1 Corinthians 8:4

As concerning therefore ... - The parenthesis closes with 1Co 8:3. The apostle now proceeds to the real question in debate, and repeats in this verse the question, and the admission that all had knowledge. The admission that all had knowledge proceeds through 1Co 8:4-6; and in 1Co 8:7 he gives the answer to it. In 1Co 8:4-6 everything is admitted by Paul which they asked in regard to the real extent of their knowledge on this subject; and in 1Co 8:7 he shows that even on the ground of this admission, the conclusion would not follow that it was right to partake of the food offered in sacrifice in the temple of an idol.

The eating of those things ... - Whether it is right to eat them. Here the question is varied somewhat from what it was in 1Co 8:1, but substantially the same inquiry is stated. The question was, whether it was right for Christians to eat the meat of animals that had been slain in sacrifice to idols.

We know - 1Co 8:1. We Corinthians know; and Paul seems fully to admit that they had all the knowledge which they claimed, 1Co 8:7. But his object was to show that even admitting that, it would not follow that it would be right to partake of that meat. It is well to bear in mind that the object of their statement in regard to knowledge was, to show that there could be no impropriety in partaking of the food. This argument the apostle answers in 1Co 8:7.

That an idol is nothing - Is not the true God; is not a proper object of worship. We are not so stupid as to suppose that the block of wood, or the carved image, or the chiseled marble is a real intelligence and is conscious and capable of receiving worship, or benefiting its volaries. We fully admit, and know, that the whole thing is delusive; and there can be no danger that, by partaking of the food offered in sacrifice to them, we should ever be brought to a belief of the stupendous falsehood that they are true objects of worship, or to deny the true God. There is no doubt that the more intelligent pagan had this knowledge; and doubtless nearly all Christians possessed it, though a few who had been educated in the grosser views of paganism might still have regarded the idol with a superstitious reverence, For whatever might have been the knowledge of statesmen and philosophers on the subject, it was still doubtless true that the great mass of the pagan world did regard the dumb idols as the proper objects of worship, and supposed that they were inhabited by invisible spirits - the gods. For purposes of state, and policy, and imposition, the lawgivers and priests of the pagan world were careful to cherish this delusion; see 1Co 8:7.

Is nothing - Is delusive; is imaginary. There may have been a reference here to the name of an idol among the Hebrews. They called idols אלילים 'ĕlı̂yliym (Elilim), or in the singular אליל 'ĕlı̂yl (Elil}, vain, null, nothingworth, nothingness, vanity, weakness, etc.; indicating their vanity and powerlessness; Lev 26:1; 1Ch 16:26; Isa 2:8; Isa 10:10; Isa 19:11, Isa 19:13, Isa 19:20; Isa 31:7; Psa 90:5; Eze 30:13; Hab 2:18; Zec 11:17, etc.

In the world - It is nothing at all; it has no power over the world; no real existence anywhere. There are no such gods as the pagans pretend to worship. There is but one God; and that fact is known to us all. The phrase “in the world” seems to be added by way of emphasis, to show the utter nothingness of idols; to explain in the most emphatic manner the belief that they had no real existence.

And that there is none other God but one - This was a great cardinal truth of religion; see the note at Mar 12:29; compare Deu 6:4-5. To keep this great truth in mind was the grand object of the Jewish economy; and this was so plain, and important, that the Corinthians supposed that it must be admitted by all. Even though they should partake of the meat that was offered in sacrifice to idols, yet they supposed it was not possible that any of them could forget the great cardinal truth that there was but one God.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

1Co_8:4-7

We know that an idol is nothing in the world.

An idol nothing in the world

A singular phenomenon, known as the Spectre of the Brocken, is seen on a certain mountain in Germany. The traveller who at dawn stands on the topmost ridge beholds a colossal shadowy spectre, moving on the summits of the distant hills. But, in fact, it is only his own shadow projected upon the morning mists by the rising sun; and it imitates, of course, every movement of its creator. So heathen nations have mistaken their own image for Deity. Their gods display human frailties and passions and scanty virtues, projected and magnified upon the heavens, just as the small figures on the slide of a magic-lantern are projected, magnified, and illuminated upon a white sheet.

