Jesus was sinned against by bad examples

JESUS WAS SINED AGAINST BY BAD EXAMPLES
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
1 Corinthians8:12 12Whenyou sin againstthem in
this way and wound their weak conscience,you sin
againstChrist.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
"sin Against Christ."
1 Corinthians 8:12
J.R. Thomson
It is a proof of the personaland intimate characterof the relation between
Christ and his people, as that relation was conceivedin the primitive
Churches, that it should be the very climax of reproach againstany professed
Christians because ofany course ofaction they followed, to charge them with
sin againstChrist, It is surely obvious that language like this could not be used
of any merely human teacheror leader. One who was on the one hand so
closelyunited to the Divine Father and on the other hand so truly a Son of
man, as Jesus, Immanuel, could alone be spokenof thus. It was not possible to
go further in expostulation than by the use of such language as this, addressed
to those who consideredtoo little the conscienceofa weak brother, "Ye sin
againstChrist." To actwithout due sympathy, consideration, and charity
towards a brother Christian is to sin againstChrist, because it is -

I. TO OFFEND AGAINST CHRIST'S COMMANDMENT. OurLord's great
commandment, his new commandment, his oft repeatedcommandment, was a
commandment to his disciples to love one another. He even went so far as to
make obedience to this law of charity a test and note of discipleship: "By this
shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." A
disregardfor the feelings, the conscience,the spiritual health, of a Christian
brother was an evident cud flagrant violation of the Lord's greatprecept, and
was therefore "sin againstChrist."
II. TO CONTRADICTCHRIST'S EXAMPLE. Our Lord did not enjoin a
spirit or conductwhich he did not exemplify in his own life. Whoeverreads
the recordof that life must observe that his spirit in dealing with his disciples
was one of forbearance, consideration, pity, and benevolence. He washedhis
disciples'feet; he bore with their infirmities and their slownessto understand
him; he pitied and instructed their ignorance;he overlookedand forgave their
cowardice anddesertion; in a word, he laid himself out in every way for their
spiritual good. How then could any Corinthian, how can any other professing
Christian, be a followerof the blessedLord, if he display an inconsiderate,
contemptuous, unforgiving spirit towards a brother in Christ? In so doing he
sins againstthe Master.
III. TO INJURE CHRIST IN THE PERSON OF ONE OF HIS LITTLE
ONES. Jesus laiddown this principle with great clearnesswhenhe identified
himself with his own, assuring us that what was done - goodor ill - to his little
ones he should, in the judgment, regardas done unto himself. The Head is
insulted when the member is injured; the King is aggrievedwhenhis subject
is attacked;the Shepherd is smitten when his sheepare scattered. Whosoever
is indifferent to the welfare of the Lord's servant sins againstthat Lord
himself, and shall not be held guiltless. Christ expects all his people to actas if
he were present in the person of every one whom he loves and for whom he
died. - T.

Biblical Illustrator
And through thy knowledge shallthe weak brother perish, for whom Christ
died?
1 Corinthians 8:11-13
Suffering, the measure of worth
H. W. Beecher.
I. THE "WEAK BROTHER" IS NOT OF MUCH VALUE IN HIMSELF;
BUT HE IS MADE VALUABLE BY THE FACT THAT CHRIST DIED FOR
HIM.
1. How much of themselves men will give for one another, measures the worth
in which that other is held. "I love you," may mean only "you are my
plaything," or "I love myself"; but true love will give up for another's sake
time and convenience. It will employ all the resources ofits being for the sake
of that friend. And when, in some greatexigency, all this will not avail, then
love, in the glory of its power, goes to death as to the consummation of itself,
and leaves a witness to itself which all mankind recognises(John15:13).
2. Even when this is the fruit of instinct, it is impressive. The bear that dies
defending its cubs, the hound that pines and dies on its master's grave, the
little sparrow that fights the hawk and owl, not for itself, but its nest — one
must be heartless indeed to feel no admiration for these fidelities of love.
3. But how much more when one's love and suffering spring from a
perception of excellence in an object loved? The greaterthe nature that
suffers, the higher is the estimate which his example gives of that for which he
suffers. And by this analogue, the suffering and sacrifice ofa Divine Being
carries out the witness to its utmost conceivable extent.

4. We see at once a new element in the hands of the apostles afterthis
testimony of the Master. No soonerwas He gone up than they began to preach
that man was valuable on accountof what Christ suffered for him. A man for
whom Christ died became a very different creature from a man before Christ
had died for him. The fact that Christ died for a man made him worth
protecting if he was weak.
5. This suffering was not founded upon man's character. It would be a
testimony to the value of goodcharacterif Christ had come to die for it; but
that was the very point of conflict betweenHim and the Pharisees. Theyheld
that Christ ought to suffer and identify Himself with them; but He most
scornfully rejectedthat, and said, "I came not to callthe righteous, but
sinners. I came to give My life for the lowestand worstmen." He more
sharply than any other discriminated betweengood and bad character;yet
there was something behind characterto which Christ was bearing witness,
viz., the abstractoriginal value which inheres in human life. The death of
Christ is a testimony to the value of man in his very substance, if I may so say;
so that the leastand the lowesthave the essenceofvalue in them.
II. THE EFFECT WHICHTHIS FACT HAS OF DETERMINING MAN'S
PLACE, HIS RIGHTS, AND HIS WORTH.
1. Considerwhat the world's way of estimationhas been in judging men.
Earliest, men measured physical power. Now the habit of societyis to classify
men into relative ranks of value by the effects which they are able to produce;
by what they are worth to society. Therefore,whena greatman dies men say,
"The world has met with a greatloss." If a poor man dies, men say, "The
world has one less incumbrance." The dog that hunts wellis better than a
pauper that does not do anything, in the estimation of men. If a race are not
able to hold their own againstaggressive peoplesmen say, "There is no help

for it; they must go." Theyjudge men by the standard of political economy.
There is no such contempt on the globe for anything as man has for man. We
need therefore to go back to this testimony of our Master's example, who
came by His suffering and death to bear a testimony of that element in human
nature which every man has like every other.
2. This view interprets the future. A man in the lowestcondition here is not
the man that he is to be; and when you have measured and weighedhim, you
have not estimatedwhat he is worth in the kingdom to come. He has before
him another world; and we are told most solemnly by our Saviour that the
men who are the most regardedhere will be worth the leastthere. "The first
shall be last, the last first." Many of the plants of our northern summer come
up quickly, and do exceedinglywell; but they are coarse and rank at that. And
there are many seeds that I plant by the side of them every spring, which in
the first summer only grow a few leaves high. There is not sun enough to
make them do what it is in them to do. But if I put them in some shelteredhot-
house, and give them the continuous growth of autumn and winter, and then,
the next summer, put them out once more, they gather strength by this second
planting, and lift up their arms and spread out the abundance of their
blossoms. The plants that grew quickestthe year before, are now called weeds
by their side. And I doubt not that there is many a man who rushes up to a
rank growth in the soilof this world, and of whom men seeing him, say, "That
is a greatman," but there are many poor, feeble creatures in this world who
will be carried safelyon and up, and rooted in a better clime; and then, lifting
up their whole nature, they will come out into that glorious summer of fervent
love in heaven, where they will be more majestic, more fruitful, than those
who so far surpass them here.
III. THE EFFECTSWHICH THIS DOCTRINE WILL HAVE UPON OUR
FEELINGS AND CONDUCT TO OUR FELLOW-MEN.

1. Let us suppose that we are in full possessionofthe Christian feeling —
Christ died for that man. It will be a powerful restraint upon lawless liberty,
and will bring us into such sympathy with all our fellow men, that, at the
sacrifice ofour own convenience and rights, it will be a privilege and a
pleasure for us to serve them. Some men go through life, saying, "I will take
care of myself, and you must take care of yourself";and they feel that they
have a right to go through life thus. Now no one who has drunk deeply of the
spirit of the Masterwill refuse to acceptthe injunction, "We that are strong
ought to bear the infirmities of the weak."It is as if a strong swimmer should
turn back and lend a helping hand to buoy up and lift across the flood one
that was weakeror less able to swim than himself. We have no right to
disregard, much less to hinder, the welfare of any human being. Have I a right
to go tramp, tramp, tramp, according to the law of my physical strength,
among little children? If I have had better privileges than others, and have
come to conclusions which they cannotunderstand, have I a right to scatter
scepticalnotions through society? A man is bound to hold his knowledge, his
conscience, his pleasures, &c., subjectto this great law:"Christ died for men,
and I must live for men, and restrain my power, and forego my rights, even
for their sake."We have a right to employ men, of course;but there is a habit
which prevails in societyofthinking that a man has a right to just so much of
his fellow-menas he is able to extract from them. A man may fleece a hundred
men during the week, and take the communion on Sunday, and nobody thinks
that there is any violation of good-fellowshipor of orthodoxy. But that great
law of fellowship which knits every man to every other man on the globe says
not only "Thouart his brother," but, "Thou art responsible for his wealas
well as thine own. Thou shalt not in any wise harm him."
2. This is one of the most precious of doctrines to those that look and long for
a better period of the world. It was almostthe only thing we could urge when
slavery rent our land. The single strand that held againstthe storms of avarice
and the fire of lurid lusts was the single argument, "Forthese Christ died."
And that held; and the most wonderful change towardregenerationthat the
world ever saw has takenplace by the simple operationof that greatlaw. And
what have we now for the weak races? Menofa hard heart and an iron-shod

foot are preparing to tread these people down and deny them their rights.
And I take my stand by the side of every weak creature, whateverhis
nationality may be, and I say, "Forhim Christ died." Give men at the bottom
a chance to come up. God, the highest, boweddown His head and came upon
the earth and suffered for the weakestandthe worst.
3. Christian brethren, we must arm ourselves betimes. The seeds ofa better
public sentiment must be sown. Then let no man be discouragedbecause he is
labouring with a very much neglectedclass. There is no material in this world
which is un-promising. No man is beyond salvationsince "Christdied" for
him.
(H. W. Beecher.)
But when ye sin so againstthe brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye
sin againstChrist.
Sin againstChrist
Prof. J. R. Thomson.
It is a proof of the intimate characterof the relationbetweenChrist and His
people that it should be the very climax of reproachagainstChristians
because ofany course they followed, to charge them with sin againstChrist.
Language like this could be used of no merely human teacherand leader. To
act without due charity is a sin againstChrist because it is —
I. TO OFFEND AGAINST CHRIST'S COMMANDMENT, viz., to love one
another. This was to be the test of Christian discipleship.
II. TO CONTRADICTCHRIST'S EXAMPLE. What Christ enjoined He
exemplified in His whole life, and at last in His death.

