rituals (6:14; 7:4), these sacred writings are holy, just, and good (7:12) and remain historically, prophetically, and instructionally useful (cf. 2:17-20; 4:22-24).²⁶

Along with the verbal “teach” [διδάσκω] (2:21; 12:7),²⁷ “instruction” [διδασκαλία] (cf. 12:7) is a central component of the apostle’s ministry and writings, especially prominent in his letters to Timothy and Titus.²⁸ Having repeatedly informed the Romans of the importance of endurance (2:7; 5:3-4; 8:25; 12:12), he now says it is “through” [διὰ] “the” [τῆς] “endurance” [ὑπομονῆς] (of previous reference), “and through the encouragement” [καὶ διὰ τῆς παρακλήσεως]²⁹ “of the Scriptures” [τῶν γραφῶν], that we acquire and maintain, like Christ (v. 3), the motivation necessary to persevere in the midst of troublesome times, which both the strong and the weak face together (cf. 5:2-5; 8:18, 24-25). The present tense of “we might have” [ἔχωμεν] implies the secure possession of an abiding “hope” [ἐλπίς], about which Paul constantly reminds his fellow-believers (4:18; 5:2-5; 8:20-25; 12:12; 15:4, 12, 13, 24). 

Unified for God’s Glory

“May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 15:5-6). 

For the benefit of his readers the apostle inserts a prayer-wish (cf. vv. 13, 33) that serves the twofold purpose of (a) exhorting the brethren (“you” plural [ὑμῖν]), both strong and weak; and (b) including God in the conflict resolution,³⁰ especially seeing that he is the author and source of “endurance” [ὑπομονή]³¹ and “encouragement” [παράκλησις],³² which he graciously extends—may he “grant” or “give” [δῴη]—through “the Scriptures” (v. 4).³³

The aspiration “to live in such harmony” is translated from the phrase τὸ αὐτὸ φρονεῖν, wherein the verbal φρονέω conveys the sense of thinking-feeling-doing,³⁴ while the articular pronoun αὐτός means “the same” (ASV, NASB, NIV) (cf. 12:16).³⁵ The desired peaceable, harmonious, unified environment is reciprocally attained: “in” [ἐν] or “among” (GNT)³⁶ “one another” [ἀλλήλοις] (vv. 5, 7, 14), a point of emphasis throughout the letter from beginning to end (1:12; 12:5, 10, 15-16; 13:8; 14:13, 19; 16:16).³⁷ The only way this can be achieved is “in accord with” or “according to” [κατά]³⁸ “Christ Jesus,” whose manner of thinking-feeling-doing is the perfect model for unity (cf. Phil. 2:2-5).³⁹

Every member of the body has a positive contribution to make in this collaborative effort “together” [ὁμοθυμαδόν], which is lit. “with one mind or purpose or impulse” (BDAG 706).⁴⁰ “This does not mean that believers are intended to see eye-to-eye on everything, but that the more Christ fills the spiritual vision, the greater will be the cohesiveness of the church. The centripetal magnetism of the Lord can effectively counter the centrifugal force of individual judgment and opinion.”⁴¹

The collective resolve is a cohesive “mouth” [στόμα] or “voice,”⁴² already sharing a common confession of faith (10:8-10), with which you [all] may in unison “glorify” [δοξάζητε], “honor,” “praise,” “magnify” (cf. vv. 7, 9)—in contrast to the sinful world’s disregard (1:21)—“the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (cf. v. 9; 1:1-7).⁴³ “Unity and harmony of worship will be the result of unity of life.”⁴⁴

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The reading “us” [ἡμῶν] is preferred over “you” [ὑμῶν] (contra Douay-Rheims).

     ² The emphatic “we” [ἡμεῖς] is limited here, separate from “the weak,” whereas the rest of the first person plurals in chap. 15 are clearly inclusive of the entire reading audience. Note “each” [ἕκαστος] (v. 2), “one another” [ἀλλήλων] (vv. 5, 7, 14), and “all of you” [πάντων ὑμῶν] (v. 33). Elsewhere Paul recognizes his own human “weakness” (Rom. 8:26; 1 Cor. 2:3; 2 Cor. 11:21, 29, 30; 12:5, 9, 10; 13:4, 9; Gal. 4:3) and distinguishes himself from those who might be considered “strong” (2 Cor. 13:9).

     ³ Compare Acts 17:29; 2 Thess. 2:3; 2:13; 1 John 3:16; 4:11; 3:8. On the verbal ὀφείλω, see also Rom. 13:8; 15:27b; and the noun form ὀφειλέτης in 1:14; 8:12; 15:27a.

