Romans 14:12

Romans

THE LIMITS OF LIBERTY

Rom 14:12 - Rom 14:23.

The special case in view, in the section of which this passage is part, is the difference of opinion as to the lawfulness of eating certain meats. It is of little consequence, so far as the principles involved are concerned, whether these were the food which the Mosaic ordinances made unclean, or, as in Corinth, meats offered to idols. The latter is the more probable, and would be the more important in Rome. The two opinions on the point represented two tendencies of mind, which always exist; one more scrupulous, and one more liberal. Paul has been giving the former class the lesson they needed in the former part of this chapter; and he now turns to the ‘stronger’ brethren, and lays down the law for their conduct. We may, perhaps, best simply follow him, verse by verse.

We note then, first, the great thought with which he starts, that of the final judgment, in which each man shall give account of himself. What has that to do with the question in hand? This, that it ought to keep us from premature and censorious judging. We have something more pressing to do than to criticise each other. Ourselves are enough to keep our hands full, without taking a lift of our fellows’ conduct. And this, further, that, in view of the final judgment, we should hold a preliminary investigation on our own principles of action, and ‘decide’ to adopt as the overruling law for ourselves, that we shall do nothing which will make duty harder for our brethren. Paul habitually settled small matters on large principles, and brought the solemnities of the final account to bear on the marketplace and the meal.

In Rom 14:13 he lays down the supreme principle for settling the case in hand. No Christian is blameless if he voluntarily acts so as to lay a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in another’s path. Are these two things the same? Possibly, but a man may stumble, and not fall, and that which makes him stumble may possibly indicate a temptation to a less grave evil than that which makes him fall does. It may be noticed that in the sequel we hear of a brother’s being ‘grieved’ first, and then of his being ‘overthrown.’ In any case, there is no mistake about the principle laid down and repeated in Rom 14:21. It is a hard saying for some of us. Is my liberty to be restricted by the narrow scruples of ‘strait-laced’ Christians? Yes. Does not that make them masters, and attach too much importance to their narrowness? No. It recognises Christ as Master, and all His servants as brethren. If the scrupulous ones go so far as to say to the more liberal, ‘You cannot be Christians if you do not do as we do’ then the limits of concession have been reached, and we are to do as Paul did, when he flatly refused to yield one hair’s-breadth to the Judaisers. If a man says, You must adopt this, that, or the other limitation in conduct, or else you shall be unchurched, the only answer is, I will not. We are to be flexible as long as possible, and let weak brethren’s scruples restrain our action. But if they insist on things indifferent as essential, a yet higher duty than that of regard to their weak consciences comes in, and faithfulness to Christ limits concession to His servants.

But, short of that extreme case, Paul lays down the law of curbing liberty in deference to ‘narrowness.’ In Rom 14:14 he states with equal breadth the extreme principle of the liberal party, that nothing is unclean of itself. He has learned that ‘in the Lord Jesus.’ Before he was ‘in Him,’ he had been entangled in cobwebs of legal cleanness and uncleanness; but now he is free. But he adds an exception, which must be kept in mind by the liberal-minded section-namely, that a clean thing is unclean to a man who thinks it is. Of course, these principles do not affect the eternal distinctions of right and wrong. Paul is not playing fast and loose with the solemn, divine law which makes sin and righteousness independent of men’s notions. He is speaking of things indifferent-ceremonial observances and the like; and the modern analogies of these are conventional pieces of conduct, in regard to amusements and the like, which, in themselves, a Christian man can do or abstain from without sin.

Rom 14:15 is difficult to understand, if the ‘for’ at the beginning is taken strictly. Some commentators would read instead of it a simple ‘but’ which smooths the flow of thought. But possibly the verse assigns a reason for the law in Rom 14:13, rather than for the statements in Rom 14:14. And surely there is no stronger reason for tender consideration for even the narrowest scruples of Christians than the obligation to walk in love. Our common brotherhood binds us to do nothing that would even grieve one of the family. For instance, Christian men have different views of the obligations of Sunday observance. It is conceivable that a very ‘broad’ Christian might see no harm in playing lawn-tennis in his garden on a Sunday; but if his doing so scandalised, or, as Paul says, ‘grieved’ Christian people of less advanced views, he would be sinning against the law of love if he did it.