Idolatry

I. Its folly.

1. An idol is a thing of the imagination.

2. For there is but one God.

3. He is incapable of any representation.

II. Its forms. Manifold.

1. Among the heathen.

2. Among professed Christians, as--

(1) Love of the world.

(2) Undue attachment or subservience to the creature.

(3) Forgetfulness of God.

III. Its antidote Consider--

1. His true character.

2. His relation to His people.

3. His revelation in Christ. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

Idolatry

I. In Its General History. Notice--

1. The awful principle in which it originated (Rom_1:28)--aversion to God. But the knowledge of its origin may direct as to the means of its overthrow. Nothing in earth or heaven can effectually overcome it but the power and grace of Christ; not force of arms nor power of reasoning.

2. The degraded objects to which it was outwardly paid (Psa_115:1-18.; Rom_1:1-32.). Surely, then, those who worship them demand our pity, our prayers, and our exertions for their reclamation.

3. The infernal spirit to whom it was really directed (1Co_10:20).

4. The amazing wealth and power by which it has hitherto been upheld. Talk we of the magnificence of some of the churches of Christendom. Think of the temple of Diana at Ephesus. Let rich Christians, who have it in their power to do so much for the propagation of their religion, but who do so little, let them turn to Isa_46:6, and learn a lesson of liberality worthy of a better cause.

II. In that particular view presented in the text. The objector to missionary exertions may possibly be ready to say that if an idol be nothing, there is no need of the efforts, sacrifices, and prayers on which you have been insisting. How slightly he must have considered the matter who does not perceive that this very fact furnishes one of the strongest grounds of appeal on behalf of the unenlightened heathen! If an idol is nothing it follows--

1. That the religious offerings of idolaters have not only been useless, but an abomination.

2. That the very religion of idolaters has promoted the honour and glory of Satan.

3. That the dying prayers of idolaters have been a delusion and a lie. (T. Mortimer, B. D.)

And that there is none other God but one.--

The unity of God

1. What it implies.

2. What are its evidences.

3. What is its bearing upon faith and practice. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The unity of God is demonstrated

1. By reason.

2. By creation and providence.

3. By revelation. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

Unity of God

A little boy being asked, How many gods are there? replied One. How do you know that? Because, said the boy, there is only room for one; for He fills heaven and earth.

Aspects of responsibility

(1Co_8:4-13):--Note--

I. That the moral obligations of all men are determined by their relation to the one God and His son. There are many objects that men call gods, but they are really nothing; they therefore impose no moral obligation.

1. There is One, however, and only One, from your relation to whom there grows up all moral obligations. One God. Monotheism is demonstrated by nature; conscience, and the Bible.

(1) He is a Father. The Creator of the universe, but the Father of spirits.

(2) He is the Source of all things.

(3) He is our end. We in or unto Him. The supreme end of our existence, and object of our love.

2. In connection with Him there is One Lord Jesus Christ, who was not only His creative Agent, by whom are all things, but His redemptive Agent, the Mediator, and we by or through Him. As Christians, we are what we are through Him.

3. Now the wilt of this One God, as coming through Christ to us, we are morally bound to fulfil--an obligation which can never be abrogated or modified.

II. That what might be wrong for one man to do might not be so for another. The apostle teaches that those who felt that an idol was nothing in the world, and that consequently there was no harm to them personally in eating meat offered to it, would commit no wrong in doing so. The meat had not been corrupted by that, and their consciences not being against it, there would be no wrong in eating it (verse 8). On the other hand, those who had a superstitious idea that they ought not to eat it would commit wrong in doing so (verse 7). That which is against a mans conscience may not be against the eternal law of right, but is against his own sense of right, and therefore should be avoided. Here is the principle, Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin. Therefore, let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

III. That to offend the conscience of a good man, however weak, is a wrong in all (verse 9). Respect for the weak consciences of good men.

