Romans 14:21
A focused desk for reading, commentary, cross-references, original language notes, and your own observations.
Romans 14:21
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.
Chapter Context
Romans 14 is a theological epistle chapter in the New Testament that explores themes of truth, worship, redemption. Written during Paul's third missionary journey (c. 57 CE), this chapter should be understood within its historical context: Christians in Rome navigated tensions between Jewish and Gentile believers under imperial watch.
The chapter can be divided into several sections:
- Verses 1-5: Introduction and setting the context
- Verses 6-12: Development of key themes
- Verses 13-20: Central message and teachings
- Verses 21-23: Conclusion and application
This chapter is significant because it addresses timeless questions about faith, suffering, and divine purpose. When studying this passage, it's important to consider both its immediate context within Romans and its broader place in the scriptural canon.
Verse Study
Romans 14:21
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.
Analysis
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—Kalon to mē phagein krea mēde piein oinon mēde en hō ho adelphos sou proskoptei (καλὸν τὸ μὴ φαγεῖν κρέα μηδὲ πιεῖν οἶνον μηδὲ ἐν ᾧ ὁ ἀδελφός σου προσκόπτει). Kalon (καλός, good/noble) elevates voluntary abstinence to virtue—not legalistic requirement but loving self-limitation. Krea (meat), oinon (wine), and en hō proskoptei (anything in which he stumbles) cover all disputable matters.
Proskoptō (προσκόπτω, stumble/take offense) indicates causing spiritual harm. Paul's principle: if your freedom wounds a brother, abstain—even from objectively permissible things. This is radical: limit liberty not merely when sinful but when potentially harmful to others. Love outweighs rights. This isn't capitulation to hypersensitivity but pastoral wisdom: where genuine conscience is at stake (not mere preference), strong believers bear responsibility to limit freedom for weak believers' spiritual welfare (15:1, 'we...strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak').
Historical Context
Wine was daily beverage in antiquity; abstaining would be notable. Yet Paul says it's 'good' to abstain if it causes stumbling. Early Christian communities varied: some abstained entirely (influenced by Nazirite vows or reaction to pagan drunkenness), others partook moderately. Paul allows both, provided they don't destroy others. This shaped Christian temperance movements: total abstinence isn't mandated biblically, but may be wise contextually (where alcoholism is rampant, weaker believers struggle). The principle applies broadly: limit freedom where it harms others' faith.
Reflection
- What liberties (food, drink, entertainment, speech) might be 'good' (<em>kalon</em>) for you to limit for weaker believers' sake?
- How do you distinguish between genuine conscience issues requiring sensitivity versus mere preferences demanding conformity?
- In what areas might you be prioritizing your 'rights' over love for those who might stumble (<em>proskoptei</em>) due to your freedom?
Cross-References
- Parallel theme: Romans 14:13, Malachi 2:8, Matthew 16:23, 1 Corinthians 8:13