There are many other applications of the principle readily suggested. The principle is the thing to keep clearly in view. It has a wide field for its exercise in our times, and when the Christian brotherhood includes such diversities of culture and social condition. And that is a solemn deepening of it, ‘Destroy not with thy meat him for whom Christ died.’ Note the almost bitter emphasis on ‘thy,’ which brings out not only the smallness of the gratification for which the mischief is done, but the selfishness of the man who will not yield up so small a thing to shield from evil which may prove fatal, a brother for whom Christ did not shrink from yielding up life. If He is our pattern, any sacrifice of tastes and liberties for our brother’s sake is plain duty, and cannot be neglected without selfish sin. One great reason, then, for the conduct enjoined, is set forth in Rom 14:15. It is the clear dictate of Christian love.

Another reason is urged in Rom 14:16 - Rom 14:18. It displays the true character of Christianity, and so reflects honour on the doer. ‘Your good’ is an expression for the whole sum of the blessings obtained by becoming Christians, and is closely connected with what is here meant by the ‘kingdom of God.’ That latter phrase seems here to be substantially equivalent to the inward condition in which they are who have submitted to the dominion of the will of God. It is ‘the kingdom within us’ which is ‘righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.’ What have you won by your Christianity? the Apostle in effect says, Do you think that its purpose is mainly to give you greater licence in regard to these matters in question? If the most obvious thing in your conduct is your ‘eating and drinking,’ your whole Christian standing will be misconceived, and men will fancy that your religion permits laxity of life. But if, on the other hand, you show that you are Christ’s servants by righteousness, peace, and joy, you will be pleasing to God, and men will recognise that your religion is from Him, and that you are consistent professors of it.

Modern liberal-minded brethren can easily translate all this for to-day’s use. Take care that you do not give the impression that your Christianity has its main operation in permitting you to do what your weaker brethren have scruples about. If you do not yield to them, but flaunt your liberty in their and the world’s faces, your advanced enlightenment will be taken by rough-and-ready observers as mainly cherished because it procures you these immunities. Show by your life that you have the true spiritual gifts. Think more about them than about your ‘breadth,’ and superiority to ‘narrow prejudices.’ Realise the purpose of the Gospel as concerns your own moral perfecting, and the questions in hand will fall into their right place.

In Rom 14:19 two more reasons are given for restricting liberty in deference to others’ scruples. Such conduct contributes to peace. If truth is imperilled, or Christ’s name in danger of being tarnished, counsels of peace are counsels of treachery; but there are not many things worth buying at the price of Christian concord. Such conduct tends to build up our own and others’ Christian character. Concessions to the ‘weak’ may help them to become strong, but flying in the face of their scruples is sure to hurt them, in one way or another.

In Rom 14:15, the case was supposed of a brother’s being grieved by what he felt to be laxity. That case corresponded to the stumbling-block of Rom 14:13. A worse result seems contemplated in Rom 14:20,-that of the weak brother, still believing that laxity was wrong, and yet being tempted by the example of the stronger to indulge in it. In that event, the responsibility of overthrowing what God had built lies at the door of the tempter. The metaphor of ‘overthrowing’ is suggested by the previous one of ‘edifying.’ Christian duty is mutual building up of character; inconsiderate exercise of ‘liberty’ may lead to pulling down, by inducing to imitation which conscience condemns.

From this point onwards, the Apostle first reiterates in inverse order his two broad principles, that clean things are unclean to the man who thinks them so, and that Christian obligation requires abstinence from permitted things if our indulgence tends to a brother’s hurt. The application of the latter principle to the duty of total abstinence from intoxicants for the sake of others is perfectly legitimate, but it is an application, not the direct purpose of the Apostle’s injunctions.

In Rom 14:22 - Rom 14:23, the section is closed by two exhortations, in which both parties, the strong and the weak, are addressed. The former is spoken to in Rom 14:22, the latter in Rom 14:23. The strong brother is bid to be content with having his wider views, or ‘faith’-that is, certainty that his liberty is in accordance with Christ’s will. It is enough that he should enjoy that conviction, only let him make sure that he can hold it as in God’s sight, and do not let him flourish it in the faces of brethren whom it would grieve, or might lead to imitating his practice, without having risen to his conviction. And let him be quite sure that his conscience is entirely convinced, and not bribed by inclination; for many a man condemns himself by letting wishes dictate to conscience.

On the other hand, there is a danger that those who have scruples should, by the example of those who have not, be tempted to do what they are not quite sure is right. If you have any doubts, says Paul, the safe course is to abstain from the conduct in question. Perhaps a brother can go to the theatre without harm, if he believes it right to do so; but if you have any hesitation as to the propriety of going, you will be condemned as sinning if you do. You must not measure your corn by another man’s bushel. Your convictions, not his, are to be your guides. ‘Faith’ is used here in a somewhat unusual sense. It means certitude of judgment. The last words of Rom 14:23 have no such meaning as is sometimes extracted from them; namely, that actions, however pure and good, done by unbelievers, are of the nature of sin. They simply mean that whatever a Christian man does without clear warrant of his judgment and conscience is sin to him, whatever it is to others.

Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 14:12.[148] Δωσει, shall give) A gentle exhortation: let no man fly upon [seize] the office of a judge.

[148] Περὶ ἑκυτοῦ, concerning himself) not any other.—V. g.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_14:12. What follows from the preceding (from πάντες γὰρ … onward).

The emphasis is neither on περὶ ἑαυτοῦ (so usually) nor on τῷ Θεῷ (Philippi), but on the ἕκαστος for that purpose prefixed, which corresponds to the emphatic πάντες, πᾶν, πᾶσα, Rom_14:10-11; hence it alone bears the stress, not sharing it with περὶ ἑαυτ. and τῷ Θεῷ (Hofmann). Each of us, none excepted, will respecting himself, etc. How at variance with this, therefore, to judge or to despise, as though one were not included in the subjection to this our universal destiny of having to give a personal account to God!

δώσει] purely future in sense, like the preceding futures.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 14:12 . ἄρα ( οὖν ): So then conclusion of this aspect of the subject: cf. Rom 5:18 , Rom 7:25 . Every word in this sentence is emphatic: ἕκαστος , περὶ ἑαυτοῦ , λόγον δώσει , τῷ θεῷ . For λόγον in this sense see 1Pe 4:5 , Heb 13:17 , Mat 12:36 , Act 19:40 .

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_14:12

So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. As, therefore, God is the supreme judge, and we are to render our account to him, we should await his decision, and not presume to act the part of judge over our brethren.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

So then--infers the apostle.

every one of us shall give account of himself to God--Now, if it be remembered that all this is adduced quite incidentally, to show that CHRIST is the absolute Master of all Christians, to rule their judgments and feelings towards each other while "living," and to dispose of them "dying," the testimony which it bears to the absolute Divinity of Christ will appear remarkable. On any other view, the quotation to show that we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of God would be a strange proof that Christians are all amenable to Christ.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 12. Every one of us shall give account of himself] We shall not, at the bar of God, be obliged to account for the conduct of each other-each shall give account of himself: and let him take heed that he be prepared to give up his accounts with joy.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. Every one of us, etc. This conclusion invites us to humility and lowliness of mind: and hence he immediately draws this inference, — that we are not to judge one another; for it is not lawful for us to usurp the office of judging, who must ourselves submit to be judged and to give an account.

From the various significations of the word to judge, he has aptly drawn two different meanings. In the first place he forbids us to judge, that is, to condemn; in the second place he bids us to judge, that is, to exercise judgment, so as not to give offense. He indeed indirectly reproves those malignant censors, who employ all their acuteness in finding out something faulty in the life of their brethren: he therefore bids them to exercise wariness themselves; for by their neglect they often precipitate, or drive their brethren against some stumblingblock or another.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

12. every one of us] Because the prediction (finally to be fulfilled when Messiah finally triumphs) emphatically speaks of “every knee, every tongue.”

give account of himself] “Himself” is, of course, emphatic. The Christian is dissuaded from “judging” by the remembrance that his Judge will ask him hereafter for his own “peculiar book[46],” not for his neighbour’s.

[46] The phrase is borrowed from Herbert’s pregnant little poem, “Judgment:”“Almighty Judge! how shall poor wretches brookThy dreadful look,Able a heart of iron to appal,When thou shalt callFor every man’s peculiar book?“But I resolve, when Thou shalt call for mine,That to decline;And thrust a Testament into Thy hand.Let that be scann’d;There Thou shalt find my faults are Thine.”

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

So then everyone of us,.... this is the conclusion, drawn from the foregoing account of things, that there will be a general judgment, that Christ will be Judge, and all must appear at his bar; from whence it necessarily follows, that every man, and so every Christian, strong or weak, whatever may be his gifts, talents, and abilities,

shall give an account of himself to God; that is, to Christ, who is God; which is another proof of his deity, for he will be the Judge, the Father will judge no man; it is before his judgment seat all shall stand; and therefore the account must be given to him by every one, of himself, and not another; of all his thoughts, words, and deeds, which will be all brought into judgment; and of his time and talents, how they have been spent and used; and of all his gifts of nature, providence, and grace, how they have been exercised for the glory of God, his own good, and the good of others: the formal manner in which this will be done is unknown unto us; however, this is certain, that the saints will have upon this reckoning, in what sort soever it may be, a full and open discharge, through the blood and righteousness of Christ. The Jews (q), say, in much such language as the apostle does, that

"when a man removes out of this world, then "he gives an account to his Lord", of all that he has done in the world.''

