Ver. 12. In such case, not only the weak brother sins by yielding, but the strong who tempted him; and the latter sins directly ‘‘against Christ’’ (for the construction, cf. vi. 18): ‘‘ But sinning in this way against the brethren, and in- flicting a blow on their conscience while it is weak, you sin against Christ ”.—rhv συνείδησιν ἀσθενοῦσαν, not “their weak conscience ”’ (τὴν ἀσθεν.), but ‘ their con- science weak as it is’’: how base to strike the weak!—rumrw describes as the violent wrong of the injurer, what is a podvopa and πρόσκοµµα (7, 9) in its effect upon the injured. A blow on the conscience shocks and deranges it.—For the bearing of such an act on Curist, see Matt. xviii. 6 ff., xxv. 40, 45; also Zech. ii. 8, etc. The principle of union with Christ, which forbids sin against oneself (vi. 15), forbids sin against one’s brother.
Ver. 13 sums up the debate in the language of personal conviction: ‘‘ Where- fore verily’’—for this last reason above all— if (a matter of) food (βρῶμα, indef.) is stumbling my brother, I will eat no flesh-meats for evermore, that I may not stumble my brother ”.—«péa (pl. of kpéas) signifies the kinds of βρῶμα in question, including probably beside the idolothyta other animal foods which might scandalise men of narrow views, such as the vege-. tarians of Rom. xiv. 13-21 (see notes ad loc.).—Four times in wv. 11-13 P. repeats the word ἀδελφός, seeking to elicit the love which was needed to control Cor, knowledge (cf. 2 f.).- -For “σκανδαλίζω,