1. May require self-denial on our part.

2. Is urged on the strongest considerations.

(1) The lack of it may inflict serious injuries on the weak.

(a) It may become a stumbling-block to them that are weak--i.e., an occasion of sin. Their faith may be shaken, and they may become apostates.

(b) They may be emboldened, encouraged to do the wrong. Without your moral strength they will imitate you and will be ruined (verse 10).

(2) The lack of it is a sin both against the weak brethren and against Christ (verse 12).

3. Is exemplified in the sublime resolve of the apostle (verse 13). Here is benevolent expediency, the strongest ground on which the temperance reformation can be wisely and effectively advocated. Give up all rather than ruin souls. Such an utterance as this is characteristic of Paul (Rom_9:3). (D. Thomas, D. D.)

But though there be that are called gods,… to us there is one God, the Father,… and one Lord Jesus Christ.--

Polytheism

1. Its numerous forms.

2. Awful prevalence.

3. Manifest absurdity.

4. Abominable wickedness. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The unity of God

The apostle had been trained in the monotheism which had from the first been the belief of his race, and from which they had now not swerved for centuries. The unity of God--

I. Is contrasted with polytheistic belief and worship.

1. The heathen deities are called, but are not, gods (verse 4).

2. These deities are deemed gods and lords. They were, and still are, in heathen lands thought supernatural, and are invested by the imagination with claims to the homage and service of men.

3. They are many in number, every natural object, &c., having its deity.

4. They have their several ranks and realms. The superior Olympian deities are in heaven; the inferior numina nymphs, fauns, dryads, &c., haunt this earth.

II. Furnishes a centre and aim for the new religious life of men.

1. In Himself He is the one God, the Father. This was a glorious revelation, and in Christ provision is made for its wide promulgation and acceptance.

2. He is the Creator and Upholder of all; Of whom are all things.

3. He is the object of our faith, love, and devotion. We are for, unto Him. It is at this point that the great revelation of the new theology becomes the great motive of the new religion. Polytheism distracted the mind, and made it impossible that faith in God should become the inspiration of a new and better life. For it was a question, What measure of reverence and of service should be offered to this deity, and what to that? But Christianity revealed one God, in whom are all perfections, and who is the Creator, Governor, and Saviour of mankind. They who live to serve this God have an elevating, purifying, powerful aim in the conduct of their life.

III. Furnishes the noblest motive to the new religious life.

1. The one God is made known by the one Lord Jesus Christ, as the Word reveals the utterer, the Son the Father, which conflicts in no sense with monotheism.

2. Christ is the universal Mediator, by whom are all things--the moral as well as the physical creation. All blessings which the Father destines for humanity He has resolved to confer by Christ.

3. We, as Christians, are what we are through Him. As in the former clause we recognised the great aim, so here we see the great means and motive of the new, the distinctively Christian life. The Divine nature and mediation of Immanuel, so far from obscuring our belief in the Divine unity, is the most effectual support of it. Even as Jesus said, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and No man cometh unto the Father but by Me. (Prof. J. R. Thomson.)