III. TO INJURE CHRIST IN THE PERSON OF ONE OF HIS LITTLE
ONES. Christ so identified Himself with His disciples as to regardwhat was
done to them as done to Himself. Whosoeveris indifferent to the welfare of the
Lord's servants, sins againstthe Lord Himself, and shall not be held guiltless.
(Prof. J. R. Thomson.)
Wounding a weak conscience
R. South, D. D.
I. WHAT A WEAK CONSCIENCE IS.
1. Such a conscienceis improperly calledtender; for tenderness imports
quickness and exactness ofsense, whichis the perfectionof this faculty, whose
duty it is to be a spiritual watchto give us warning of whatsoeverconcerns us.
It is opposedto a hard or searedconscience;but a weak conscienceis opposed
to a strong, which very strength consists in the tenderness or quickness ofits
discerning power.
2. The weaknessofconsciencehere spokenof is opposedto faith (Romans
14:2), by which is not meant that actby which a man is justified, but signifies
the same with knowledge (vers. 7, 10). The cleardiscernment of what is
unlawful, and what is only indifferent, togetherwith a firm persuasionof the
lawful use of such indifferent things, all circumstances being duly observedin
the using of them. And therefore, on the other side, the weak conscienceis
such a one as judges otherwise ofthe nature of things than indeed it is,
supposing that to be unlawful in itself which really is not so.

3. From whence it follows that weaknessofconscienceimplies —(1) An
ignorance of the lawfulness of some certain thing or action. That ignorance
must be such a one as is not willing.(a) Because itmust be such a one as
renders it in some degree excusable;but so far as any defectis resolved into
the will, it is in that degree inexcusable.(b)Because itmust be such an
ignorance as renders the person having it the object of compassion.Butno
man pities another for any evil lying upon him, which he would not help, but
which he could not. And consequently it must be resolvedinto the natural
weakness ofthe understanding faculty, or else the want of opportunities or
means of knowledge.Either of which makes ignorance necessary, as it is
impossible for him to see who wants eyes, and equally impossible for him who
wants light.(2) A suspicionof the unlawfulness of any thing or action.(3)A
religious abstinence from the use of that thing of the lawfulness whereofit is
thus ignorant or suspicious. It brings a man to that condition in Colossians
2:21.
II. WHAT IT IS TO WOUND OR SIN AGAINST IT.
1. To afflict or discompose it; i.e., to rob it of its peace. Forthere is that
concernmentfor God's honour dwelling in every truly pious heart which
makes it troubled at the sight of any actionby which it supposes Godto be
dishonoured. And as piety commands us not to offend God, so charity enjoins
us not to grieve our neighbour.
2. To encourage orembolden it to actagainstits present judgment or
persuasion:which is, in other terms, to offend, or casta stumbling-block
before it: i.e., to do something which may administer to it an occasionof
falling or bringing itself under the guilt of sin. So that as the former was a
breach upon the peace, this is properly a wound upon the purity of the
conscience.

3. The consciencemay be induced to actcounter to its presentpersuasion.(1)
By example; which is the case here expresslymentioned, and principally
intended.(2) By command; as when a person in power enjoins the doing
something, of the lawfulness of which a man is not persuaded.
(R. South, D. D.)
Dissuasivesagainstanundue use of Christian liberty
J. Lyth, D. D.
1. A weak conscienceis easilywounded.
2. The infliction of such a wound is a violation of the law of love.
3. It is a sin againstChrist Himself.
(J. Lyth, D. D.)
Wherefore, if meat
The greatargument for abstinence
W. E. Hurndall, M. A.
I. ARGUMENTS FOR ABSTINENCEARE OFTEN GROUNDED ON. —
1. Dangerto ourselves.
(1)We may be led to excess.

(2)We may injure ourselves, physicallyor morally.
2. Wastefulness.
3. Intrinsical wrongness.
II. SUCH ARGUMENTS FREQUENTLYLACK COGENCY.
1. The third will have no application to a large class ofthings indifferent in
themselves, and it is generally in respectof such that the war is waged.
2. The others are open to question. Conflicting facts will be adduced, and
where knowledge is imperfect the contestis likely to continue. And the
argument often acts as a temptation, for when human nature is warned of
peril it often delights to show how brave and steadfastit canbe.
III. THE APOSTOLIC ARGUMENT. St. Paul —
1. Enlarges the view so that others are included as well as ourselves.
Abstinence is sometimes not for ourselves atall, but only for our fellows
(Philippians 2:4). We are units, but united units. We cannot legislate forthat
little area which we ourselves occupy.
2. Recognisesthe influence of example. Our words are a spider's web; our acts
are a cable. Mendo what we show them, not what we tell them. And we
cannot persuade men that we are strong and they weak.

3. Asserts the obligation of self-sacrificefor the welfare of others. That which
is "indifferent" becomes anything but that if our indulgence is injurious to
others. Our sacrifice is small indeed compared with their possible loss. This
argument has specialforce for Christians.(1)They have the example of self-
sacrifice in their Master(ver. 12). They have a more impressive view of the
issues involved in the fall of a fellow-creature.(2)Theirnon-abstinence may be
a sin againsta fellow-Christian (ver. 11). The fall may be, not of an
unbeliever, but of a brother associatedin Christian fellowship and service,
and thus be —(3) A sin againstthe brethren (ver. 12), i.e., the Church,
bringing scandaland disgrace through a brother's fall. And also —(4) A sin
againstChrist (ver. 12). For Christ and Christians are one — He the Head
and they the members.(5) They have in their ears such utterances of their
Master's as Matthew 18:6; Matthew 25:40.
(W. E. Hurndall, M. A.)
Personalsacrifice is
J. Lyth, D. D.
I. NECESSARY.
1. Notonly in meats and drinks, but in many other things.
2. To avoid offence.
II. Is OBLIGATORY—
1. On Christians.

2. By the law of love, and —
3. The example of Christ.
III. Is MAGNANIMOUS. It is —
1. A conquestof self.
2. An act of benevolence.
3. A feature of renewednature.
IV. WILL BE ABUNDANTLY COMPENSATED.
1. By the approval of conscience.
2. The benefit of others.
3. The approbation of God.
4. Final reward.

(J. Lyth, D. D.)
Abstaining for the goodof others
C. H. Spurgeon.
Do you not think, dear friends, that though it may be quite proper for you to
take a glass ofwine or a glass ofbeer, and there is no sin in the thing at all,
your example may be injurious to somebodyto whom it would be a sin to take
it? Perhaps some persons cannot take a glass without taking two, three, four,
five, or six glasses. Youcan stop, you know; but if your example leads them to
start, and they cannot stop, is it right to setthem going? Thoughyou have a
clearhead, and canstand in a dangerous place, I would not recommend you
to go there if somebodyelse would thus be placedin danger. If I were walking
by the cliffs of Dover, and I happened to have a very fine coolhead, yet, if I
had my sons with me, and I knew that they had ordinary kinds of heads, I
should not like to go and stand just on a jutting piece of crag so as to induce
them to try the same position. No; I should feel, "ThoughI can stand here,
you cannot; and if I stand here, perhaps you will attempt it, and fall, and I
shall be guilty of your blood." Let us treat men as we would treat our sons;
and let us be weak to their weakness, anddeny ourselves for their sakes.Is not
that goodand proper reasoning? It seems to me that it is. If it is not good
reasoning, it is safe. I never have askedGodto forgive me for my sin in going
without strong drink. I have never seenany commandment in Scripture
showing that I am bound to take it. I feelfree to do as I like about abstaining;
but especiallyfree when for the goodof others I prefer to abstain altogether.
(C. H. Spurgeon.)
Christian considerationfor others
J. B. Gough.
Now you may sayto me if you please as a man, "Mr. Gough, I am a moderate
drinker; I use these things in moderation, and therefore I set you a good

example." I say at once, "Sir, you do not." "Well, if I drink one glass and
there stop, is not that an example for others?" "No, sir; no, sir; no more than
if there was a bridge built overa gulf, to fall into which was utter ruin, and
that bridge will bear 150 lbs., and you weigh1501bs., andyou say to that
young man (and he weighs 200 lbs.), 'Follow my example.' — 'I don't like the
look of that bridge.' 'Don't be a fool, I have walkedit forty years; proved it
perfectly safe;never crackedwith me; never sprung with me; perfectly safe.'
— 'But I don't like it.' 'Don't be foolish; you can do that which I cando; now I
am setting you a goodexample; follow me step by step.' That young man
attempts to follow it; he sets his footon the centre; crash! crash!down he
goes, with a shriek, into destruction. Now, did you set a goodexample? No,
because you didn't take into considerationthe difference of weight." Before
you cansay to a young man, "I setyou a goodexample," you must take into
considerationthe difference betweenhis temperament and yours, his
susceptibility and yours.
(J. B. Gough.).
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(12) When ye sin so.—Whenyou sin in this way—andhe explains further
what the sin is: “Striking a blow upon their weak consciences”—yousin
againstChrist. You wound a member of that body which is His. (See Matthew
25:40.)
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
8:7-13 Eating one kind of food, and abstaining from another, have nothing in
them to recommend a person to God. But the apostle cautions againstputting

a stumbling-block in the way of the weak;lest they be made bold to eatwhat
was offeredto the idol, not as common food, but as a sacrifice, and thereby be
guilty of idolatry. He who has the Spirit of Christ in him, will love those whom
Christ loved so as to die for them. Injuries done to Christians, are done to
Christ; but most of all, the entangling them in guilt: wounding their
consciences, is wounding him. We should be very tender of doing any thing
that may occasionstumbling to others, though it may be innocent in itself.
And if we must not endanger other men's souls, how much should we take
care not to destroy our own! Let Christians beware of approaching the brink
of evil, or the appearance of it, though many do this in public matters, for
which perhaps they plead plausibly. Men cannotthus sin againsttheir
brethren, without offending Christ, and endangering their own souls.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
But when ye sin so againstthe brethren - This is designedfurther to show the
evil of causing others to sin; and hence, the evil which might arise from
partaking of the meat offered to idols. The word sin here is to be takenin the
sense of"injuring, offending, leading into sin." You violate the law which
requires you to love your brethren, and to seek their welfare, and thus you sin
againstthem. Sin is properly againstGod; but there may be a course of injury
pursued againstpeople, or doing them injustice or wrong, and this is sin
againstthem. Christians are bound to do right toward all.
And wound their weak conscience -The word "wound" here (τύπτοντες
tuptontes, "smiting, beating")is taken in the sense ofinjure. Their
consciencesare ill-informed. They have not the knowledge whichyou have.
And by your conduct they are led further into error, and believe that the idol
is something, and is to be honored. They are thus led into sin, and their
conscienceis more and more perverted, and oppressedmore and more with a
sense ofguilt.
Ye sin againstChrist - Because:

