Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Corinthians 8

Now as touching things offered to idols.—A new subject is introduced here and occupies this entire chapter. In Corinth and other cities, meat was offered for sale that had been used for sacrificial purposes in the heathen temples. This meat was sold to the dealers either by the priests, who received a large share of the sacrifices for themselves, or by the individuals who offered them and had more of their own share remaining than they could use themselves.

Thus, a Christian might unknowingly eat meat—either at a friend's house (see 1 Corinthians 10:27) or by purchasing it himself in the public markets—that had previously come into contact with an idol through sacrificial use.

There were some in Corinth who felt no scruples on this subject. In their opinion, an idol was nothing; it could neither consecrate nor pollute what was offered in its temple. To show how completely and effectively their Christianity had dispelled all their previous heathen superstition, such Christians would buy meat without caring from where it came. They would partake of a heathen friend’s hospitality, regardless of how the meat had been used, and even join in a meal held in the outer court of a heathen temple (1 Corinthians 8:10), where the meat would almost certainly be what remained after the sacrifice.

We can scarcely doubt that St. Paul himself would have done so, as far as his own personal feelings alone were concerned. Therefore, those who acted on his authority appealed to him on this subject.

However, there were others at Corinth who felt some scruples on this subject. Among them were heathen converts who had not completely rid themselves of every trace of their old superstition, or whose conscience would accuse them of not having fully abandoned idolatry if they participated even in its social aspects. This was because, in the heathen mind, many social acts—as well as purely religious ceremonies—were included as acts of worship. Additionally, there were Jews whose intense traditional hatred of idolatry prevented them from regarding as “nothing” that against which Jehovah had uttered His most terrible denunciations, and against which He had preserved their people as a living witness.

To both these sections of the Church, the conduct of the more liberal party would prove a serious stumbling block. The argument used by those who asked St. Paul’s advice was evidently that Christians have enough knowledge to recognize that an idol is nothing and that, therefore, there can be no harm in partaking of what has been offered to “nothing.”

“We know,” St. Paul says in reply, taking up the words of their own letter, “we know that we all have knowledge... we know that an idol is nothing.” The last clause of 1 Corinthians 8:1 and 1 Corinthians 8:2–3 form a parenthesis; in 1 Corinthians 8:4, the opening words of 1 Corinthians 8:1 are repeated, and the line of thought that this parenthesis interrupted is resumed.

Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.—Those who grounded everything on knowledge are reminded parenthetically that knowledge by itself may have a bad effect. They are also reminded (1 Corinthians 8:2–3) that there is an element in the awareness of our knowledge that destroys the truth and purity of that knowledge itself. Knowledge puffs up the individual.

Love builds up the whole Church. The word “edify” now has only a moral significance; originally, it could be applied to moral conduct only figuratively.

The noun “edifice” has retained its original literal meaning. In Spenser, “edify” is used in its literal sense, and in Hakluyt’s Travels (1553), the “edification” of the castle of Corfu is mentioned. The use St. Paul made of this figure is of some importance.

This word is used chiefly by St. Paul; it is found once also in St. Luke’s writings (Acts 9:31). The idea it conveys is not so much the improvement of the individual as the building up of the whole Christian structure. We have come to speak of an “edifying discourse” if it helps the individual; St. Paul would have spoken of an “edifying work” if it built up the Church. “We are sometimes too apt to treat Christianity as if it were monolithic” (Howson). (See 1 Corinthians 12:19; 1 Corinthians 14:3; 1 Corinthians 14:5; 1 Corinthians 14:12; 1 Corinthians 14:17; Ephesians 4:12–16; 1 Thessalonians 5:11).

It is worth noting that the word used in the original text in Hebrews 3:3–4 and Hebrews 9:11 is quite different from the word St. Paul employed here and elsewhere.

If any man thinks that he knows anything . . . .—There must be a moral as well as a merely intellectual element in knowledge if it is to be true knowledge. Without love to guide us in its use it is not an operative knowledge, and so does not fulfill the true end of knowledge.

It has been suggested (Stanley in loc) that “not yet” has here the force of “not in the infirmities of their mortal state;” but such an interpretation introduces altogether a new element of thought, to which there is no antithetical explanation in what follows.

If any man love God.—This explains the nature of the love which edifies. Love to God, and therefore love to man, builds up the whole Christian communion.

The man gets outside the mere selfish thought of his own indulgence in his liberty.

There is the underlying thought in these words (the same is known of Him) of the identity between knowing God and being known by Him. The latter is the source of the former. Like water rising to its own level, the love and the knowledge rise as high as their source.

As concerning therefore the eating of those things. See 1 Corinthians 8:1. The subject is resumed after the parenthesis. We have, perhaps, in this repetition of the words a characteristic of a letter written by another from the author’s dictation, as was the case with this and other epistles.

An idol is nothing in the world.: It is nothing in itself but a piece of wood or metal, and it really represents nothing, for we know that there is no God but one. The word “other” was inserted in later manuscripts, probably from a recollection of the words of the first commandment.

For though there be. . . .—This is a hypothetical argument. 'Be' is the emphatic word of the supposition. Even assuming that those beings that are called 'gods' exist (we have a right to make such a supposition, for Deuteronomy 10:17 and Psalms 105:2-3 speak of 'gods and lords' of another kind), the difference between the heathen 'gods many' and the 'lords and gods' of whom the Old Testament speaks, is that the former are deities, while the latter is only a casual way of speaking of angels and other spiritual subjects and servants of the one God. This is brought out in the following verse.