NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp approving:

rwp@1Corinthians:11:22 @{What? Have ye not houses?} (\M gar oikias ouk echete;\) The double negative (\m--ouk\) in the single question is like the idiom in strkjv@9:4f.| which see. \M\ expects a negative answer while \ouk\ negatives the verb \echete\. "For do you fail to have houses?" Paul is not approving gluttony and drunkenness but only expressing horror at their sacrilege (despising, \kataphroneite\) of the church of God. {That have not} (\tous m echontas\). Not those without houses, but those who have nothing, "the have-nots" (Findlay) like strkjv@2Corinthians:8:12|, in contrast with \hoi echontes\ "the haves" (the men of property). {What shall I say to you?} (\ti eip humin;\) Deliberative subjunctive that well expresses Paul's bewilderment.

rwp@Romans:14:22 @{Have thou to thyself before God} (\su--kata seauton eche enpion tou theou\). Very emphatic position of \su\ at the beginning of the sentence, "Thou there." The old MSS. put \hn\ (relative "which") after \pistin\ and before \echeis\. This principle applies to both the "strong" and the "weak." He is within his rights to act "according to thyself," but it must be "before God" and with due regard to the rights of the other brethren. {In that which he approveth} (\en hoi dokimazei\). This beatitude cuts both ways. After testing and then approving (1:28; strkjv@2:18|) one takes his stand which very act may condemn himself by what he says or does. "It is a rare felicity to have a conscience untroubled by scruples" (Denney).