The unity of God

The term unity is difficult to define. It may mean merely the numerical basis of calculation; the contrast between one thing and two or more things of the same kind. But if used in the sense of a unit, it is clear that every one thing is made up of many parts, possesses many qualities, stands in various relations, and though in itself only one thing, is also a part of many other things. By unity is often meant more than the antithesis of many. Though the unity of God means that there is one God, in opposition to the claims of lords many and gods many, yet the phrase implies that whatever internal distinctions there may be in the essence of the Most High, that essence is one essence--a whole, a unity in itself. Unity is individuality, in spite of the recognition of the multiplicity of elements of which it is compounded. Thus a crystal of quartz is a unity distinct from all other crystals, and from the hand that holds it. It possesses a multitude of curious properties as long as it remains one thing; but let me break it into a thousand pieces, and it might soon be proved that every fragment possessed in a measure all those properties. Yet those fragments, though many, previously formed one whole. Consider, again, a tree or plant; its root, stem, branches, leaves, flowers, and seed form one whole of mysterious beauty; and though each twig and leaflet is a perfect creation, having an independent life in itself, yet the many parts do not fail to form a unity. Farther, playing in the branches of the tree there is a world of more mysterious life. Every leaf has its colony of insects, every bough its parasitical growth; the bees are humming in its fragrant flowers, and the birds are building their nests in its branches. But each lichen, moss, insect, and bird is as wonderful in its mysterious combination of many opposites, and dependent structures, and wondrous balancing of powers, as was the tree itself. But while I am considering crystal and tree, and insect and bird, I find that I myself am just such a combination of many parts, faculties, passions, and relations, each of which is sufficiently individual, and yet the whole of which seem all but indispensable to constitute my self-conscious unity. I am a strange combination of body, soul, and spirit; and yet I am reckoned as one man. My senses, reflections, and passions; my body, understanding, and will seem at times capable of individualisation, and to be unities in themselves; but it is the mutual relation and dependence of the parts that constitute the unity of the whole. With this self-consciousness of multiplicity in unity to help me, the revelation that God has made of His threefold nature is less perplexing than it otherwise would be. The unity of the Divine nature, like the unity of all other things, is a unity consistent with the self-inclusions of various constituent elements. (J. W. Reynolds, M. A.)

One God, one Lord

I. The one God. The oneness of Deity is here emphasised. It is insisted on throughout the Scriptures. The conflict, confusion, and absurdity conspicuous in polytheism find no place in Judaism or Christianity. This oneness is confirmed by nature, providence, and the moral sense. The one God is--

1. The Source of all things. We know not how; the manner is not revealed to us; the fact is. God may have left much to mans scientific instinct to discover. He may have intended not a little to remain in mystery. We may travel reverently along the lines of true knowledge till they cease for us; then the great truth remains still for our enlightenment and comfort. The march backward of science is towards unity; revelation began with it.

2. The end of all things. We unto, not in, Him. What is here asserted of some of Gods works applies to all (Col_1:16). The whole universe looks God-wards. So far as intelligent creatures do not find the end of their existence in God and seek His glory, so far they fall out of harmony with the rest of creation and bring failure into their lives.

II. The one Lord. The Head of the Church was the active power in creation. This verse teaches the Divinity of Christ in a very impressive manner. The administrative, mediating position occupied by Christ is recognised; but the assertion that through Him all things were, is only explicable on the supposition of His Deity. Moreover, this very expression is applied elsewhere to God (Rom_9:36; Heb_2:10), and the expression unto Him is in Col_1:15 applied to Christ. Paul is speaking about idols as gods and lords. These were all regarded as deities. In carrying over the same terms to the realm of Christianity, there is nothing which should lead us to suppose that Lord is less Divine than God.

III. The special relations subsisting between believers and the one Lord and one God.

1. They are through Christ--as creatures, amongst all things; but the additional we through Him indicates special relationship. Believers are such through Christ; they believe in Him. Through Him they are separated from all things, and made a peculiar people. Apart from Christ believers are nothing; through Him they become heirs of God.

2. They are unto God in a special sense, and through Christ. They show forth the Divine glories as others cannot. They reflect the Divine love manifested in redemption. They are presented to God as the fruits of Divine grace. Once rebellious, they are now obedient; once defiled, they are now purified, &c.

3. God is their Father. In a certain sense He is the Father of all, but in a spiritual sense He is not so. Of some Christ said, Ye are of your father the devil. But the believer has received the adoption through Christ. (W. E. Hurndall, M. A.)

The many gods and the one God

I. The worlds many gods. To make gods for himself has been mans great object all along. Every nation has had its gods, and every age. Is there no god-making still, even in our day? Money, business, pleasure, lusts, luxuries! Will they prove more helpful in the day of trouble than Baal, or Jupiter, or Buddha? Will they forgive, and save, and comfort?