(q) Zohar in Gen. fol. 49. 3.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Ver. 12. So then every one, &c.] It was excellent counsel that the orator gave his hearers, Ita vivamus ut rationem nobis reddendam arbitremur. (Cic. IV in Ver.) Let us so live as those that must give an account of all at last.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

So then - Wherefore; or according to the doctrine of the Old Testament.

Every one of us - That is, every Christian; for the connection requires us to understand the argument only of Christians. At the same time it is a truth abundantly revealed elsewhere, that “all men” shall give account of their conduct to God; 2Co 5:10; Matt. 25; Ecc 12:14.

Give account of himself - That is, of his character and conduct; his words and actions; his plans and purposes. In the fearful arraignment of that day every work and purpose shall be brought forth, and tried by the unerring standard of justice. As we shall be called to so fearful an account with God, we should not be engaged in condemning our brethren, but should examine whether we are prepared to give up our account with joy, and not with grief.

To God - The judgment will be conducted by the Lord Jesus; Mat. 25:31-46; Act 17:31. All judgment is committed to the Son; Joh 5:22, Joh 5:27. Still we may be said to give account to God,

Because He “appointed” the Messiah to be the Judge Act 17:31; and, Because the Judge himself is divine.

The Lord Jesus being God as well as man, the account will be rendered directly to the Creator as well as the Redeemer of the world. In this passage there are “two” incidental proofs of the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. “First,” the fact that the apostle applies to him language which in the prophecy is expressly spoken by “Yahweh;” and, “Secondly,” the fact that Jesus is declared to be the Judge of all. No being that is not “omniscient” can be qualified to judge the secrets of all people. None who has not “seen” human purposes at all times, and in all places; who has not been a witness of the conduct by day and by night; who has not been present with all the race at all times, and who in the great day cannot discern the true character of the soul, can be qualified to conduct the general judgment. Yet none can possess these qualifications but God. The Lord Jesus, “the judge of quick and dead” 2Ti 4:1, is therefore divine.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Here you have the end of our standing before the judgment-seat of Christ, which is to give account: see Mat 12:36; 1Pe 4:5. He saith:

Every one of us shall give account, whether he be great or small, strong or weak; and that he shall give account of himself; i.e. of his own actions, and not another’s. He shall give account of himself in his natural capacity, as a man; and in his capacity, as a rich or great man; and in his religious capacity, as one that hath enjoyed such education, such means of grace, &c.

Objection. Pastors must give account for their flock, Heb 13:17.

Answer. Pastors shall give account of their negligence, and want of care, whereby they suffered their sheep or flock to miscarry; but every particular sheep also shall give account of his own personal wanderings.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. Every one of us—Of every party, whether judging or judged of each other. Each must come under the final scrutiny of God.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12. “For it has been written, I say, saith the Lord, that every knee shall bow to me and every tongue confess to God. Then, therefore, each one of us shall give an account to God concerning himself.” Here we are having the day problem, which the devil in all ages has used to upset myriads, clearly and unequivocally settled. The Christian says, “Keep Sunday,” the Jew, Saturday, and the Moslem, Friday. Go round the world eastwardly and Saturday would become Sunday; go round westwardly and Monday is your Sunday. Here Paul certifies the utter nonessentiality of the day problem. You must simply satisfy your conscience and that of others and be true to God. “Sabbath” is a Hebrew word which means “rest,” symbolizing the soul-rest we have in Jesus when sin is dead and gone. The sanctified have perpetual Sabbath in the soul and life, i. e., seven Sabbaths every week. We see in the above Scripture that every man is to follow his conscience as to this matter. All days are holy when you are holy. God requires you to be holy. If you are truly holy, all your days are holy. If your own heart is not holy, it is idolatry to depend on holy days. You will go straight to hell through holy days if you yourself are not holy. Hence the silly nonsense of the people who try so hard to get you to Judaize on Saturday and at the same time let the devil have your soul. There is no issue here raised on holy days, but holy people. When we are all right, the day is all right. We must all keep Sunday for the conscience of Christendom (1Co 8:12). If your conscience requires you to keep Saturday, then do it for the sake of your own conscience, at the same time remembering that God requires you to keep Sunday for the conscience of Christendom.