     ⁴ Lung-kwong Lo extends this application to vv. 1-4 (“Identity Crisis” 6-7). S. Byrskog classifies this special usage as the “pluralis sociativus,” describing it as the incorporation of a specific group within the community. But he applies the same designation to the general sense in which all of the addressees are included (“Co-Senders” 232).

     ⁵ See C. E. B. Cranfield, “Changes” 285. J. D. G. Dunn comments: “The ἡμεῖς is no doubt deliberate, emphasizing (as the previous first person plurals had not [14:7-8, 10, 12, 13, 19]) Paul’s stance as one of ‘the strong.’ That Paul is referring specifically to those greeted in chap. 16 is possible (Wilckens), but the appeal probably has in view the too confident gentile Christians in general (cf. 11:18; 12:3, 16). On this issue Paul the Jew feels more at one with the gentile (and more liberated Jewish) believers than with the majority(?) of the Jewish Christians” (Romans 2:837; cf. L.-k. Lo, “Identity Crisis” 1-19).

     ⁶ The adjectival ἀδύνατος is used in Romans only here and in 8:3a.

     ⁷ Besides the noun ἀσθένημα, the verbal cognate ἀσθενέω, in reference to one who is weak, occurs in 4:19; 8:3b; 14:1-2.

     ⁸ D. A. Black, “Weakness” in DPL 966.

     ⁹ 1 Cor. 7:33, 34; 10:33; Phil. 1:19-22; 2:3-4.

     ¹⁰ 1 Cor. 7:32; 2 Cor. 5:9; Gal. 1:10; Eph. 5:9-10; Phil. 4:18; Col. 1:10; 3:20; 1 Thess. 2:4, 15; 4:1; 2 Tim. 2:3-4; Heb. 13:20-21. 

     ¹¹ Matt. 5:43; 19:19; 22:39; Mark 12:31, 33; Luke 10:25-37; Gal 5:14; Eph. 4:25; Jas. 2:8; 4:12.

     ¹² Gal. 1:10; Eph. 6:6; Col. 3:22; 1 Thess. 2:4.

     ¹³ Paul’s repeated use of the verbal γράφω (to “write”) in the perfect passive indicative formula, “it is written” [γέγραπται] (Rom. 1:17; 2:24; 3:4, 10; 4:17; 8:36; 9:13, 33; 10:15; 11:8, 26; 12:19; 14:11; 15:3, 9, 21), consistently refers to sacred scripture having been recorded in the past with current and ongoing applicability. Exceptions are the aorist form [ἐγράφη] in 4:23 that contextually extends the application of what was written in the past (vv. 22-24), and the present tense [γράφει] in 10:5, conveying a sense of ongoing relevance. 

     ¹⁴ R. P. Martin, Philippians (Rev.) 99. On Christ’s example, see also 1 Cor. 11:1; 2 Cor. 8:9.

     ¹⁵ See also 1 Cor. 8:1, 9, 13; 9:12, 19; 10:24, 33; 13:1-7; 16:14.

     ¹⁶ C. H. Dodd, Romans 219. “This is the sort of issue that reveals Paul at his clearest and surest…. His argument has an intellectual and moral directness which makes commentary unnecessary …” (J. A T. Robinson, Wrestling with Romans 142).

     ¹⁷ C. E. B. Cranfield, Romans 2:732-33.

     ¹⁸ The possessive adj. ἡμετέραν is first person singular in form because it modifies τὴνδιδασκαλίαν (“the instruction”) but is first person plural (“our”) in meaning (see BAGD 347; D. B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics 348; R. A. Young, Intermediate Greek 78-79).

     ¹⁹ There are around sixty-eight scripture quotations in Romans and many more allusions and verbal parallels. See E. E. Ellis, Paul’s Use of the OT 150-85; C. G. Kruse, “Paul’s Use of Scripture in Romans,” in Paul and Scripture 10:77-92.

     ²⁰ The verb προγράφω can refer to (a) something written beforehand, as in prophecy (Rom. 15:4; Jude 4), or previously in the same document (Eph. 3:3); or (b) something publicly proclaimed or written for public reading (Gal. 3:1). See BAGD 704; J. M. Boice, “Galatians” 455; H. N. Ridderbos, Epistle to Galatia 112.

     ²¹ As noted above, this is consistently affirmed throughout Romans with the perfect passive indicative formula, “it is written” [γέγραπται] – in the past with ongoing relevance. 

     ²² D. J. Moo, Romans 869.

     ²³ C. H. Dodd, Romans 221, emp. in the text.

