this direction by showing them that they had no right to sit in judgment on their brethren in such matters.
(3) For one believeth he may eat all things : another, who is weak, eateth herbs. This is an iUustration of the weakness of faith to which the apostle refers in v. 1. It was a scrupulousness about the use of things considered as unclean, and with regard to sacred days, v. 5. It is most probable that the scrupulous Christians, to whom the apostle here refers, were of Jewish origin, who had not been able to shake off their early opinions respecting the distinction between clean and unclean meats. The fact that they abstained from all meat, as seems to be inti- mated in this verse, may have arisen from the constant apprehension of eating meat which, after having been presented in sacrifice, was sold in the market place, or which had in some other way been rendered unclean,*
(3) Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not ; and let not him which eateth not Judge him that eateth ; for God hath received him. There is mutual forbearance to be exercised in relation to this sub- ject. The strong are not to despise the weak as superstitious and imbe- cile ; nor the weak to condemn those who disregard their scruples. Points of indifference are not to be allowed to disturb the harmony of Christian fellowship. For God hath received him, i. e. God has recog- nised him as a Christian, and received him into his kingdom. This rea- son is not designed to enforce merely the latter of the two duties here enjoined, but is applied to both. As God does not make eating or not eating certain kinds of food a condition of acceptance, Christians ought not to allow it to interfere with their communion as brethren.
(4) TVho art thou that judgest another man's servant ? to his own master he standeth or falleth. If God has not made the point in question a term of communion, we; have no right to do so ; we have no right to exercise the office of judge over the servant of another. This is the second reason for mutual forbearance with regard to such matters as divided the Jewish and Gentile converts. It cannot fail to be remarked how differently the apostle speaks of the same things under different cir- cumstances. He who circumcised Timothy, who conformed in many things to the law of Moses, and to the Jews became a Jew, and who here exhorts Christians to regard their external observances as matters of indifference, resisted to the uttermost as soon as these things were urged as matters of importance, or were insisted upon as necessary to acceptance with God. He would not allow Titus to be circumcised, nor give place even for an hour to false brethren, who had come in privily to spy out our liberty. Gal. 2 ; 3, 5. What might be safely granted, if asked and given as a matter of indifference, became a fatal apostasy when demanded as a matter of necessity or a condition of salvation.
* Josephus states in his life (ch. 23) that certain Jewish priests, while at Rome, ived entirely upon fruit, from the dread of eating any thing unclean.