(1) Christ has commanded you to love them, and seek their good, and not to
lead them into sin, and,
(2) Because theyare so intimately united to Christ (see the notes at John 15:1
ff) that to offend them is to offend him; to injure the members is to injure the
head; to destroytheir souls is to pain his heart and to injure his cause;see the
note at Matthew 10:40; compare Luke 10:16.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
12. wound their weak conscience—literally, "smite their conscience,being (as
yet) in a weak state." Itaggravatesthe cruelty of the act that it is committed
on the weak, just as if one were to strike an invalid.
againstChrist—on accountof the sympathy betweenChrist and His members
(Mt 25:40;Ac 9:4, 5).
Matthew Poole's Commentary
But when ye sin so againstthe brethren: sin is properly againstGod, for it is a
breach of the Divine law; but the violations of that part of the Divine law
which concernethour duty to our neighbour, are calledsins againstour
brethren, that is, sins againstGod in matters which concernour duty towards
our brethren.
And wound their weak conscience;the giving the weak judgments of others,
by your examples, an occasionofsin, by venturing upon actions which they
think sinful, is that which is here calleda beating, or a wounding, their weak
consciences, becauseit is indeed a hurting and defiling of them.

Ye sin againstChrist; this the apostle determineth to be a sinning against
Christ; both againstthe law of Christ, concerning loving one another, and
againstthe love of Christ, who, in dying for the weakestbelievers, hath
showedthe highest degree of love imaginable to them; whom they are far
from following, who will not abate themselves a small matter of liberty, where
the use of it this or that way may very probably be an occasionofsin and ruin
to their brethren’s souls.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
But when ye sin so againstthe brethren,.... Through sitting at meat in an idol's
temple, and thereby violating the new commandment of love; by which saints
are obligedto love one another as brethren, and take care to do nothing that
may hurt and prejudice one another's peace and comfort, it being an
incumbent duty upon them by love to serve one another: and
wound their weak conscience:as before observed:it is contrary to the law of
love to wound a brother; it is an aggravationof the sin to wound a weak one;
what greatercruelty than to strike or beat, as the word here used signifies, a
sick and infirm man? and greaterstill to strike and wound his consciencethan
any part of his body; for a wounded spirit is insupportable without divine aid
and influence; and what serves most to enhance the crime and guilt is,
ye sin againstChrist, who has so loved this weak brother as to die for him;
and betweenwhom there is so close anunion, as betweenhead and members;
and from whence such a sympathy arises, that what is done to or againstsuch
a person, Christ takes as done to himself. The Syriac version emphatically
adds, "himself".
Geneva Study Bible
{8} But when ye sin so againstthe brethren, and wound their weak conscience,
ye sin againstChrist.

(8) Another amplification: such offending of our weak brethren, results in the
offending of Christ, and therefore do not let these men think that they have to
deal only with their brethren.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
1 Corinthians 8:12. Οὕτω]When ye sin againstthe brethren in this way, as
describedin 1 Corinthians 8:10-11.
καί]and especially.
τύπτοντες]in substance the same thing as μολύνοντες in 1 Corinthians 8:7,
only expressedby a different metaphor, which makes the cruelty of the
procedure more apparent. What befits a weak conscienceis forbearance, not
that it should morally receive blows, should be smitten through offence done
to it as with a wounding weapon(Hom. Il. xix. 125;Herod, iii. 64; Xen. Cyr. v.
4. 5; Proverbs 26:22), so that now, instead of being but a weak, it becomes a
bad conscience.
αὐτῶν] put first because correlative to the εἰς Χριστόν which follows;in the
latter is finally concentratedthe whole heinousness of the offence.
Expositor's Greek Testament
1 Corinthians 8:12. In such case, notonly the weak brother sins by yielding,
but the strong who tempted him; and the latter sins directly “againstChrist”
(for the construction, cf. 1 Corinthians 6:18): “But sinning in this way against
the brethren, and inflicting a blow on their consciencewhile it is weak, you sin
againstChrist”.—τὴνσυνείδησιν ἀσθενοῦσαν, not “their weak conscience”
(τὴν ἀσθεν.), but “their conscienceweak as it is”:how base to strike the

weak!—τύπτω describes as the violent wrong of the injurer, what is a
μόλυσμα. and πρόσκομμα (1 Corinthians 8:7; 1 Corinthians 8:9) in its effect
upon the injured. A blow on the conscienceshocksandderanges it.—Forthe
bearing of such an acton Christ, see Matthew 18:6 ff; Matthew 25:40;
Matthew 25:45; also Zechariah2:8, etc. The principle of union with Christ,
which forbids sin againstoneself(1 Corinthians 6:15), forbids sin against
one’s brother.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
12. ye sin againstChrist] Cf. St Matthew 25:40;Matthew 25:45. Forthe
reasonof this compare St John 17 throughout, as also such passages as
Romans 12:5; Ephesians 1:23; Ephesians 3:17; Ephesians 4:15-16;Colossians
2:19; and ch. 1 Corinthians 10:17, 1 Corinthians 12:17 of this Epistle, where
the indwelling of Christ in the individual believer is taught.
Bengel's Gnomen
1 Corinthians 8:12. Τύπτοντες, striking)[Engl. V. not so well, wounding], as
the wearycattle are urged on by the lash. Striking is elegantlyused, not
wounding, for a wound is seen, a stroke is not so discernible. You strike
brethren, or make them strike themselves.—εἰς Χριστὸν, againstChrist) to
whom the brethren are united. The expression, againstChrist, in the latter
clause bears the chief emphasis; when ye sin, in the former.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 12. - And wound their weak conscience;rather, and in smiting their
conseiencewhichis weak. "What," asksSt. Chrysostom, "canbe more
ruthless than a man who strikes one who is sick?" Was it not a cowardly
exercise ofliberty to strike the conscienceofthe defenceless? It is another
form of "defiling" (ver. 7) the conscience, but brings out the cruelty of such
conduct. Ye sin againstChrist. BecauseChristlives and suffers in the persons
of the leastof his little ones (Matthew 25:40, 45;Romans 12:5, etc.).

PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
JACK ARNOLD
Abuse of Liberty Will Spiritually DestroyA WeakerBrother8:10-11
For if anyone with a weak conscience seesyou who have this knowledge eating
in an idol's temple, won’t he be emboldened to eatwhat has been sacrificedto
idols? So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your
knowledge. Whena weak brother sees a strong brother eating a delicious T-
bone steak in the temple restaurant, it will strengthen, encourage orinfluence
his to try it for himself, even though his conscience says it is wrong for him. In
trying this questionable practice, the weakerbrother may go back into his old
idolatrous habits, bringing disgrace onhis Christian testimony. Opening his
weak conscienceto eat meat sacrificedto idols, which he saw a strong brother
do, gets the weak brother out of fellowship with Christ because ofpast
associationswith idolatry, so the result is the weak brother gets wiped out
spiritually. The strongerbrother has influenced the weakerbrother to do
something his consciencecould not handle. The obvious result is a spiritual
disasterbecause his weak conscience getshardenedand insensitive to the
danger of the questionable practice which he cannothandle. Misuse of
freedom by the strong may well inflict ruinous damage on the weak by
inducing him to do what he otherwise might not do. Christ died for the weak
brother and Christ loves him as much as he loves the strong brother. If Christ
loved the weakerbrotherenough to die for him, then the strong brother ought
to love him enough so as not to put any stumbling block in his way that might
hinder spiritual growth.
Abuse of Liberty Will Cause the Stranger Brother to Sin Against Christ

When you sin againstyour brothers in this wayand wound their weak
consciences, yousin againstChrist. Every Christian is in spiritual union with
Christ, and any sin done againstthe believer is a direct sin againstChrist.
Whenever the strongerbrother wounds the conscience ofthe weakerbrother
over any questionable practice, the strongerbrother has sinned, not only
againstthe weakerbrother but againstChrist. A warning is given to the
strong brother by the Lord Jesus:“But if anyone causes one ofthese little
ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large
millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea”
(Matt. 18:6).
WILLIAM BARCLAY
We have seenhow it was scarcelypossible to live in any Greek city and not to
come daily up againstthe problem of what to do about eating meat that had
been offered as a sacrifice to idols. There were certain of the Corinthians to
whom the matter was no problem. They held that their superior knowledge
had taught them that the heathen gods simply did not exist, and that therefore
it was possible for a Christian to eat meat that had been offered to idols
without a qualm. In reality Paul has two answers to that. One does not come
until 1 Corinthians 10:20. In that passagePaulmakes it clearthat, although
he quite agreedthat the heathen gods did not exist, he felt certain that the
spirits and the demons did exist and that they were behind the idols and were
using them to seduce men from the worship of the true God.
In the present passagehe uses a much simpler argument. He says that in
Corinth there were men who all their lives, up until now, had really believed
in the heathen gods;and these men, simple souls, could not quite rid
themselves of a lingering belief that an idol really was something, although it
was a false something. Whenever they ate meat offered to idols, they had

qualms of conscience. Theycould not help it; instinctively they felt that it was
wrong. So Paul argues that if you saythat there is absolutely no harm in
eating meat offeredto idols you are really hurting and bewildering the
conscienceof these simple souls. His final argument is that, even if a thing is
harmless for you, when it hurts someone else, itmust be given up, for a
Christian must never do anything which causes his brother to stumble.
In this passagewhichdeals with so remote a thing there are three great
principles which are eternally valid.
(i) What is safe for one man may be quite unsafe for another. It has been said,
and it is blessedlytrue, that God has his own secretstairwayinto every heart;
but it is equally true that the devil has his own secretand subtle stairwayinto
every heart. We may be strong enough to resist some temptation, but it may
well be that someone else is not. Something may be no temptation whatever to
us, but it may be a violent temptation to someone else.Therefore, in
considering whether we will or will not do anything, we must think not only of
its effect on us, but of its effecton others as well.
(ii) Nothing ought to be judged solelyfrom the point of view of knowledge;
everything ought to be judged from the point of view of love. The argument of
the advancedCorinthians was that they knew better than to regard an idol as
anything; their knowledge hadtakenthem far past that. There is always a
certain dangerin knowledge.It tends to make a man arrogantand feel
superior and look down unsympathetically on the man who is not as far
advancedas himself. Knowledge which does that is not true knowledge. But
the consciousness ofintellectualsuperiority is a dangerous thing. Our conduct
should always be guided not by the thought of our own superior knowledge,
but by sympathetic and considerate love for our fellow man. And it may well
be that for his sake we must refrain from doing and saying certain otherwise
legitimate things.