     ²⁴ When Romans was penned (15:15; 16:22), the letter of James and the Pauline letters to the Thessalonians, Galatians, and Corinthians had already been written (see K. L. Moore, A Critical Introduction to the NT 37-43, 122-150, 198-202).

     ²⁵ In the first century AD the collection was known simply as “the scriptures” (Luke 24:27; John 5:39; Acts 17:2; 2 Tim. 3:15). The English word “scripture” is a transliteration of the Latin scriptura with reference to “a writing” or “something written.” In religious circles “the term acquires special meaning, referring not to any written text but to a text, usually a collection of texts, considered uniquely authoritative for members of that religious community” (C. R. Holladay, A Critical Introduction to the NT 572). For Christians the word is used in the special sense of a sacred writing, recognized as inspired by God’s Spirit. In Paul’s final apostolic manuscript he reminisces about [τὰ] ἱερὰ γράμματα (“the sacred writings”) that Timothy had known from childhood, an apparent allusion to the OT, then he speaks of πᾶσα γραφή (“all scripture”) having been θεόπνευστος (“God-breathed”) (2 Tim. 3:14-16). The adjectival “all” would necessarily include ἡ γραφή (“the scripture”) that Paul had quoted in his previous correspondence to Timothy (1 Tim. 5:18), viz. Deut. 24:4 and Luke 10:7. In referencing the latter text, Paul does not recite the spoken words of Jesus or oral tradition but something that had been put into written form [ἡ γραφή]. Not long afterwards Peter alludes to Paul’s writings, which he includes among τὰς λοιπὰς γραφάς (“the rest of [the] scriptures”) (2 Pet. 3:15-16).

     ²⁶ See also 1 Cor. 9:9-10; 10:6, 11; 2 Tim. 3:14-17. Helpful resources include E. E. Ellis, Paul’s Use of the OT (3rd printing 1991), and G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, eds., Commentary on the NT Use of the OT (2007).

     ²⁷ Note also 1 Cor. 4:17; 11:14; Gal. 1:12; Eph. 4:21; Col. 1:28; 2:7; 3:16; 2 Thess. 2:15; 1 Tim. 2:12; 4:11; 6:2; 2 Tim. 2:2; Tit. 1:11.

     ²⁸ 1 Tim. 1:10; 4:1, 6, 13, 16; 5:17; 6:1, 3; 2 Tim. 3:10, 16; 4:3; Tit. 1:9; 2:1, 7, 10; elsewhere in Paul, Eph. 4:14; Col. 2:22. 

     ²⁹ On Paul’s use of the noun παράκλησις (“encouragement,” “comfort,” “exhortation”), cf. Rom. 12:8; 15:4-5; see also 1 Cor. 14:3; 2 Cor. 1:3-7; 7:4, 7, 13; 8:4, 17; Phil. 2:1; 1 Thess. 2:3; 2 Thess. 2:16; 1 Tim. 4:13; Philem. 7.

     ³⁰ D. J. Moo, Romans 871; J. Murray, Romans 200-201.

     ³¹ Cf. Rom. 5:1-5; Col. 1:9-12; 2 Thess. 3:5.

     ³² Cf. Acts 9:31; 2 Cor. 1:3-7; 7:6; Phil. 2:1; 2 Thess. 2:16; Heb. 6:18.

     ³³ Cf. Luke 8:15; Acts 15:30-31; 1 Cor. 14:3; 1 Thess. 2:2-4; 1 Tim. 4:13; Heb. 13:22; Rev. 3:10. 

     ³⁴ With its highest concentration in Philippians, the verb occurs in Romans at 8:5; 11:20; 12:3, 16; 14:6; 15:5; the cognate noun φρόνημα in 8:6, 7, 27. The corresponding noun φρήν (1 Cor. 14:20) refers to the diaphragm or inward parts surrounding the heart; metaphorically the inner self that regulates external behavior.

     ³⁵ See also 1 Cor. 1:10; 12:25; 2 Cor. 4:13; 13:11; Phil. 2:2; 4:2.

     ³⁶ The preposition ἐν “has a remarkable elasticity of use in the NT” (M. J. Harris, Prepositions and Theology 116; see discussion and examples 116-36), and in this passage is most often rendered “with” (ASV, CSB, ESV, NASB, NET, N/RSV, WEB) or “toward” (LSV, NIV, N/KJV).

     ³⁷ Note also Rom. 2:10; 8:6; 10:15; 12:18; 14:17, 19.