II. The saints one God. Yes; one only, the living and the true God. Jehovah is His name. With undistracted eye the Christian looks but to one, not many; with undivided heart he fixes on one, not many; and that one sufficient to fill his whole heart, and soul, and being. How the thought of that one God--infinite, eternal, and unchangeable--makes all that are called gods to vanish utterly away! Jehovah is my portion, saith my soul. We need no other; we need no more.

III. The saints one Christ. To us there is but one Lord Jesus Christ. As there are many beings who go under the name of God, so are there many who go under the name of Christ, yet there is but one Christ, not two, nor many. The tendency of the present day is to multiply Christs. A Christ as the impersonation or representative of humanity is quite in accordance with the spirit of the age. But every one wants to have his own Christ, just as each heathen wanted to have his own god; the Christ that suits his own fancy, or his own philosophy, or his own intellect, or his own circumstances. Some want a Christ who is not God; others a Christ who is not a sacrifice; a Christ without a cross, and without blood; a Christ who will teach but not expiate sin; a Christ whose life and death are an example of self-surrender to the utmost, but not an atonement; a Christ who is not a judge, nor a law-giver, nor a priest, and only a prophet in the sense of teacher. If thus, then, there is but one Christ, then there is but--

1. One Cross.

2. One Priest.

3. One altar.

4. One sacrifice.

5. One way to the kingdom. (H. Bonar.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co 8:4-6. As, &c. — To proceed, therefore, to the question in debate; concerning the eating of those things that are offered unto idols — Meats of whatever kind sacrificed to them. We know that an idol — Or the supposed deity residing therein; is nothing — A mere nominal god, having no real divinity, virtue, or power; and that there is none other God but one — Jehovah, the self-existent, independent, infinite, and eternal Being, to whom the Scripture in general, and the gospel in particular, hath taught us to appropriate our worship. “The Greek word ειδωλον, translated idol, signifies an image formed in the mind, and which exists nowhere else. Wherefore, to show that the gods of the heathen were mere creatures of the human imagination, the Jews, who used the Greek language, termed them ειδωλα, idols. By this word, likewise, they signified the pictures and statues which the heathen set up in their temples, as representations of their gods; and by giving them the appellation of idols, they declared their persuasion that the things of which they were the representations had no existence. Nevertheless, as the apostle knew that some of the heathen worshipped their dead ancestors, legislators, kings, &c., others of them the heavenly bodies, others certain kinds of brute animals, he cannot be understood to say that an idol is nothing, in the sense of its having no existence as a being, but of its having no existence as a god, and no share in the government of the world.” For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth — Or even under the earth; for the heathen had not only their celestial and terrestrial, but likewise their infernal deities: as there be gods many, and lords many — Who are in their various subordinations adored by the Gentiles, and have great, though very absurd worship paid to them. But to us — Christians; there is — In the whole universe; but one God — One supreme essence; the Father — Of angels and men. This is exclusive not of the Word which was in the beginning with God, and was God, termed the one Lord, in the next clause, any more than of the Holy Spirit, but only of the idols, to which the one God is opposed. Of — Or from; whom are all things — By creation, providence, and grace; and we in him — Living, moving, and having our being; or we are, εις αυτον, for him, for his glory, the end of all we are, have, and do. And one Lord — The Word and Son of the eternal Father, equally the object of divine worship; by whom are all things — Created, sustained, and governed; and we by him — Thankfully acknowledging ourselves obliged to his agency and care for all we are, have, or hope for, and by whom, as the only Mediator between God and man, we have access to the Father and all spiritual blessings.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8:4-6 In reality, the idols to which such meat is sacrificed are not gods, for there is only one God (Deut 6:4; cp. Deut 4:35, 39; 10:19-20). He is the Creator of everything, including the meat in question. The only ultimate reality is God, the Father, and the one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things were created (cp. John 1:3; Col 1:16; Heb 1:2).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1Co 8:4. Βρώσεως) He more closely limits the subject proposed at 1Co 8:1: as concerning, therefore, the eating, etc.—οὐδὲν) nothing, is the predicate; nothing, the force of which is augmented by the antithetic words, in the world, תהו, 1Sa 12:21, LXX., οὐδεν; comp. ch. 1Co 10:19, note. [A piece of wood or stone and nothing besides.—V. g.]