So, in that case, you have two days to keep. It will not hurt you to desist from labor and attend church two days in the week. The Christian church began all Jews, revolutionizing in a century and becoming all Gentiles. The primitive Jewish Christians kept Saturday, and commemorated Sunday also as a sacred memento of our Lord’s resurrection (Acts 20 and 1Co 16:3). This is corroborated by Justin Martyr and other Christian fathers who lived and wrote in the second century. As the Gentiles never did keep the Jewish Sabbath, the universal hebdomadal division of time which followed the evangelization of the nations and exists this day, is demonstrative proof that the early Christians kept Sunday. Some fanatics tell us the Pope of Rome changed the day, when there never was a pope till the seventh century, when Procas, King of Italy, crowned Boniface the Third Bishop of Rome. When a student in college I read the Roman historians Suitonius, Pliny, Sallust, and Livy, who wrote in the first centuries of the Christian era their graphic accounts of the Christians suffering persecution under the Emperors. They are to be taken as perfectly reliable, because they were all heathens and in no sympathy with the martyrs. In their descriptions of their martyrdom, they simply narrate how their persecutors questioned them, “Doininicum servasti?” “Hast thou kept the Lord’s day?” The answer came, “Christianus sum; intermittere non possum ,” “I am a Christian; I can not omit it.” On this confession they killed them. Now this is positive proof that these early martyrs kept Sunday, which is called the Lord’s day, whereas Saturday never was so called. If those martyrs had kept Saturday, they would have asked them: “Sabbaticum servasti?” “Have you kept the Sabbath?” This question they never did ask them. It is a shame to have weak Christians upset about the old Jewish Sabbath. The very genius of the gospel dispensation corroborates the charge. The old dispensation was under the law, which was work first and then rest, — “if you do not work you shall not rest,” — while our dispensation is under the gospel characterized by love and mercy, which says, “Rest first and then you will be in good fix to do your work.” Some people in our time worship a day-god, others a water-god, and still others worship gods of wood and stone in a fine edifice, worship the institutions of their own making and many other gods. Get saved through and through. Keep your eye on Jesus, be sure that you are holy, then all your days will be holy. Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess. If you keep on your knees before God and confess Him constantly with your tongue you are going to come out all right. On any other line, with all your holy days, the devil will get you.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

So then each one of us shall give account of himself to God . [God judges all, hence it is superfluous for the Christian to judge any. Why gather stones of condemnation and judgment when, after all, Jesus renders us powerless to throw them? ( Joh_8:7 ) Since, then, our judgments are futile and worthless, affecting no one but ourselves, let us refrain from them, and cultivate charity, remembering the rule which metes unto us as we measure to others ( Mat_7:1-2 ). We should be glad that we escape the responsibility of judging, since Jesus himself expressed no eagerness to assume the burden. Comp. Joh_5:22 ; Joh_5:27 ; Joh_5:30 ; Joh_5:45 ; Joh_3:17-19 ; Joh_8:15-16 ; Joh_12:47 ; Luk_12:13-14 ]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. So then every one of us shall give account. God's universal sovereignty gives him the right to call every mortal to account. Hence, we should leave judgment to God.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

will give an account of himself to God

"will have to explain our actions to God"

but instead decide this, that no one will place a stumbling block or a snare for his brother

Here "stumbling block" and "snare" mean basically the same thing. AT: "but instead make it your goal not to do or say anything that might cause a fellow believer to sin" (See: Doublet)

brother

Here this means a fellow Christian, male or female.

translationWords

God

judge

stumbling block

brother

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

12. ἄρα οὖν. The final conclusion on this line of argument: each man will account to GOD, and to Him alone.

λόγον δώσει. Elsewhere ἀποδίδοναι Mat 12:36 alibi

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12.] The stress is on περὶ ἑαυτοῦ: and the next verse refers back to it, laying the emphasis on ἀλλήλους. ‘Seeing that our account to God will be of each man’s own self, let us take heed lest by judging one another (κρίνομεν here in the general sense of ‘pass judgment on,’ including both the ἐξουθενεῖν of the strong and the κρίνειν of the weak) we incur the guilt of ἀπολλύειν one another.’

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12. The conclusion is: it is to God and not to man that each of us has to give account. If Θεῷ be read (see below), it may again be noted how easily St. Paul passes from Κύριος to Θεός (see on ver. 10 and cf. 14:3 with 15:7).

There are several minor variations of text. οὖν is omitted by B D F G P and perhaps the Latin authorities, which read itaque. For δώσει of the T. R. WH. read ἀποδώσει with B D F G Chrys., the Latin authorities reading reddit (but Cyprian dabit). τῷ Θεῷ at the end of the sentence is omitted by B F G Cypr. Aug. In all these cases B is noticeable as appearing with a group which is almost entirely Western in character.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.