     ³⁸ “Often the substantive that follows κατά specifies the criterion, standard, or norm in the light of which a statement is made, and action is performed, or a judgment is passed. In these cases the preposition will mean ‘according to, in conformity/keeping with, corresponding to, in a manner consistent with, on a scale that matches’” (M. J. Harris, Prepositions and Theology152).

     ³⁹ “Even where Paul is being most practical and pastoral, there he is most theological. His appeal is not to moral generalities like broadmindedness and tolerance, but to the very heart of what God has done and has given us in Jesus Christ” (J. A. T. Robinson, Wrestling with Romans 143). Cf. John 10:16; 17:20-23; 1 Cor. 1:10; 2 Cor. 13:11; Phil. 2:2; 4:2; Gal. 3:26-28; Eph. 2:14-18.

     ⁴⁰ As a compound word (ὁμο -“same” + θυμός -“passion”), the rendering “together” conveys a weakened meaning (BDAG 706). Cf. Acts 1:14; 2:46; 4:24; 5:12; 8:6; 15:25. Outside the Christian context, compare its use in Acts 7:57; 12:20; 18:12; 19:29.

     ⁴¹ E. F. Harrison, “Romans” 152-53; cf. also F. F. Bruce, Romans 216. 

     ⁴² Lit. “in one mouth” [ἐν ἑνὶ στόματι].

     ⁴³ Note also 2 Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3, 17; Col. 1:3; 1 Pet. 1:3. Paul explicitly designates Jesus as “Son” [υἱός] seventeen times in his extant writings, with the highest concentration in Romans (1:3, 4, 9; 5:10; 8:3, 29, 32).

     ⁴⁴ W. Sanday and A. C. Headlam, Romans 396.

Related Posts: The Weak and Strong: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5

 

Image credit: https://www.jobillico.com/blog/en/6-ways-to-encourage-workplace-unity/

The Weak and the Strong (Romans 14:1–15:13): Part 5 of 7

 “Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble” (Romans 14:20-21, ESV).¹ 

Reiterating and thus reemphasizing what is said in vv. 13b-15, the idea of causing one to “stumble” is expressed here with the noun πρόσκομμα (as in v. 13b) and its verbal form προσκόπτω (as in 9:32), meaning to cause hurtful offense and/or induce to sin.² Though not the same word used earlier to describe a weaker brother’s spiritual demise (v. 15), here the term “destroy” [καταλύω], lit. “tear down,”³ is the opposite of the “upbuilding” image of the previous verse.  

Abstaining from Meat

While “food” [βρῶμα] (cf. v. 15)⁴ is generically applicable to whatever is eaten or abstained from, the modifier “clean” [καθαρός] would be more relevant to “meat” [κρέας]⁵ in the context of Jewish ceremonial protocol (cf. v. 14). Under Christ’s new covenant system, the eating of certain types of food or abstaining therefrom is neither enjoined nor forbidden. However, anything can be “wrong” or “evil” [κακός]⁶ if it causes unnecessary spiritual harm to oneself or to another. Therefore, “not only is lawful food sometimes bad, but abstinence from lawful food is sometimes good.”⁷

Whether an individual or the entire community is in view, the seriousness of the matter is magnified by the fact that “the work [ἔργον] of God” is impacted,⁸ especially when righteousness, peace, and joy are robbed from his kingdom (vv. 17, 19). Even though giving up something that injures others is an abstract principle easy enough to comprehend,⁹ it “can never be the rule of Christian conduct…. It does not define his duty, but only makes clear his responsibility …. looking with love at other Christians, and the effect of any given line of conduct on them, he has to define his duty for himself. All meat is clean, but not all eating.”¹⁰ It is necessary to appreciate, of course, the difference between radically coercive asceticism (e.g., 1 Tim. 4:3-4) and voluntary abstinence (e.g., 1 Cor. 7:1; 8:13).

Abstaining from Wine

To illustrate the avoidance of “anything”¹¹ that causes a brother to stumble, Paul uses the examples of “meat” [κρέας] and “wine” [οἶνος], probably as hypotheticals, given that both were part of the normal dietary habits of many Jews and non-Jews alike. Since forgoing meat could be related to the kosher laws of Judaism (v. 14) or to association with pagan sacrifices,¹² aversion to wine may similarly be motivated by non-Christian religious practices.¹³ However, the current circumstances under consideration are perhaps more complicated. 

