For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs—Hos men pisteuei phagein panta, ho de asthenōn lachana esthiei (ὃς μὲν πιστεύει φαγεῖν πάντα, ὁ δὲ ἀσθενῶν λάχανα ἐσθίει). Pisteuei (believes/is persuaded) indicates conscience conviction, not mere opinion. The 'strong' believer is persuaded (pisteuei phagein panta, believes to eat all things)—convinced that foods don't defile (Mark 7:18-19). The 'weak' (asthenōn) eats only lachana (vegetables/herbs), avoiding meat possibly offered to idols or not kosher.
Paul doesn't adjudicate who's correct (though 14:14, 20 reveal his position). The issue isn't truth but how to handle conscience differences in the body. Both eat 'unto the Lord' (v. 6) from sincere conviction. The problem arises when strong despise weak as legalistic, or weak judge strong as licentious. Paul protects both conscience and unity—don't violate your conscience, don't force others to violate theirs, don't fracture fellowship over disputable matters.
Historical Context
Meat sold in Roman markets was often from pagan temple sacrifices (1 Corinthians 8-10). Some Christians avoided all meat to ensure purity. Jewish Christians maintained kosher laws, considering Gentile food practices defiling. Paul navigates between extreme positions: legalists who made food laws salvific, and libertines who flaunted freedom destructively. His principle: truth with love. Strong are right theologically (all foods clean, Mark 7:19) but wrong to destroy weak believers (v. 15, 20). Weak are bound by conscience, which must not be violated (v. 23).
Questions for Reflection
What modern equivalents exist to the meat-eating controversy—alcohol, entertainment, political positions, worship styles?
How do you distinguish between 'disputable matters' (where conscience governs) and essential doctrines (where conformity to truth is required)?
Are you more prone to despise the 'weak' for scrupulosity or judge the 'strong' for license—and how does Paul's teaching correct you?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs—Hos men pisteuei phagein panta, ho de asthenōn lachana esthiei (ὃς μὲν πιστεύει φαγεῖν πάντα, ὁ δὲ ἀσθενῶν λάχανα ἐσθίει). Pisteuei (believes/is persuaded) indicates conscience conviction, not mere opinion. The 'strong' believer is persuaded (pisteuei phagein panta, believes to eat all things)—convinced that foods don't defile (Mark 7:18-19). The 'weak' (asthenōn) eats only lachana (vegetables/herbs), avoiding meat possibly offered to idols or not kosher.
Paul doesn't adjudicate who's correct (though 14:14, 20 reveal his position). The issue isn't truth but how to handle conscience differences in the body. Both eat 'unto the Lord' (v. 6) from sincere conviction. The problem arises when strong despise weak as legalistic, or weak judge strong as licentious. Paul protects both conscience and unity—don't violate your conscience, don't force others to violate theirs, don't fracture fellowship over disputable matters.