(iii) This leads to the greatesttruth of all. No man has any right to indulge in a
pleasure or to demand a liberty which may be the ruination of someone else.
He may have the strength of mind and will to keepthat pleasure in its proper
place;that course of actionmay be safe enoughfor him; but he has not only
himself to think about, he must think of the weakerbrother. An indulgence
which may be the ruin of someone else is not a pleasure but a sin.
-Barclay's Daily Study Bible (NT)
JOSEPHBEET
Verse 11-12
1 Corinthians 8:11-12. Terrible and possible result of this “edification,” given
as a dissuasive;and then expounded.
Perishes:see 1 Corinthians 1:18. A natural tendency, Paul represents as
actualfact. For tendencies are sure to realize themselves sooneror later in
facts. And this gives them their significance.
Through thy knowledge:melancholy result. If the strong man had not known
that idols do not exist at all, the weak brother would not have been overcome
by his example (an example the strongerbecause ofhis well-known
knowledge)and led to eatthat which he believed to be wrong, and thus made
still weakertill he fell from Christ and fell into eternaldeath. Notice the three-
fold darkness ofthis picture; there perishes, a brother, for whom Christ died.

Same argument, Romans 14:15. This argument, 1 Corinthians 8:12 further
expounds.
Thus: as expounded in 1 Corinthians 8:10-11.
Sin against:Matthew 18:21.
The brothers; reproduces the argument lying in “brother,” 1 Corinthians
8:11.
Smiting their conscience:By leading them to do what their conscience
disapproves, we create in them unintentionally a consciousnessofhaving done
wrong; and thus inflict upon them a blow in the inmost and most vital part of
their being.
It being weak:and, therefore, liable to receive injury. A reasonfor caution on
the part of the strong.
Against Christ: for by doing so we frustrate the purpose of His death. Cp.
Matthew 25:45; Matthew 18:5.
WILLIAM BURKITT
Verse 12

The apostle goes onto show, that such an use of our Christian liberty as doth
embolden and encourage others to do that which is evil, is both an act of
uncharitableness towards our brother, and also an actof sin againstour Lord
Jesus Christ, in betraying a soul to ruin as much as in us lieth, and hindering
his salvation, for the saving of whom Christ died; wounding the members of
his body, defeating the greatend of his death, and destroying them whom he
designedto save.
Learn, 1. That Christ, in dying for the weakestbelievers, hathshown the
highest degree of love imaginable unto them.
Learn, 2. That such as will not abate or abridge themselves of their Christian
liberty, when the use of it may probably be an occasionofsin, and the ruin of
their brethren's souls, do at once wound their weak brethren, and sin against
Christ.
CALVIN
Verse 12
12.Whenye sin so againstthe brethren, etc. For if the soul of every one that is
weak is the price of Christ’s blood, that man who, for the sake ofa very small
portion of meat, hurries back againto death the brother who has been
redeemedby Christ, shows how contemptible the blood of Christ is in his
view. Hence contempt of this kind is an open insult to Christ. In what way a
weak consciencemay be wounded has been already explained — when it is
built up in what is evil (1 Corinthians 8:10) so as daringly and rashly to rush
on farther than the individual thinks to be lawful for him.

ADAM CLARKE
Verse 12
But when ye sin so againstthe brethren - Against Christians, who are called
by the Gospelto abhor and detestall such abominations.
Ye sin againstChrist - By sending to perdition, through your bad example, a
soul for whom he shed his blood; and so far defeating the gracious intentions
of his sacrificialdeath. This is a farther intimation, that a person for whom
Christ died may perish; and this is the drift of the apostle's argument.
Dr. Thomas Constable
Verse 12
We are not free to damage another person"s relationshipwith God. We sin
againstGod and that person when we put an occasionforstumbling before
him or her. This is the very opposite of what God has calledus to do, namely,
love God and other people (cf. Matthew 22:37-39). The ultimate wrong of the
person who lives only by his knowledge is not just that he lacks true
knowledge orthat he causes a brother to stumble. It is that he sins against
Christ.
CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE

Dr. W. A. Criswell
1 Corinthians 8:1-13
10-9-55 10:50 a.m.
In our preaching through the Word, we have come to the eighth chapter of the
first Corinthian letter, and if you will open it before you, you canlook at the
messagewrit large on the face of the Word of God – the first Corinthian
letter. And last Sunday, we closedwith the seventh chapter, and today, the
messageis the eighth chapter of the first Corinthian letter. Now, this is the
reading from the Book:
Now as touching things offered unto idols: We know that we all have
knowledge. Knowledgepuffeth up, but charity edifieth.
And if any man think that he knowethanything, he knowethnothing yet as he
ought to know.

But if any man love God, the same is knownof him.
As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice
unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing . . . that there is none other God
but one.
For though there be that are called gods, whetherin heavenor in earth, (as
there be gods many and lords many)
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in
Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him.
Howbeit, there is not in every man that knowledge;for some, with conscience
of the idol, unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their
conscience, being weak, is defiled.
But meat commendeth not to God; for neither if we eatare we the better,
neither if we eat not are we the worse.
But take heed lestby any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock
to them that are weak.
For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sitat meat in the idol’s temple,
shall not the conscienceofhim which is weak be emboldened to eat those
things which are offered to idols?

And through thy knowledge shallthe weak brother perish, for whom Christ
died?
But when ye sin so againstthe brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye
sin againstChrist.
Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the
world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
[1 Corinthians 8:1-13]
That’s the reading of the Word.
Now, it is very difficult, most difficult, for us who live in the liberty of this
Christian culture – the framework of which has been shaped by Christian
ideals – it is very difficult for us to realize the close connectionbetween
ancient idolatry and ancientdaily life. We’re so far removed from it until an
idol, to us, is just a piece of wood, or it is an image, or it is a statue. It’s just a
likeness ofsomebody’s idea, but it has nothing at all to us. It doesn’tenter at
all into our daily lives.
It was the opposite back yonder in that ancient day. For example, today,
when we divide our week into sevenparts and the seventh part, why, you can
do as you want to with it: you can go to the synagogue, oryou can go to the

church, or you can go fishing, or you cango out to the fair. But you divide
your week into sevenparts, and one part, we pray, could be given to God.
Now, you got that from the Jewishpeople. That’s the Hebrew week. That’s
the shabbath; that’s the seventh. But in that day, back yonder in ancient
times, they didn’t have any seven-dayweek and the life of the nation was filled
with holidays, festivaldays. And all of those festival days were dedicated to
gods, and when you shared in the festival – when you sharedin the holiday –
you sharedin the worship of that god.
Now, today, we got one day out of sevento do what we want to with, but in
that day, I say, that all of their national holidays were religious days; and
when you shared in them, you shared in the religion of that god.
All right, another thing: Back there, societywas organizedinto guilds, into
craftsman’s groups. Were you a stonecutter? Thenyou belongedto that
stonecutting guild. Were you a baker, were you a butcher, were you a
candlestick maker? Whateveryou did, you belongedto a certain guild. Now,
those guilds were religious organizations. Theyhad a patron god, and if you
didn’t belong to the guild, chances are you’d starve to death; but to belong to
the guild was to worship the god.
All right, another thing: when they had their greatgames, their games were
all dedicated to gods. They’d have the famous Olympian Games. Well, all of
those games were patronized and held in honor of the Olympian gods. And
when you go out here to the CottonBowl, you attachno religious significance
to that slaughterout there on the gridiron. It just never occurs to you that
that’s dedicated to any deity. When they bring in the ambulance and they
haul those boys away, why, you don’t have any connectionabout religion at
all. You just wonder at the inanity of people who go out there and bust one

another wide open just for the fun of it. Well, that’s a game to us, but in that
day, in that day, it was a religious exercise, andthe greatOlympian Games,
the Isthmian Games, all the Delphic, all the restof it – it was a means of
worship.
Now, in the first, could I liken a thing in our generationto that? Before the
War – and now it’s coming back – for a man in Japanto be loyally Japanese
was to be a Shintoist. But a Shintoist is a worshiper of a god, and he’s
incarnate there in the emperor.
Or another: Today, right now, when you go to India, you will find those
children that used to be taught English, they’re all being taught Hindustani.
And the national religionof India is Hinduism; and if you are a nationalist, if
you are a loyal Hindu, why you go to the Hindu temples and you worship.
And all the women, I say, put a little dot in the centerof their forehead. They
put their finger there in that coloredmaterial and touch their foreheads there,
and then a rich woman, of course, will have a magnificently contrived dot
right there in the centerof her forehead. And that means that family is
national; they are loyal to India. The religion was identified with the nation
and the daily lives of the people.
All right, one of the things that the people met everywhere in that religion –
false heathen religion – was this thing of meat that had been sacrificedto
idols. There were so many temples in Corinth, and there were so many gods,
and the sacrifices were so profuse until the meat of the animal that was
sacrificedthere at the temple was sold in the marketplace. And when you
went to buy meat, the meat that you bought had doubtless been sacrificedto
some god; and they couldn’t consume it there at the temple, so they sold it in
the shambles.