With the prohibition against drunkenness [μέθαι] understood (13:13),¹⁴ there is a distinction in the NT between “wine” [οἶνος] that is “new” [νέος], prior to fermentation, and fermented “wine” [οἶνος].¹⁵ Abstention from either is not unprecedented in the biblical record.¹⁶

Jesus and his disciples engaged in eating and drinking,¹⁷ so when they drank “wine” [οἶνος],¹⁸ was it fermented or not? The Lord had table fellowship with sinners in order to lead them to repentance,¹⁹ whereas he condemned eating and drinking in drunken environments.²⁰ When he therefore turned 120-180 gallons (450-490 liters) of water into “wine” [οἶνος] for those who had already “drunk freely,”²¹ the “good wine” [καλὸν οἶνον] that he made appears to have been new and fresh, without having undergone the process of fermentation (John 2:1-10).²²  

But what about the consumption of fermented wine in antiquity? A fair assessment begins with recognizing the common “apples-and-oranges” fallacy of comparing the English word “wine” and its modern connotation with that of the ancient Mediterranean world.²³ As noted above, the so-called “wine” of biblical accounts was not always fermented,²⁴ and when it was, the alcohol concentration was significantly less than today’s standards. The alcohol content of modern wines, with added boosting agents (inoculation), is much more potent than the product of natural fermentation of the distant past. 

The sugar of grape juice can only ferment to 3 or 4% alcohol with wild yeast — airborne yeast. For grape juice to exceed 4% alcohol, then the winemaker must add yeast. The yeast added to ancient wines produced between 4-11% alcohol. Alcohol kills these yeast cells and prevents levels of alcohol from exceeding ~10%. Today, wines average 12-20% alcohol due to modern fermentation by adding sulfur dioxide and Saccharomyces (a cultured GMO yeast) to a late harvest of ripened grapes with higher fructose.²⁵

Reducing the alcohol concentration to avoid intoxication, the ancients routinely diluted fermented wine with water, sometimes as much as twenty parts water to one part wine.²⁶ The Greek rhetorician Athenaus of Naucratis (early third century), citing nearly 800 ancient authors and 2500 separate works in his fifteen volumes entitled Deipnosophistae (“Scholars at the Dinner Table”), documents the common practice, among society’s more sophisticated, of drinking wine diluted with water (of various water-to-wine ratios ranging from 1:1 to 20:1), regarding it uncultured to drink full-strength undiluted wine characteristic of barbaric Scythians.²⁷ The first-century Greco-Roman historian Plutarch speaks of recommended proportions of 3:2, 2:1, and 3:1, the greater part water making it harder to get drunk (Symposiacs 3.9). 

Concerning the Lord’s Supper, Justin Martyr (ca. 100-165) spoke of “bread [ἄρτος] and a cup (of wine) [ποτήριον] mixed with water [ὕδωρ] …. deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread [ἄρτος] and wine [οἶνος] mixed with water [ὕδωρ] over which the thanksgiving was pronounced …” (First Apology 65). 

Among the Jews of the intertestamental period, 2 Maccabees 15:39 states: “Just as it is unpleasant to drink wine by itself or just water, whereas wine mixed with water makes a delightful and pleasing drink, so a skillfully composed story delights the ears of those who read the work …”²⁸ In Talmudic times (post-70 to fifth century AD),²⁹ the normal dilution rate was three parts water to one part wine (Pesaḥim 108b), while 2:1 was considered “impure” (Niddah 2.7). According to rabbi Rava, “Any wine that does not hold one part wine diluted by three parts water is not wine. Wine must be sufficiently potent to be capable of being diluted with water three times its measure” (Shabbath 77a).³⁰ Moreover, grape juice was often boiled down to a concentrate before adding water.³¹

Mixing fermented wine with water may also have had a purifying effect, making water safer to drink,³² although the well-known practices of boiling and filtering were commonly used for this purpose.³³ At the same time, contrary to what is often assumed and alleged, clean water was readily available for drinking.³⁴ In fact, while extoling the merits of drinking only water, Athenaus observes, “He who has been accustomed from his earliest upbringing to drink water takes no pleasure in the cup” (Deipnosophistae 2:40-46).³⁵

Unless historical context is ignored, the recreational drinking of full-strength, fortified, ethyl alcohol is not biblically maintainable.³⁶ Paul’s allusion to “meat” or “wine,” notwithstanding the likely hypothetical nature of his point, is simply illustrative of whatever may cause a fellow-Christian to stumble and ought to be relinquished by considerate, loving brethren. “While freedom is a right, it is not a guide for conduct. Love serves that purpose. Rights are to be laid aside in the interest of love.”³⁷

Personal Faith

“The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin” (Romans 14:22-23). 

