Chapter # 14 Paragraph # 2 Study # 10
July 11, 2021
Humble, Texas

⁽¹³²⁾

1769 KJV Translation:
19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed [are] pure; but [it is] evil for that man who eateth with offence.
21 [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.
22 Hast thou faith? have [it] to thyself before God. Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin.

1901 ASV Translation:
19 So then let us follow after things which make for peace, and things whereby we may edify one another.
20 Overthrow not for meat's sake the work of God. All things indeed are clean; howbeit it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
21 It is good not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor [to do anything] whereby thy brother stumbleth.
22 The faith which thou hast, have thou to thyself before God. Happy is he that judgeth not himself in that which he approveth.
23 But he that doubteth is condemned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith; and whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

• I. Paul's "Repetition" Of His "Kingdom" Principles.
  • A. The aforementioned "chiastic" structure of Paul's words (see ⁽¹²⁷⁾) made the essence of The Kingdom of The God his major subject of interest.
  • B. Now we are "into" a look at Paul's second half of his chiasm.
    • 1. The "other side" of the essence of The Kingdom of The God is presented in the words of 14:18.
    • 2. The "other side" of the prohibition of using a freedom so that blasphemy results.
      • a. In 14:16 Paul insisted that those Romans who had the "freedom to eat all foods" and the luxury of "not going to Jerusalem to observe the memorial days of the Jews" refrain from allowing these freedoms, which for them was a "good", to become manifest evidence that they were not walking according to "Love" in respect to their brethren who were "diseased in the faith" because that would lead to "blasphemy" regarding those "freedoms" (i.e., to establish a basis for the imposition of bondage where freedom should exist). "Blasphemy" comes into play when people have some "reason" to decry the hypocrisy that they "see", or, better, "think they see" (Romans 3:8).
      • b. Now, in the chiastic parallel to 14:16, Paul expresses another face of that prohibition to exalt "freedoms" over harmonious relationships between brethren. It must be kept in mind that Paul is dealing only with genuine freedoms that have no objective criticism from God; he is not dealing with subversive teachings of "freedoms" that are actually evils being paraded about as being within God's permissions for our enjoyment.
        • 1) There is an "ara oun" that opens 14:19 in which this 'other face' is found.
          • a) The Logos Library "information popup" regarding "ara" says that this Greek term "is an untranslatable interrogative particle implying anxiety or impatience". Robertson says of the same word that the etymology has the meaning "accordingly" or "fittingly" and appeals to Paul's use in Romans where it shows up in 11 texts. In those 11 texts Paul clearly "draws a strong implication" from what he had previously said ... along the lines of "Since this is true, what I am now arguing is that there is a rather inescapable following truth...". These claims may actually blend together in that Paul may have been a bit testy about the readers' not being able to see the "rather inescapable following truth". When a truth is "obvious" it is more than a bit frustrating to have to deal with it because of certain persons' deliberate self-blinding.
          • b) This phrase in 14:19 does seem to have a bit of a "testy" attitude since Paul is having to deal with "brethren" who are more "about" exalting themselves over others than they are "about" walking in the Love of The God. After all, what excuse can anyone give for "forsaking Love" just to puff oneself up in the eyes of others?
          • c) And then there is the "oun" part of the "inferential" nature of the whole phrase, "ara oun".
            • i. This "oun" indicates a "therefore" as drawing out a conclusion rooted in a prior truth.
            • ii. The "prior truth" is that those whose willingness to be "slaves" to The Christ in view of the losses that will be incurred will prove to be "well-pleasing to The God" and "approved by the men"; the two most sought after issues in our text/context. Man simply has a penchant for wanting the "end" without the "process": self-exaltation is simply a shortcut designed to gain "approval" without having to endure the process.
        • 2) Paul's exhortation is "...in regard to the things of The Peace, let us be in 'persecution mode'...". In other words, there needs to be a deliberately intense pursuit of "the things of The Peace".
          • a) The verb used to call for what I have called 'persecution mode' is in the Subjunctive Mood, meaning Paul is addressing what should be, not was is, or actually will be. The Subjunctive in the place of the more overt Imperative indicates what Paul has addressed in his "ara oun": anyone with understanding "should" be able to see that being in 'persecution mode' in regard to 'chasing the things of peace' is the only acceptable "ought" available.
          • b) "The things" of The Peace have just been laid out: those "things" are those which are "righteousness in expression". In other words, "...righteousness, peace, and joy.." means "peace" arises out of actions of righteousness and it is those actions that we are to "pursue" with the devotion of a "persecutor" (a kind of laser focus on the thing pursued).
          • c) Under all of Paul's argument (and testiness) is the reality that he pointedly declared in 14:15 -- that the exaltation of "freedom" over a fellow believer's well-being is "unloving". "Duh" leading to testiness.
          • d) This, then, inescapably leads to this: "Love" will always do "righteousness"; all acts of "unrighteousness" indicate the puffed up mind of a deceiver.
        • 3) And he extends this "laser focused pursuit" to a second objective: "the things which belong to the building up which is focused upon one another".
          • a) This "building up" is the contrary activity (in the chiasm) to 14:15's "destroying one for whom Christ died". Rather than "incremental destruction", there is to be a strong practice of "incremental correction".
          • b) This "building up" extends to both issues in the text: the correction of those whose diseased grasp of The Faith is leading them into "legalistic judgmentalism" and the imposition of the responsibility (of those whose grasp of The Faith is conceptually sound but not actually being practiced) to move into that practical self-denial of the "Love" established in The Faith.
            • i. The "flaw" needing correction in those "diseased" has two parts: the lust for the approval of men; and the willingness to compromise one's conscience in order to obtain that approval.
            • ii. The "flaw" in those who have a solid perception of The Faith is also two-fold: they lust after participation in "freedoms"; and they are willing to destroy their brethren to do so.
          • c) And, practically speaking, "the things" which "build up" are the same "things" that bring peace: lovingly righteous actions.

(return to the top of the article)


This is article #131.
If you wish, you may contact Darrel as darrelcline at this site.