Now, with regardto that, there were people in the church in Corinth who
were sophists. Theywere intellectuals. The Greek wordfor them are
"Gnostics,"andthe system of their superior learning is called"Gnosticism."
It’s a funny thing how universal that was back yonder, and yet people today
never heard about it.
Well, many of these Gnostics – these intellectualsuperiors – many of them
embracedthe Christian faith there in Corinth, and they belongedto the
Corinthian church. Now, they lookedupon themselves as having been
initiated into the mysteries of life and they were the "knowing ones," andall
the restof the people were illiterate, or ignorant, or they had a not been
initiated into these higher mysteries of Gnosticismsuch as they had.
So when they embracedthe Christian faith, why, they did it intellectually,
without the heart and charity that Paul had in his soulfor those weaker
people who were still deluded and still caughtin the meshes of idolatry. But
these "superior ones," these Gnostics, whythey boastedof their freedom in
the Christian religion from all of these things that bound down other people.
For example, there in the Corinthian church, these superior ones – these
knowing ones, these intellectual ones, these Gnostics – for example, they spoke
often in the assemblies andwere gifted in speaking in tongues [1 Corinthians
14:1-33].
Another thing: their womenthrew off all restraint, and in their dressing, why,
they were not bound down by habits and customs of Jewishpeople or Greek
people or anybody else. And when they came to church, they came with their
heads uncovered which was a thing unheard of in that day and that time [1
Corinthians 11:5-6]. But they were Gnostics. Theywere superior. They were
liberated from all of the habits and customs by which other people were
bound.

They had the doctrine of the immortality of the soul but not of the body, and
that came in a funny, funny wayas it was developed. They came to believe
that the body was the seatof sin, but sin could not touch the soul. And so
whateverthe body did, well that was no matter at all. The soul and the spirit
were untouched by what the body did, and that’s the reasonthe fifth chapter,
when we were preaching through it, why when Paul mentions here this fellow
in the church that was living with his father’s wife [1 Corinthians 5:1], the
next verse says:"And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned" [1
Corinthians 5:2]. Well, isn’t that a funny thing to say? "And you are puffed
up" about this guy living in incest. Well, the reasonwhy they were puffed up
was because they were intellectually superior to all of the judgments of God
upon sin. That was a part of the body and it had nothing to do with the soul,
and they believed in the immortality of the soul but not in the resurrection of
the body. The body was nothing.
Then they had another thing, and that’s the one we come to this morning.
They had another thing: They didn’t believe in gods, and they didn’t believe
in idols, and they didn’t believe that meat sacrificedto idols was in any wise
contaminated. So these intellectually superior ones ate there in the idol
temples [1 Corinthians 8:10]. They bought meat at the shambles without
asking questions about it. They satdown at a banquet and never thought
anything about idols one way or the other, and they lookeddownupon all
other people who so were bothered by those idols and by meat offered to idols.
Well, now when we get into this answerof Paul about that, you’re going to
find him sympathizing with those people, but he also puts a hedge around it.
Now, look at it as he starts: "Now as touching things offered unto idols, we
know . . ." [1 Corinthians 8:1]. Now watch him as he uses that word "know" –
gnōsis:

We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity
edifieth.
And if any man think that he knowethanything, he knoweth nothing yet as he
ought to know.
But if any man love God, the same is knownof Him.
See how many times – there are about seventimes in those three verses he
uses that word "know."
Now, he is drawing a distinction there betweengnōsis and agape – between
knowledge and love. "Knowledge,"Paulsays, without love," knowledge
puffeth up" [1 Corinthians 8:1], and a thing "puffed up" is just inflated by
wind, and the bigger it is, the hollowerand the emptier it is. It’s a sadthing,
but knowledge in itself almostalways leads to unbearable and unacceptable
conceit. Knowledge in itself does not edify. It is love that edifies. It is love
that builds up, but knowledge in itself – Paul avows here – knowledge in itself
does nothing else, for the most part, but to lead to an attitude of superiority.
And the people who have knowledge andaccomplishment without love always
have a tendency to look with cruel disregard upon those around who are not
thus intellectual. They are not thus full of attainments and achievements;they
are not thus full of understanding as they themselves are.

I couldn’t imagine a more perfect illustration of that than the terrible turn of
the culture of Germany. Theyso prided themselves upon their universities.
They so prided themselves upon their advancements in theology, and in
philosophy, and in higher criticism, and in science until they came to look
upon themselves as super men: the Nazi German – the super man; and all
around them were just to be walkedon. All the other people were underneath
their feet. They were the "knowing ones;" they were the Gnostics. Theywere
born to be superior and to rule the world!
And all knowledge, without love, leads to that same self-conceit! At least
that’s what Paul says [1 Corinthians 8:1]. Now, he says, "Love edifieth!" [1
Corinthians 8:1]. Now, he doesn’t mean that way – he doesn’t mean that love
is antagonistic to true knowledge, but what Paul is saying here is that there is
no way, there is no wayto subvert that terrible self-conceitthat arises with
intellectual achievementother than that a man shall love God and love his
brother.
All right, then he starts off answering that question: "Knowledge puffeth up;
it is charity – it is love that edifieth [1 Corinthians 8:1]. Now concerning those
things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols . . ." [1 Corinthians 8:4]. "Those
Gnostics are right," he says. "Those superiorones are right. We know that an
idol is nothing, that there is none other God but one. Thoughthere are lots of
gods and Corinth is filled with their temples, to us there is but one God the
Father, and to us there’s but one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,
and we by Him [1 Corinthians 8:4-6].
"That’s right," says Paul. "These superiorintellectuals are right. There’s not
a thing in the world to an idol and there’s nothing at all to eating meat that is
offered to idols" [1 Corinthians 8:4]. For, he says, "Meatcommendethnot to
God; for neither if we eatare we the better; neither if we eatnot are we the

worse" [1 Corinthians 8:8]. It doesn’t make any difference. "The intellectual
is right," he says. "There’s nota thing in the world to this idol business and
nothing to this sacrifice ofmeat to them. Go ahead and eatit. That’s right."
But Paul says – now listen to him – "But," he says, "there is not in every man
that gnōsis." This is the seventhverse: "There is not in every man that
gnōsis" [1 Corinthians 8:7] – that superior ability, those intellectual
achievements. Theyhaven’t gotthat far. "There is not in every man that
gnōsis. For," says Paul, "there are some with conscienceofthe idol unto this
very hour and when they eatit, to them, it is offered unto an idol." And that
weak man says, "’When you eat meat sacrificedto an idol, you are worshiping
that idol’" [1 Corinthians 8:7]. That’s what he thinks. And this weak man,
when he is led to share in that, his conscienceis hurt. Last part of the seventh
verse:"His conscienceis defiled." His conscienceis contaminated. We have
led him to do something that is againsthis conscienceandin doing that we
have hurt him.
Now, he continues. Listen to him: "Take heedlestby any means this liberty
of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak. If any man see thee
which hast knowledge sitat meat in the idol’s temple . . ." [1 Corinthians 8:9-
10].
Now, overhere in the [tenth] chapter, he mentions that again:
If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and you are disposedto go,
why whatsoeveris satbefore you eat, asking no questions for conscience’sake.

But if any man say unto thee
– while you’re sitting at dinner there –
"This is offered in sacrifice unto idols,"
– it was bought at a marketplace, but it had been sacrificedunto idols –
eat not for his sake that showedit, and for conscience’sake.
All right, the same thing now:
If any man see thee which has knowledge
– this superior gnōsis –

sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the conscienceofhim which is weak
be emboldened to eatthose things which are offered to idols?
And through thy gnōsis
– through thy superiority –
shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
When you so sin againsta brother, and wound his weak conscience, yousin
againstChrist.
Then he has one of the great, noble pronouncements of the Christian faith and
attitude. "Wherefore, if by my eating meat" – sacrificedto an idol – "I hurt
my brother" – if I cause him to stumble – "I will eat no flesh while the world
standeth, lestI make my brother to stumble" [1 Corinthians 8:13].
Well, all of that was a long time ago, and when I speak of the difficulty, to us,
you canalmost smile at it. Think of that: because ananimal – a fine, prize
heifer – had been slain at the idol’s temple and had been dedicated to the
goddess and now we have baked it for our roastand we’re eating it, therefore
we are worshiping the idol – all of that is passedaway. In our country and in

our land and in our culture, we’ve never even seenan idol like that nor a
temple like that. And that difficulty that so perturbed the soul of these who
lived in that day, all of it is passedaway.
But this doesn’t pass away: the divine and inspired wisdom by which Paul
solvedthat difficulty two thousand years ago. And that holy and inspired
wisdom is this: that for the sake ofmy weakerbrother, I will gladly abridge
my Christian liberties. Fortheir sakes,I will gladly do it. "If eating meat
makes my brother to offend, I will eat no meat while the world standeth" [1
Corinthians 8:13]. If it hurts his souland hurts his life, I’ll not share in it. I
will abridge what otherwise I am at liberty to do. I will abridge it for his sake.
I will refrain from it for his sake.
Now, for a moment, may I apply it? You say to me, "Preacher, Ican take it
or I can leave it." And you’re right. That’s what Paul said about these
Gnostics – these "knowing ones," these "superiorones." "That’sright;
you’re right: I cantake it, or I can leave it. Therefore, I will not abridge my
liberties. I can do it and get by with it, and it doesn’thurt me, and it doesn’t
hurt anything I’m doing, and I’m going to live in all of the liberty of my
Christian religion and my Christian faith. I don’t believe I’ll be damned in
hell for that, and I don’t believe I’ll be judged by God for doing that. And I
don’t believe salvationis a matter of that. I can take it, or I canleave it."
And Paul would say, "You’re right. That’s right, but there is also another
principle that comes out of the Christian faith and the Christian religion. You
may be able to, but what about a weakerfellow that by your example and by
your liberty, he is mortally hurt and eternally perishes? Whatabout that?"
Paul says. "Whatabout him?"