The second person singular pronoun “you” [σύ], with which v. 22 begins (cf. also vv. 4, 10), indirectly and emphatically identifies the convictions or personal “faith” [πίστις] each Christian has concerning matters that should not challenge or unsettle the objective faith all believers mutually share.³⁸ If a legitimate activity (related to the issues at hand) has the potential of adversely affecting the unity of the church or the spiritual well-being of a brother or sister in Christ, it is to be kept private “between yourself and God.”³⁹ No need to flaunt your religious freedom (cf. vv. 4-12). “For faith is in itself so good that we can afford to forego some points of its outward manifestation, and be satisfied to enjoy it in our own hearts and in the presence of God.”⁴⁰

Note the repetition of κριν- (assessment-making) words: “pass judgment” [κρίνω], “has doubts” [διακρίνω], “is condemned” [κατακρίνω]. The unacceptable judging of others (vv. 1-4, 10-13) extends to self-condemnatory “judging” [κρίνω] (cf. v. 5a). “Blessed” [μακάριος]⁴¹ (cf. 4:7, 8) or “happy” (ASV, NASB, N/KJV) is the one who avoids this pitfall. Otherwise, one is fraught by needless misgivings, uncertainty, and “doubting” [διακρίνω] – the opposite of a solid Abraham-like faith (4:20).⁴² If not fully convinced, one is “weak in the faith” (v. 1), trying to function as a Christian on tenuous footing, and “is condemned” [κατακρίνω] (cf. 2:1; 8:3, 34)⁴³ if engaging in an uncertain activity (like “eating” something about which one is unsure) that is “not from faith” [οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως]. This is in contrast to one “having faith” [πιστεύει] to eat anything (v. 2). 

The eating in itself is not the problem. Rather, eating when one thinks it may be wrong or when one is unconvinced it is right in the sight of God (vv. 14, 20) constitutes “sin.” This is the final occurrence of the word “sin” [ἁμαρτία] in the letter that has been thoroughly discussed, in both its noun and verbal forms, since chapter 2.⁴⁴ “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.”⁴⁵

In chapter 14 Paul seems to be using the noun “faith” [πίστις] and its verbal form (vv. 1, 2, 22, 23) in reference to “the confidence that one’s Christian faith permits one to do a particular thing, an inward liberty with reference to it.”⁴⁶ Yet here he establishes a general principle exceeding the representative samples he has noted thus far, applicable to “whatever” [πᾶν] is not “from faith” [ἐκ πίστεως], including “other matters in which believers might act contrary to what they believe is true.”⁴⁷

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The Byzantine Majority Text and Textus Receptus have the added, “or is offended or is made weak” (NKJV) [ἢ σκανδαλίζεται ἢ ἀσθενεῖ]. While many believe this is “a Western expansion … which gained wide circulation” (B. M. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek NT [2nd ed.] 469), it is attested quite early and both readings “have good documentary support; either reading could be original” (P. W. Comfort, A Commentary on the Manuscripts and Text of the NT 310). Based on the longer reading, John Calvin observed a descending order of “falling” [προσκόπτω], “stumbling” [σκανδαλίζω], and “weakening” [ἀσθενέω], as Paul proscribes instigating the latter to avoid the more serious leading to the most serious (Commentary on Romans 433).

     ² Compare 1 Cor. 8:7-13.

     ³ Cf. 2 Cor. 5:1; Gal. 2:18.

     ⁴ 1 Cor. 6:13; 8:8, 13; 1 Tim. 4:3; Heb. 9:10 (incl. drink); 13:9.

     ⁵ The only other occurrence of this word in the NT is 1 Cor. 8:13.

     ⁶ Cf. 1:30; 2:9; 3:8; 7:19, 21; 12:17, 21; 13:3, 4, 10; 16:10.

     ⁷ J. A. Beet, Romans 358.

     ⁸ Cf. 1 Cor. 3:9-17; Eph. 2:10.

     ⁹ Cf. 1 Cor. 8:13; 9:12, 15, 19; 10:27-33; Gal. 5:13-15, 26; Phil. 2:1-4.

     ¹⁰ J. Denney, “Romans” 2:706.

     ¹¹ To complete the thought, the English pronoun “anything” is added by translators to the triple negative μή … μηδέ … μηδέ, which normally expresses a sense of urgency.

     ¹² Acts 15:20, 29; 1 Cor. 8–10; Col. 2:20-22.

     ¹³ Wine was used in Jewish drink offerings (Lev. 23:13; Num. 15:5), and pouring out a libation of wine to the gods was a common practice among the Greeks, both in drinking wine and accompanying sacrifices (see W. Burkert, Greek Religion 70-73; L. B. Zaidman and P. S. Pantel, Religion in the Ancient Greek City 28-40). The Greek verb μεθύω (to “get drunk”), according to Aristotle, is derived “from the use of wine after sacrifice” (as reported by Athenaus of Naucratis, Deipnosophistae 2:40).