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_8:4. Οὖν] igitur, takes up again the interrupted statement (1Co_8:1); comp 1Co_11:20, and see on Mar_3:31, and Baeumlein, Partik. p. 177.

τῆς βρώσ. τ. εἰδ.] more precise definition of the indefinite ΤῶΝ ΕἸΔΩΛΟΘ., 1Co_8:1. There is no reason any more than formerly for writing ΟἼΔΑΜΕΝ here as ΟἾΔΑ ΜΈΝ with Hofmann.

ὍΤΙ ΟὐΔῈΝ ΕἸΔΩΛ. ἘΝ ΚΌΣΜῼ] that there is not an idol in the world. Pauls meaning here is not: what the heathen adore as gods is something absolutely without existence (see, on the contrary, 1Co_8:5; 1Co_10:20); but: no heathen god exists as the being which the heathen supposes him to be; and so there is no adequate reality, corresponding to the heathen conception of a god Jupiter, Apollo, etc. Most of the old interpreters, with the Vulgate, Luther, and Beza (also more recently, Michaelis, Rosenmüller, Flatt, Heydenreich), took οὐδέν to mean nihil: that an idol is a nonentity. Comp Jer_10:3; Isa_41:24, al[1322], Addit. to Est_4:8; Sanhedr. f. 63. 2 : Noverant utique Israelitae, idolum nihil esse. Comp also Joseph. Antt. viii. 13. 6. But this must be held incorrect, seeing that ἐν τ. κόσμῳ does not harmonize with it, and because of the parallel expression ΟὐΔΕῚς ΘΕΌς.

ΚΑῚ ὍΤΙ ΟὐΔΕῚς Κ.Τ.Λ[1324]] and that there is no other God but one. The εἰ μή refers simply to οὐδεὶς Θεός, not to ἕτερος. see on Gal_1:19.

[1322] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[1324] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co 8:4 . After his thrust at Cor [1233] γνῶσις , P. resumes, with οὖν ( cf. 1Co 11:17-20 ), from 1Co 8:1 the question “About the eating of idolothyta,” repeating the “we know” at which he had interrupted his correspondents. For οἴδαμεν in a confessio fidei, cf. 1Jn 5:18 ff. That the theological statement given in 1Co 8:4 ff. comes from the mouth of the Corinthians seems probable from the following considerations: ( a ) the repeated οἴδαμεν ( h.l . in this Ep.; cf. the frequent interrog. οὐκ οἴδατε ; of chh. 3, 5, 6; also 1Co 12:2 ), by which P. associates himself with the readers , who are men of knowledge (1Co 1:5 , 1Co 10:15 , etc.); ( b ) the solemn rhythm of 1Co 8:4 b and 1Co 8:6 , resembling a confessional formula ( cf. Eph 4:4 ff., 1Ti 3:16 )

[1233] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_8:4

As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol (is) nothing in the world, and that (there is) none other God but one.

Concerning then. The particle (οὖν), then serves to resume the subject of 1Co_8:1 after the interruption occasioned by the preceding parenthesis. For the general expression in 1Co_8:1, Concerning idol-sacrifices, we have here the more definite one, Concerning the eating of idol-sacrifices; which was the point in dispute. To determine whether it was proper to eat of these sacrifices, it must be determined, first, what an idol is, and secondly, what effect the eating would have. As to the former, Paul says, there is no idol, (or an idol is nothing;) and as to the latter, that the eating could have no effect on our religious state; it could make us neither better nor worse, 1Co_8:8. From this it follows, that eating or not eating is a matter of indifference. Nevertheless, if our eating causes others to sin, we ought not to eat. It is worthy of remark that the apostle, in answering questions of conscience, does not give a categorical reply, but gives the reason for his decision. So here; and in ch. 11 he does not simply say it was wrong for Grecian women to appear in public unveiled, but he unfolds the principles valid for all time, on which the decision of that particular question rested.