At a legislature, they were having a hearing on a liquor bill, and the bishop
appearedbefore the legislative committee; and he spoke eloquently, and he
spoke learnedly, and he spoke conclusively. And when the prelate had done
his address before the assembly gatheredthere, before the legislative
committee on this liquor bill, what he had done, he had spokenso splendidly
and so conclusivelythat when the bishop sat down, there was silence. The
bishop, as you would know, was speaking in favor of moderation – indulgence
but not too much. And he’s right. Why certainly, he’s right! He can take it,
or he canleave it. He can share with his parishioners, and he’s right. That is
liberty. And when he sat down, he had spokenso learnedly and so
conclusivelythat there was silence.
A humble man arose and addressedthe moderator, the chairman of the
committee, and he said to him, "Sir, could I be not saveda word?"
And the humble man began to say:
There was a boy who was caughtin the terrible throes of an evil habit and
finally became alcoholic. Throughthe prayers of his mother and through the
love of his father, the boy was won back to health and won back to life. He
was doing fine again. He was successful. He was going up. He was in the
finest socialgroup. He was one of the up and coming young businessmenof
the city.
And upon a day, he was in a socialgathering and liquor was served. And
while they were there in that gathering and the liquor being served, they came
to that boy, and he refused. "I can’t take it," he said. But they came again.

And the boy lookedaround at that group, and he saw a prelate standing there
with a glass ofliquor in his hand. And looking at the prelate, he said, "That’s
God’s man. That’s the leading God’s man. I will, therefore, at leastbe able to
do what he does."
He took the glass ofliquor, that boy, and he drank it. It was the first time
he’d tastedthat fire since the days when he was won back, and it set in those
terrible chains. And he drank again. And that night, he drank again. And
that night he drank again. And the boy went down, back like he was before,
and that boy died in delirium.
And the old man paused and added, saying, "Thatboy was my boy, and the
prelate with whom he was drinking that night is the right reverend bishop
who has just now addressedyou."
"Wherefore, if meat maketh my brother to offend, I will eat no meat while the
world standeth" [1 Corinthians 8:13]. The number of people in this church
who share in that are legion;the number of businessmenin this town who
share in that are legion, and the number of ministers of the gospelwho share
in that are legion! And in their superiority, they look down upon us and they
say, "We – we cantake it or we can leave it, and we shall enjoy our Christian
liberties!"
That’s right. That’s right, but there’s something else that is righter and that
is this: if what I do makes my brother to offend – my weak brother perishes
for whom Christ died – and if that’s the fruit of my example, I’ll not take to
my lips any cup of death so long as I live lest I make my brother to stumble [1

Corinthians 8:10-13]. Oh, I wish I could apply that principle endlessly,
endlessly!
"Preacher, is there anything wrong with a roulette wheel?"
"Why certainly not."
"In Monte Carlo, in Las Vegas, in old Mexico, I’ve seenthem gather around
that roulette wheel. Anything wrong in that?"
"No, not at all."
"Anything wrong in the horse races?"
"No, not at all."
"Anything wrong in those dice games?"
"Notat all."
"Anything wrong in those gambling cards?"
"Notat all, not at all."

"Well, Preacher, why don’t you have them over there in the recreational
building? Why don’t you have dice tables there? Why don’t you have
roulette wheels there? Why don’t you have gambling cards there? Why don’t
you? Aren’t you superior to all that? Do you think those things are
instruments of damnation in themselves?"
"No, not at all. I would enjoy playing a game at a roulette wheelif I had time
to waste. I would enjoy a dice game. I would enjoy those gambling cards
games. They’re interesting."
"Well, why don’t you have them in your rec building over here?"
"Forone simple reasononly: they are associated, they are associatedwith
Monte Carlo and Las Vegas and the Tivoli; and when people see us do it, that
same thing that may be in itself nothing at all enters the mind and the
conscienceofanother fellow that seeing it here and doing it here may be
tempted to share in the same thing out there. And to him it is associatedwith
gambling and with sin and with iniquity. And for their sakes,we don’t do it.
We don’t do it. Just for them, for their sakes."
I have to quit. The things we do on a Sunday, so innocent, but our example
may pull awaysomebodyfrom God’s house and God’s church and God’s
people. You wouldn’t find me out there at that State Fair on the Lord’s Day
unless you bound me, and tied me, and carried me out there.
"Well, you think it’s a sin to go to a fair on the Lord’s Day?"

"Well, not like that. Every day is a holy day for the Christian, and we’re not
bound by any law. Notat all! We do what we want to. We’re not judged by
the law of Christ [Romans 8:1]. He’s the law for us, and we are free! [Romans
10:4]; We have liberty in Him!" [Galatians 5:1].
"Why aren’t you out there on the Lord’s Day at the fair? Why aren’t you?"
"Because there’s a whole lot of people – and among them lots of children –
that we’re trying to getdown here in Training Union and trying to teachthem
to give one day to God, and trying to getthem to come to the church on
Sunday, and trying to have them share in the evening preaching hour. And
we’re trying to lead them this way, and when I go out there on the Lord’s
Day, it may not hurt me at all – though I think it would – and I may have
liberty to do it, but for their sakes,for their sakes, youwon’t find me out
there: never, never, never!"
And there are ten thousand things that you canshare in, and that you cando,
and that you can justify, and you cansay "it’s all right;" and you are right in
saying it. But there is a greaterand a higher principle that comes out of the
heart of the Christian faith and the Christian message. If I do it, what of the
influence on somebodyelse? Whatof them? What of them? And that by my
influence, they might be led awayfrom God, and awayfrom Christ, and away
from His church.
Our influence: it belongs to God, and what you do affects somebodyelse. You
come down this aisle, take this preacher by the hand, somebody’ll see it.
Somebody will be encouraged. Somebodymay be making a decision.
Somebody may be just wavering betweenthe Lord and againstthe Lord, and
when you take your stand and you’re here and you stand by our sides, he is
encouragedto come.

A man came down the aisle and took me by the hand; down this other aisle
came a boy. While I was talking to this man here, he lookedaround and saw
that boy: "Son, what’re you doing here? What’re you doing here?"
And the little fellow replied, "Dad, I saw you come down there to the front. I
saw you come down there to the front, and I wanted to be with you. I wanted
to come too."
You can’t help that. That’s the way God put us together. If we were isolated
and lived on some sphere apart, what we’d do would [be] just betweenus and
God. But He put us here together, and what we do affects everybody and
everything.
Give it to God – your life, your heart, your soul, your influence – give it to
God. Give it to Godwhile we sing our song, while we make this appeal. In the
balcony, from side to side, somebody you, somebody you, while we make the
appeal, while we sing the song, down here into the fellowshipof this church:
"Pastor, here I am, and here I come. As the Lord shall help me and as God
shall be with me, I’m dedicating my life, and all that I have I’m giving it to
Thee."
Come and take me by the hand: "Preacher, todayI’m giving my life in trust
to the Lord Jesus, and here I am and here I come. Here’s my boy. This day
he’s trusting the Lord as his Savior," or "Here’s my whole family. Here’s my
whole family. Here we come, and we’re putting our lives here in the church."
While we make appeal, while we stand and sing, come and make it now, while
we stand and while we sing.

12. οὕτως δὲ ἁμαρτάνοντες εἰς τοὺς ἀδ. ‘But by sinning againstyour brothers
in such a way as this’: οὕτως is emphatic. This verse confirms the view that εἰς
τ. ἴδ. σῶμα ἁμαρτ. (6:18) must mean ‘sins againsthis ownbody.’
καὶ τύπτοντες. ‘And by inflicting blows upon their consciencein its weakness.’
The καί makes the ἁμαρτάνοντες more definite, by showing the kind of injury.
The force of the presentparticiples should be noted: the wounding is a
continued process,and so also is the weakliness;not ἀσθενῆ, but ἀσθενοῦσαν.
Nowhere else in N.T. is τύπτω used in a metaphoricalsense:elsewhere onlyin
the Synoptists and Acts. But this sense occurs, in LXX (1 Samuel 1:8;
Proverbs 26:22; Daniel11:20). ‘Wounding’ and ‘weakening’are in emphatic
contrast:what requires the tenderesthandling is brutally treated, so that its
sensibility is numbed. The wounding is not the shock which the weak
Christian receives at seeing a fellow-Christianeating idol-meats in an idol-
court, but the inducement to do the like, although he believes it to be wrong.
His conscience is lamed by being crushed. This is the third metaphor used
respecting the weak conscience;it is soiled (v. 7), made to stumble (v. 9),
wounded (v. 12). The order of the words is a climax; ‘inflicting blows, not on
the back, but on the conscience, andon the consciencewhenit is in a weakly
state.’
εἰς Χριστὸν ἁμ. Like οὕτως and τύπτοντες, εἰς Χρ. is emphatic by position: ‘it
is againstChrist that ye are sinning.’ St Paul may have known the parable of
the Sheepand the Goats (Matthew 25:40, Matthew 25:45), but Christ Himself
had taught him that an injury to the brethren was an injury to Himself (Acts
9:4, Acts 9:5).
ICC New TestamentCommentary

BOB DEFFINBAUGH
The GreatDivorce—Separating “Truth From Love” (1 Cor. 8:1-13)
Introduction
Years ago, there was a televisionprogram which gave contestants the chance
to identify an object. The hitch was that these objects were not seenfrom a
normal perspective, but from a microscopic orvery close up view. It could be
a sponge or a floweror something else, but because it was so close up, it was
very difficult to identify. I had great difficulty “seeing”our text for the same
reason:I was looking at it too closely. To understand 1 Corinthians 8, we need
to back off and seek to understand Paul’s teaching here from a broader
perspective. Severalobservations, made from a distance, should contribute
greatly to our understanding of this text:
(1) Meat offeredto idols is specificallyprohibited for Gentile saints, which
must certainly include the saints at Corinth.
28 “Forit seemedgoodto the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater
burden than these essentials:29 that you abstain from things sacrificedto
idols and from blood and from things strangledand from fornication; if you
keepyourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell” (Acts 15:28-
29).
20 And when they heard it they beganglorifying God; and they said to him,
“You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews ofthose
who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; 21 and they have
been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the
Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to

walk according to the customs. 22 “What, then, is to be done? They will
certainly hear that you have come. 23 “Therefore do this that we tell you. We
have four men who are under a vow; 24 take them and purify yourself along
with them, and pay their expenses in order that they may shave their heads;
and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told
about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law. 25 “But
concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they
should abstainfrom meat sacrificedto idols and from blood and from what is
strangledand from fornication” (Acts 21:20-25).
Some Jews wantedto impose many rules and regulations on the Gentile
converts, but the Jerusalemcouncildetermined that only four requirements
would be made. One of these was a prohibition againsteating meat offered to
idols.94 Eating meat offered to idols is not a Christian liberty.
(2) While Paul initially appears to grant the premise that eating meat offered
to idols is a matter of liberty in chapter 8, this same permissiveness is not
found at the end of Paul’s argument on the subject.
14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; you
judge what I say. 16 Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the
blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of
Christ? 17 Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all
partake of the one bread. 18 Look at the nation Israel; are not those who eat
the sacrificessharers in the altar? 19 What do I mean then? That a thing
sacrificedto idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, but I saythat
the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to
God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons. 21 You cannot
drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannotpartake of the
table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to
jealousy? We are not strongerthan He, are we? (1 Corinthians 10:14-22).