     ¹⁴ Cf. Luke 21:34; Gal. 5:21; also 1 Cor. 6:10; Eph. 5:18; 1 Pet. 4:3. The noun κώμοι in Rom. 13:13, translated “orgies” in the ESV and NAB, is more closely related to drunkenness in the sense of “reveling” (ASV, NRSV) or “carousing” (NASB, NIV).

     ¹⁵ Matt. 9:17; Mark 2:22; Luke 5:37-38. 

     ¹⁶ Num. 6:1-4; Jer. 35:6-14; Dan. 1:8; Luke 1:14; 7:33.

     ¹⁷ Matt. 11:19; Luke 5:30, 33; 10:7.

     ¹⁸ Luke 7:33-34; John 2:1-11; 4:46. In the NT the word “wine” [οἶνος] is never used with reference to the Passover meal or the Lord’s Supper, notwithstanding some modern English paraphrastic versions. Rather, the terminology used is simply “cup” [ποτήριον = “drinking vessel”] as a metonymy (Matt. 26:27; Mark 14:23; Luke 22:17, 20), and “the fruit of the vine” [τοῦ γενήματος τῆς ἀμπέλου] (Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18).

     ¹⁹ Luke 5:29-32; cf. Matt. 9:10-12; Mark 2:15-17.

     ²⁰ Matt. 24:48-51; Luke 12:45-46; cf. Prov. 23:19-21; Eccl. 10:17; 1 Pet. 4:3-5.

     ²¹ The verb μεθύω and its transitive form μεθύσκω mean to “get drunk” only when intoxicants are involved (Luke 12:45; Eph. 5:18; 1 Thess. 5:7). Otherwise, the sense of “indulging” or “overindulging” (cf. Rev. 17:2, 6) would include excessive eating (1 Cor. 11:21), as well as drinking “freely” or “fully” without inebriation (John 2:10).

     ²² The description “good” does not imply fermentation, although “old” [παλαιός] (fermented) wine, as opposed to “new” [νέος] (unfermented) wine, is usually preferred by those who have developed a taste for it (Luke 5:37-39), especially when addicted (cf. Prov. 23:29-35). See also Prov. 20:1; Hab. 2:15. Elsewhere in John’s Gospel, the adj. “good” [καλός] always applies to Jesus (10:11, 14, 32, 33); note also the comparable ἀγαθός (1:46; 5:29; 7:12).

     ²³ The Greek word οἶνος reportedly came from Oineus, the name of the first person to have used the term for what he squeezed into cups from the clusters of grapevines, according to Hecataeus of Miletus (6th-5th century BC Greek historian and geographer), Melanippides of Melos (5th century BC Greek poet), and Nicander of Colophon (2nd century BC Greek poet, grammarian, and physician); reported in Deipnosophistae 2:35 by Athenaus of Naucratis (ca. 228).

     ²⁴ Cf. Gen. 49:11-12; Num. 18:12; Deut. 11:14; 32:14; 2 Chron. 31:5; 32:28; Neh. 10:37; Prov. 3:10; Isa. 16:10; 27:2; 62:8-9; 65:8; Jer. 40:10, 12; 48:33; Joel 1:10-12; Amos 9:13.

     ²⁵ S. J. Shifferd, “What Kind of Wine Did Jesus Drink?” The Breath of God (retrieved 29 March 2024), <Link>; cf. J. Chorniak, “Wild Yeast: The Pros and Cons of Spontaneous Fermentation,” WineMaker (retrieved 29 March 2024), <Link>; J. L. Jacobson, “Upsides of Wild Fermentation,” Wines & Vines (April 2012), <Link>; “Wine Alcohol Content,” Alcohol Content Database (retrieved 29 March 2024), <Link>. 

     ²⁶ See E. Ferguson, “Wine as a Table-Drink in the Ancient World,” RQ 13 (1970): 141-53. 

     ²⁷ See The Deipnosophistae of Athenaus, LCL Vol. 4; also available online. On the reputation of the Scythians as uncultured barbarians and drunkards, see B. Cunliffe, The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe 52-54.

     ²⁸ USCCB translation, © 2019-2024.

     ²⁹ Granted, the rabbinic teachings were recorded after the earliest period of the Christ movement, but since undiluted wine became commonplace in later Jewish tradition, greater moderation in earlier times is assumed.

