Chapter # 14 Paragraph # 2 Study # 16
September 19, 2021
Humble, Texas
(144)
1769 KJV Translation:
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:
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. We have looked at Paul's second half of his chiasm.
- II. Paul's Summation: 14:21-23.
- A. Regarding the "on the ground issue" of "eating and drinking" in the light of the conflict because of "baggage" brought into "The Faith" by those who believe the Gospel but are too ignorant and selfish to grasp its roots.
- 1. This "baggage" is, on the part of those "diseased in The Faith", a carry over of "Law" into "Grace" so that they "do" what they do in order to attempt to be pleasing to God, not resting in His provisions of Son and Spirit.
- 2. This "baggage" is, on the part of those who have grasped aright the "Grace of God" in the light of their fallenness, is the carry over of "Pride" because they are yet afflicted by the lust for recognition/status among the brethren so as to be accepted by men.
- B. Regarding the exercise of "faith" in view of "freedom" given in Christ.
- 1. The one who "has faith" [both those who determine to follow the dietary restrictions and the observances of memorial days as well as those who disregard the dietary and liturgical requirements placed upon Israel, the nation].
- a. Is to exercise it "before God" and, if it is problematic for the "brother", is to exercise it privately ((both for the sake of not being judgmental (14:13) and for Love's sake (14:15)).
- b. Is to live under the "blessedness" of being free from self-condemnation.
- 1) The main issue: blessedness.
- 2) The particular issue: the absence of self-condemnation.
- a) The word translated "condemn" by the NASB translators is used by Paul in 14 texts of Romans and they all signify the "decision" that is made as to the legitimacy/illegitimacy of those things that a person does (2:12). It has a strong implication that the "decision" is against the one taking the action being "judged". It is translated "condemn", but the meaning is not an actual condemnation, but the determination that wrath is due.
- b) This text sets the stage for such a "decision" by putting the "action taken" into a context of "going against what is considered to be the will/desire of God" so that the conscience is violated and the relationship with God is corrupted by the barriers erected by guilt.
- 3) The "problem": "approving" something that one's conscience does not "approve" so that it "bears witness" by "accusing" (2:14-15).
- a) The meaning of "approve" as Paul used it in Romans.
- i. In 1:28 he uses this word to describe the decision of the reprobates who refuse to "possess epignosis" of God. This means that they did not allow God to be tangibly present in their minds/hearts. They "did not approve of God being an integral, major, part of their lives". This has strong implications regarding the way in which God is an integral part of a person's life: He must, in some way, be active in directing one's thinking so that one can grasp the reality of His words; and, He must, in some ways, be so far beneath the processes that He is not the "obvious" guide to thought. The Scriptures make one's conscience the "obvious" guide to both "thought" and "relationship-to-God" issues, but they are also active in providing the content of God's thoughts in actual words, sentences, and meaning. Satan is also, by the Scriptures, attributed with the ability to launch "fiery darts"/"flaming arrows" of accusation (Ephesians 6:16). This strongly suggests some form of access to the believer's mind/heart and reasonings. This automatically raises the question of how one discerns between the conviction of the Spirit of God and the accusations of His adversary.
- ii. In 2:18 he uses this word to describe the Jews who had divine revelation to give them an understanding of God, but who perverted that revelation, not by not "understanding", but by hypocritically insisting that others do what it reveals while personally refusing to do so themselves.
- iii. In 12:2 he uses this word to describe what happens when one's mind is renewed through the presentation of one's whole self to God for His purposes and through a refusal to be shaped by this world's value system: he/she "approves" the will of God as "good, acceptable, and perfect".
- iv. Summary: the word "approve" means to settle one's mind upon the acceptability of an action as "approved by God" (whether it actually is, or not).
- b) The danger is that "approval" has consequences of grave importance. If a matter is "approved" by God also, the person is "blessed"; but, if the matter is deceitfully "approved" when God does not, the person becomes one who does not have God in his life any further.
- i. The fact of God's disapproval is a matter of personal conscience, whether God actually disapproves, or not.
- ii. The fact of a violated conscience supersedes all else because at its root is a willingness to "bend" God's "approval" into a self-serving, hateful thing ... and the conscience knows of this "bending". But, 1 Timothy 4:2 declares that it is possible to "sear" the conscience "as with a branding iron" so that it is no longer capable of giving legitimate guidance.
- iii. The outcome of this "bending" is "guilt", which drives a wedge between the man and God so that the life of God is shut out of the man's experience.
- c) Paul's concern regards the person who "has faith" but disregards the impact he has upon his brethren to their hurt. This "disregard" will violate his conscience so that he must not "have faith openly to the destruction of his brother".
- i. At issue is his "faith" that he can eat without displeasing God.
- ii. But also at issue is his "faith" that he must consider the well-being of the brother.
- iii. "Blessed" is his condition if he regards both God and the brother when he is making his decisions and taking his actions.
- 2. The one who "does not have faith".