(3) Paul’s approachto correcting errorin 1 Corinthians is to grant his
opponents some slack atthe beginning of his argument, only to show they are
wrong by the time he concludes. This is a most significant point and is the key
to understanding much of this epistle. In chapter 7, verse 1, Paul appears to
agree with the ascetics, who think that sex is wrong: “It is goodfor a man not
to touch a woman.” The asceticsseemto have taken this as a globalprinciple,
so that Christians were abstaining from sexin marriage, were seeking to
abandon their existing marriages, and were instructing those who were single
that they could not marry (see 1 Timothy 4:3). As Paul’s argument in chapter
7 develops, he commands married partners not to ceasesexualrelationships
for any extended period of time, he instructs married couples not to leave
their marriage partners, and he makes it clearthat eligible singles are not
sinning if they choose to marry.
In 1 Corinthians 11-14, Pauldeals with spirituality, spiritual gifts, and the
roles of men and women in the church. Some leap on the fact that Paul
mentions women praying and prophesying as a possibility, as though this
proves that he condones suchpractice. What they ignore is that this reference
to women praying or prophesying with an uncoveredhead is found at the
beginning of Paul’s argument, and not at the conclusion. Bythe time Paul
reaches the end of chapter 14, we know those who possesscertaingifts, or who
are prominent in their public participation in the meeting of the church, may
not be so spiritual. We find that the most verbal and visible gifts are not of the
greatestvalue, but the unseen gifts. Women are not given permissionto lead
and to assume visible and verbal ministries in the church meeting, but are to
remain silent.
What Paul allows to stand initially in his argument, he may eventually prove
to be wrong. This is the case in 1 Corinthians 8-10. In chapter8, he allows
those Corinthians who view themselves as being more spiritual than others to
retain this false notion momentarily. But by the end of chapter 10, those who

think they have the liberty to eatmeat offered to idols are shownup for what
they are. The “weakerbrethren” of chapter 8 seemto be the “stronger
brethren” in chapter 10. Those supposedly“weakerbrethren” who refrained
from eating meat offeredto idols were not only in compliance with the decree
of the JerusalemCouncil, but with the teaching of Paul.
The backgroundof our text may be summarized in this way. The question of
eating meat offeredto idols is not new, but a question which was raised
shortly after Gentiles beganto come to faith in Christ. The apostles and early
church leaders at Jerusalemconsideredthe matter and concluded that Gentile
Christians should not eatmeat offeredto idols, along with avoiding blood,
things strangled, and fornication. A group of Corinthian Christians, thinking
themselves to be wiser than the apostles, developeda reasonedargument that
meats offered to idols could be eaten. They even went so far as to look down
on those who refrained from eating idol-meat. These meat-eaters seemto have
takenpride in their superior knowledge andspirituality. Paul has some things
to say to these strongerbrethren. Using their ownpremises, Paul will show
that they have fallen short of true spirituality.
It is this broader perspective of chapter 8 which resolves some of the apparent
problems in its interpretation and application, and which makes sense of
Paul’s teaching. This text may seriouslyreverse or revise some of our
“convictions” andcause us to look at our liberties in a different light.
The RelationshipBetweenLove and Knowledge
(8:1-3)
1 Now concerning things sacrificedto idols, we know that we all have
knowledge. Knowledge makesarrogant, but love edifies. 2 If anyone supposes
that he knows anything, he has not yet knownas he ought to know;3 but if
anyone loves God, he is known by Him.

Paul sets the stage for his teaching on meats offered to idols in verses 1-3. In
these three verses, addressedto those who prided themselves for their higher
knowledge and who indulged themselves in the name of liberty, Paul lays
down four foundational truths which they need to grasp. If these truths were
understood and applied, the error of these libertines would be recognizedas
such and abandoned.
(1) Christian knowledge is common knowledge, available to all. There was an
ancient heresyknown as gnosticismwhich plagued the early church. Gnostics
prided themselves in possessing knowledgenot knownby all. This secret
knowledge was notfound in Scripture, but outside of biblical revelation, and
it was handed down orally to those “in the know.” Pauldenies that there is
any such knowledge outside ofthe Scriptures and known by the spiritually
elite. He writes, “Now concerning things sacrificedto idols, we know that we
all have knowledge” (1 Corinthians 8:1a). Knowledge is not restricted to the
few but is available to all.
In the Book ofProverbs, error and deceptive knowledge is personifiedby
“MadamFolly.” This woman is symbolized by the prostitute, who appeals not
to the head but to the hormones; she appeals to fleshly pride and sensual
desires. Her appeal is secretand sneaky. She lurks in the dark alleys, and she
whispers her offer of illicit knowledge (Proverbs 7:6-27). Truth and wisdom is
personified in Proverbs by a gracious and intelligent woman, Dame Wisdom.
She publicly proclaims truth to all who will hear and learn, speaking openly in
broad daylight and in the most public place (see Proverbs 8:1-21). True
knowledge is offered to all, while false wisdom is secretlyand seductively
presentedto the naive.
(2) Even true knowledge, whichis wrongly interpreted or applied, can puff up
the pride of the knower, while genuine love places others aheadof selfand

seeks to build them up.95 The “knowledge”whichthese “stronger”
Corinthian brethren possessedwas producing the wrong effect. True love is
not puffed up with pride, and it does not serve self-interest(1 Corinthians
13:4-5). Knowledge is not opposedto love, but is to be closelyassociatedwith
it, as we can see in the Scriptures:
And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge;
and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am
nothing (1 Corinthians 13:2).
But just as you abound in everything, in faith and utterance and knowledge
and in all earnestness andin the love we inspired in you, see that you abound
in this gracious work also (2 Corinthians 8:7).
And to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be
filled up to all the fulness of God (Ephesians 3:19).
But speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him, who
is the head, even Christ (Ephesians 4:15).
And this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in real
knowledge and all discernment (Philippians 1:9).
That their hearts may be encouraged, having been knit togetherin love, and
attaining to all the wealth that comes from the full assuranceof
understanding, resulting in a true knowledge ofGod’s mystery, that is, Christ
Himself (Colossians2:2).

But the goalof our instruction is love from a pure heart and a goodconscience
and a sincere faith (1 Timothy 1:5).
But you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love,
perseverance (2 Timothy 3:10).
Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls for a sincere love
of the brethren, fervently love one another from the heart (1 Peter 1:22).
The elder to the chosenlady and her children, whom I love in truth; and not
only I, but also all who know the truth (2 John 1:1).
Grace, mercy and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus
Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love (2 John 1:3).
(3) Those who suppose themselves to fully know only revealtheir true
ignorance (verse 2). Our knowledge in this life is partial, and even that which
has been revealedby God is never perfectly grasped(see 1 Corinthians 13:8-
13). Those who speak arrogantlyof what they know are ignorant and self-
deceived, often deceiving others as well (Romans 1:28-32;2:17-23;Galatians
1:8; Colossians 2:18;1 Timothy 1:7; 2 Peter2:17-19). In 1 Corinthians, Paul
does not hesitate to tell us when he is speaking the command of the Lord
(7:10; 14:37), and neither does he fail to tell us when he is speaking his
personalopinions or convictions (7:6, 25, 40). Over-confidence is often an
indication of ignorance, while humility is the outgrowth of knowledge.
(4) Christians are not to boastin knowing, but to rejoice in being knownby
God, and this is the result of loving God (verse 3). When Jesus sentHis

disciples out to proclaim the coming of the kingdom of God, they returned,
rejoicing over the mighty works God had accomplishedthrough them. Jesus
gently correctedthem saying, “… do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are
subject to you, but rejoice that your names are recordedin heaven” (Luke
10:20). Here, Paul tells Christians that they should not rejoice in knowing, but
in being knownby God. Salvation surpassesany sheepskin(diploma) we will
ever obtain. Moreover, the way that we are known by Godis not because of
our knowledge,but because ofthe love which God has produced within us for
Himself. Once again, love takes priority overknowledge. Whata humbling
truth Paul has put before these all-knowing, strongersaints. If knowledge was
the most important thing of all, and if they knew more than others, than they
were the spiritual elite. But they have soughtto excelin a categorywhich is
subordinate to love.
Transforming Truth into Error
(8:4-6)
4 Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificedto idols, we know that
there is no such thing as an idol in the world, and that there is no God but one.
5 For even if there are so-calledgods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed
there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet for us there is but one God, the
Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus
Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
It comes as no surprise to hear that false teaching leads to various kinds of
evil. But it is also possible to pervert the truth:
1 What shall we saythen? Are we to continue in sin that grace might
increase? 2 Mayit never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?
(Romans 6:1-2).