     ³⁰ From the William Davidson edition of the Babylonian Talmud, trans. A. Even-Israel Steinsaltz. On the question of using unfermented grape juice for the cup of blessing at Passover, R. Rava affirms: “One can squeeze a cluster of grapes and say Kiddush over [the juice]” (Bava Batra 97b).

     ³¹ J. Kulp, Mishnah Yomit: English Explanation of Mishnah Pesachim, USCJ Conservative Yeshiva in Jerusalem (retrieved 21 March 2020), <Web>.

     ³² E. Ferguson, “Wine as a Table-Drink” 146.

     ³³ Athenaus, Deipnosophistae 2:45. “The Greeks and Romans used different methods to improve the quality of the water if it did not satisfy their quality requirements. From written sources and archaeological excavations, we know that using settling tanks, sieves, filters and the boiling of water were methods used during antiquity. At least boiling of water, which was widely recommended by the medical authors during antiquity, would have diminished the biological risks of poor quality water” (P. S. Juuti, T. S. Katko, and H. S. Vuorinen, eds. “A Brief History of Water and Health from Ancient Civilizations,” IWA Publishing [retrieved 30 March 2024], <Link>).

     ³⁴ See Mark 9:41; John 4:7-13; 1 Tim. 5:23a; Jas. 3:11-12.

     ³⁵ In 1 Tim. 5:22b-23, prompted by the reminder to “keep yourself pure,” Paul inserts the parenthetical comment: “No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.” The present active imperative verb ὑδροπότει (from ὑδροποτέω, to “drink water”), is suggestive of Timothy’s ordinary means of hydration, drinking water exclusively and total abstinence from wine. The young evangelist is therefore encouraged to alter his customary routine to address his digestive problems and other “frequent ailments.” He is not instructed to imbibe or indulge but to “use” [χράομαι] (cf. 1:8), for medicinal purposes, a small amount [ὀλίγος] (cf. 4:8) of “wine” [οἶνος], the only explicit exception to the apostle’s earlier stance against “much wine” (3:8).

     ³⁶ See K. L. Moore, “Here’s Why I Don’t Drink Beverage Alcohol,” Moore Perspective (28 Sept. 2013), <Link>.

     ³⁷ R. Mounce, Romans 257-58.

     ³⁸ As per Rom. 1:5, 8, 12; 3:28; 5:1-2; 10:17; et al.; cf. also 1 Cor. 1:10; Eph. 4:4-6, 13; Phil. 1:27; Col. 1:23.

     ³⁹ Lit. “before” [ἐνώπιον] God: cf. Luke 1:74-75; 12:6-7; 16:15; Acts 7:46; 10:31; 1 Cor. 1:29; 2 Cor. 4:2; 8:21; Gal. 1:20; 1 Tim. 2:3; 6:13; Heb. 4:13; 13:20-21; Jas. 4:10; 1 Pet. 3:4; 1 John 3:18-21. Note also 1 Cor. 14:28.

     ⁴⁰ J. A. Beet, Romans 358.

     ⁴¹ The adj. μακάριος means “blessed, fortunate, happy, usu[ally] in the sense privileged recipient of divine favor” (BAGD 486). While the Latin beatus, from which the English term “beatitude” is derived, means “fortunate,” “blissful,” or “happy,” the word “blessed” is probably the better sense in most biblical texts, wherein the focus is directed upward and implicitly acknowledges God from whom the blessings proceed (cf. Matt. 5:3-11; Col. 3:2; Jas. 1:12, 17, 25).

     ⁴² Compare Matt. 21:21; Mark 11:23; Acts 10:20; 11:12; Jas. 1:6; Jude 22-23.

     ⁴³ As Paul consistently uses the expression (cf. also 1 Cor. 11:32), this is not merely self-condemnation but divine condemnation. 

     ⁴⁴ Verb ἁμαρτάνω, Rom. 2:12; 3:23; 5:12, 14, 16; 6:15. Noun ἁμαρτία, 3:9, 20; 4:7, 8; 5:12, 13, 20, 21; 6:1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23; 7:5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 17, 20, 23, 25; 8:2, 3, 10; 11:27; 14:23.

     ⁴⁵ H. N. Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology 291.

     ⁴⁶ C. E. B. Cranfield, Romans 2:728-29. Cranfield also speaks of the word’s “limited applicability,” which he says contextually “refers only to matters which have been under discussion, the matters at issue between the weak and the strong …” (ibid.); cf. also 697-700.

     ⁴⁷ C. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans 526.

Related Posts: The Weak and Strong: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 6

Image credit: https://www.freepik.com/premium-vector/man-thinking-with-feel-tension-vector-silhouette-22_207161104.htm