For certainpersons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand
marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace ofour
God into licentiousness anddeny our only Masterand Lord, Jesus Christ
(Jude 1:4).
Even Satansought to use the truth in such a way as to tempt our Lord to do
what was evil (Matthew 4:1-11).
In verses 4-6, Paul supplies us with the doctrine—true doctrine—whichthe
“stronger” Corinthians twisted in order to justify eating meat offered to idols.
The doctrine which all Christians “know” is that there is but one God. This is
one of the foundation stones of the Christian faith. It is emphatically laid
down in the early chapters of the Book of Deuteronomy:
6 “‘I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of
the house of slavery. 7 ‘You shall have no other gods before Me. 8 ‘You shall
not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness ofwhat is in heaven above or on
the earth beneath or in the waterunder the earth. 9 ‘You shall not worship
them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the
iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the third and the fourth
generations ofthose who hate Me, 10 but showing lovingkindness to
thousands, to those who love Me and keepMy commandments’”
(Deuteronomy 5:6-10).
4 “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! 5 “And you shall love
the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your
might. 6 “And these words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on
your heart; 7 and you shall teachthem diligently to your sons and shall talk of
them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you
lie down and when you rise up. 8 “And you shall bind them as a signon your

hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. 9 “And you shall write
them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates” (Deuteronomy6:4-9).
There is but one God. He is the Creatorand Sustainer of all things. He is the
One from whom all things come, and for whom all things exist (1 Corinthians
8:6). While there is but one God, He exists in three persons:Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit. Here, Paul speaks onlyof Fatherand Son as the one true God,
but it is clearthat while he distinguishes Fatherand Son, he also considers
them as One. The Fatheris the One from whom all things have come; the Son
is the One through whom all things are, and through whom we exist (verse 6).
Contrary to the objections of the Jewishreligious leaders ofour Lord’s day,
the deity of our Lord was not a contradiction to the existence and worship of
God as the only God.
From this foundational truth concerning God, a truth universally acceptedby
all Christians, the Corinthians sought to build an argument which
rationalized the eating of meats offeredto idols, even though this was
forbidden by the JerusalemCouncil. Heaping inference upon inference, these
“wise” and“spiritual” saints justify their self-indulgence. Paul traces their
reasoning from the truth of God’s exclusive existence as God to the error of
eating meats offeredto idols.
If there is but one God (and all Christians know this to be true), then there are
no other “gods.”Idols are symbols or representations ofthese “no-gods.”
These “no-gods”existonly in the minds of their heathen worshippers, and not
in reality. Thus, since there are no other gods than God, idols really have no
meaning or significance—theyrepresentnothing. Idols are something like
confederate money—theyhave nothing to back them up, so they are
worthless. If idols are nothing, then the foods offered to them are of no
significance either. Meats offeredto gods which don’t exist are thereby
assumedto have no negative or profane contamination by their use in false

worship. If this is so, as some of the Corinthians have reasoned, then meats
offered to idols are certainly free of moral contamination, and thus can be
eatenwithout moral qualms. Those who fail to think on this high level are
obviously weakerChristians, whose scruples are not to be takeninto account.
And if these “weakerChristians” follow the example of their “stronger
brethren,” then they are so much the better for having done so, even though
their consciencesare prickedby eating this meat.
Jeremiahsaid it well: “The heart is more deceitful than all else And is
desperatelysick;Who can understand it? (Jeremiah 17:9). Through twisted
logic and compounded inferences, some Corinthians have turned the truth of
God into a lie. They have made orthodox doctrine the basis for their sin. In
verses 7-13, Paulwill show these “stronger” brethren that they have become
puffed up with knowledge, but they have failed to show love for their
brothers.
Before we move on to these verses, letus pause for one moment to look back
on the truth on which these Corinthians based their practice of eating idol-
meat. The truth that there is but one God is emphatically taught in
Deuteronomy 6 and 8. But God never intended that men should perform the
“greatdivorce” … separating truth from love. The Corinthians error was
basedupon a lack of knowledge,not an abundance of knowledge. The
Corinthians lackedlove, but this love was linked to knowledge anddoctrinal
teaching. Look once more at what God commanded the Israelites:
4 “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! 5 “And you shall love
the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your
might. 6 “And these words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on
your heart; 7 and you shall teachthem diligently to your sons and shall talk of
them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you
lie down and when you rise up. 8 “And you shall bind them as a signon your

hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. 9 “And you shall write
them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates” (Deuteronomy6:4-9).
The truth that God is One, that He is God alone, was taught to the Israelites.
It was truth which they desperatelyneeded to know and to practice by
shunning every form of idolatrous worship and practice. The truths which
God taught the Israelites through Moses were to be on their hearts. In the
Bible, the “heart” is not just the seatof the emotions (the “bowels” are more
closelyidentified with emotions), it includes the mind and the will of the
individual. The Israelites were not only to know of God’s exclusive existence,
they were to love God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength
(Deuteronomy 6:5; Matthew 22:37;Mark 12:30;Luke 10:27). In their love for
God, they were to teachtheir children to do likewise (Deuteronomy6:4-9).
Love and knowledge were notto be divorced; they were to be interwoven. No
one knew and taught this more than the Apostle Paul: “But the goalof our
instruction is love from a pure heart and a goodconscienceanda sincere
faith” (1 Timothy 1:5). The “greatdivorce” which these Corinthians had
brought about by their teaching and practice was the separationof love and
knowledge. Paulhas shown how their “knowledge”has been twistedto excuse
and even encourage sin;now he will show them how their “love” is lacking as
well.
Lacking in Love
(8:7-13)
7 Howevernot all men have this knowledge;but some, being accustomedto
the idol until now, eatfood as if it were sacrificedto an idol; and their
consciencebeing weak is defiled. 8 But food will not commend us to God; we
are neither the worse if we do not eat, nor the better if we do eat. 9 But take
care lest this liberty of yours somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.
10 For if someone seesyou, who have knowledge, dining in an idol’s temple,
will not his conscience, ifhe is weak, be strengthened to eatthings sacrificedto

idols? 11 Forthrough your knowledge he who is weak is ruined, the brother
for whose sakeChristdied. 12 And thus, by sinning againstthe brethren and
wounding their conscience whenit is weak, yousin againstChrist. 13
Therefore, if food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eatmeat again,
that I might not cause my brother to stumble (1 Corinthians 8:7-13).
If the “knowledge”ofsome Corinthians was defective, so was their love.
Having dealt with their “knowledge” in verses 4-6, Paulmoves on to show the
deficiency of their love in verses 7-13. It may be that these Corinthians prided
themselves on their love, as well as their knowledge. Somehow, they were
puffed up with pride over the factthat they continued to embrace and support
a member who was living in an incestualrelationship (chapter 5). Paul will
show that their love no more meets God’s standards than does their
knowledge.
The Corinthians were using their (defective) knowledge to the detriment of
one who appearedto be a weakerbrother. Paul will show them that one who
loved his brother would surrender any right which would be detrimental to
the weakerbrother. For the time being, Paul allows some false assumptions to
stand unchallenged. He allows the idol-meat eaterto think he is more
spiritual, and that the one who has scruples over eating such meat is the
“weakerbrother.” Paul argues, using the theologyand assumptions of the
allegedly“strongerbrother.”
While some saints with superior knowledge seemto have the right to eatidol-
meat, there are others who have not come to this same knowledge.How, then,
does the one with “knowledge”respondto the one without it? Specifically,
what does a man do about eating idol-meat when a “weakerbrother” believes
it is wrong to eatsuch meat? This weakerbrothercannot so easily disassociate
the idol-meat from the idol, or from the heathen worship associatedwith it,
due to his past involvement in such worship. If this brother with his “weaker

conscience”were to eat such meat, he would do so without faith, and thus he
would sin.
Paul now makes a very important point in verse 8. Meatis really a matter of
indifference. Contrary to the thinking of the “strongerbrother,” eating such
meat doesn’t make him more spiritual. Conversely, if one were not to eat such
idol-meat, it would not in any way diminish his standing before God. It is a
sort of “Heads, I win; tails, you lose” proposition. I don’t gainanything by
eating idol-meat, nor do I lose anything by refusing it. Anyone who makes a
big dealof idol-meat has failed to grasp this fact. The writer to the Hebrews
has something similar to say on this matter: “Do not be carriedawayby
varied and strange teachings;for it is goodfor the heart to be strengthened by
grace, notby foods, through which those who were thus occupiedwere not
benefited” (Hebrews 13:9).
While neither eating meat nor abstaining from it changes my spiritual status,
what I do with this meat can have a greatimpact on my brother. If something
is a true liberty, I can partake of it in goodconscience, justas I canabstain
from it in goodconscience, forI am not doing what I believe to be wrong. But
a truly weakerbrother does not have the same liberty. He does not see eating
this meat as a liberty, but as a sin. If he views me as the strongerbrother, then
what I do is an example for him to follow. If I am more spiritual by eating
idol-meat, then my weakerbrother assumes he will be more spiritual for
following my example. But since his conscienceis not clearwith respectto
idol-meat, eating of it will be a sin for him.
When I insist on exercising my liberty, in spite of the fact that others do not
have this liberty, I am encouraging my “weakerbrother” to sin. In verse 10,
Paul employs a very well-knownterm, which is translated “strengthened” in
the NASB (“emboldened,” KJV, NIV, Berkeley;“encouraging,”J. B.
Phillips). The word is seldom used in this negative sense by Paul, but is most

often positively used with the meaning “edified” or “built up.” Eating idol-
meat is reverse edification. It builds up or strengthens others, encouraging
them to sin. True love, Paul has just saidin verse 1 “edifies” (the same root
word). Eating idol meat so as to encourage a weakerbrother to sin is not
walking in love! It is, instead, putting a stumbling block in his path (verse 9).
In verses 11 and 12, Paul shows that eating idol-meat is not only a sin against
a brother, it is a sin againstour Lord. Here is how Paul’s argument plays out
in these verses. Christ died for sinners, to save them from their sin and to
sanctify them. Christ’s work on the cross ofCalvary was to set men free from
their sin, and to present them holy and blameless to the Father. Christ’s work
on the sinner’s behalf was for their edification, for their spiritual birth,
growth, and maturity. When a thoughtless, self-serving saint insists on eating
idol-meat, he knows that his “weakerbrother” will be encouragedto follow
his example. But in so doing, the weakerbrother is not edified; he is causedto
stumble. Insisting on my right to eat idol meat may cause a fellow saint to
stumble, falling into sin, and in causing this, I find myself working at cross
purposes with Christ. I am therefore not only sinning againstmy weaker
brother, I am sinning againstmy Lord. This is a most serious offense indeed.
In verse 13, Paul sets down a principle which establishes the relationship of
love to knowledge and Christian liberties. No liberty should ever be exercised
when it acts contrary to love. No liberty of mine should be a spiritual
detriment or hindrance to my brother in Christ. If I love my brother, I will
gladly forego any liberty which will cause my brother to stumble. If eating
meat (any meat, not just meats offered to idols) would cause a weakerbrother
to stumble, then I should gladly be willing never to eat meat again. No right
should be exercisedwhich is contrary to love, and love always seeksto edify.
Conclusion

Jesus was sinned against by bad examples

Jesus was sinned against by bad examples

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was sinned against by bad examples

Similar to Jesus was sinned against by bad examples (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was sinned against by bad examples