As to the question, What is an idol? it is obvious that the word (ἔιδωλον, image,) is used metonymically for the deity which the image was intended to represent. It is of such deity, or rather of the heathen gods generally, the apostle here speaks. His words are, We know that οὐδὲν ἔιδωλον ἐν κόσμῳ, which may mean, either, an idol is nothing in the world; or, there is no idol in the world, i.e. the universe. If the former version be adopted, the sense may be, either, these deities are nonentities, they have no existence; or, they are powerless, they have no influence over the affairs of men. In favor of that translation is the analogy of Scripture. In the Old Testament the gods of the heathen are frequently said to be nothing, vanities, lies, etc., Isa_41:24; Isa_44:8, Isa_44:9. Jer_10:14. Psa_115:4, Psa_115:8. So the Rabbis also said, Noverant utique Israelitae, idolum nihil esse, Sanhdr. 63:2. But this explanation is not suitable here. As οὐδεὶς θεός in the next clause means there is no God, οὐδὲν εἴδωλον must mean, there is no idol. This does not mean that the heathen gods are either nonentities or powerless, for in 1Co_10:19 Paul says they are demons. But it means, there are no such beings in the universe as the heathen conceived their gods to be. There was no Jupiter, Juno, or Mars. There is no God, no real divine being but one. The objects of heathen worship were neither what the heathen took them to be, nor were they gods in the true sense of that term.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The application of that answer to things offered to idols: I grant, saith he that an idol is indeed a vain imagination, and that there is but one God and Lord, herefore that meat cannot be made holy or profane by the idol: but it followeth not therefore that a man may without respect use those meats as any other.

It is a vain dream.

This word (idol) in this place is taken for an image which is made to present some godhead, that worship might be given unto it: whereupon came the word (idolatry) that is to say, Image service.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

In this passage he shows the vanity of idols: As to the eating of things that have been sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world; or, there is no idol in the world; or, an idol can do nothing in the world: for the form of expression in the original is elliptical. The meaning in the general is, that heathen idols have no divinity in them; and therefore the Old Testament they are commonly called lies and vanities, or lying vanities. They are merely imaginary gods, and many of them no better than imaginary beings; they have no power to pollute the creatures of God, and thereby render them unfit to be eaten by a child or servant of God. Every creature of God is good, if it be received with thanksgiving, Ti1 4:4. It is not in the power of the vanities of the heathens to change its nature. - And there is no other God but one. Heathen idols are not gods, nor to be owned and respected as gods, for there is no other God but one. Note, the unity of the Godhead is a fundamental principle in Christianity, and in all right religion. The gods of the heathens must be nothing in the world, must have no divinity in them, nothing of real godhead belonging to them; for there is no other God but one. Others may be called gods: There are that are called gods, in heaven and earth, gods many, and lords many; but they are falsely thus called. The heathens had many such, some in heaven and some on earth, celestial deities, that were of highest rank and repute among them, and terrestrial ones, men made into gods, that were to mediate for men with the former, and were deputed by them to preside over earthly affairs. These are in scripture commonly called Baalim. They had gods of higher and lower degree; nay, many in each order: gods many, and lords many; but all titular deities and mediators: so called, but not such in truth. All their divinity and mediation were imagery. For, 1. To us there is but one God, says the apostle, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in or for him. We Christians are better informed; we well know there is but one God, the fountain of being, the author of all things, maker, preserver, and governor of the whole world, of whom and for whom are all things. Not one God to govern one part of mankind, or one rank and order of men, and another to govern another. One God made all, and therefore has power over all. All things are of him, and we, and all things else, are for him. Called the Father here, not in contradistinction to the other persons of the sacred Trinity, and to exclude them from the Godhead, but in contradistinction to all creatures that were made by God, and whose formation is attributed to each of these three in other places of scripture, and not appropriated to the Father alone. God the Father, as Fons et fundamentum Trinitatis - as the first person in the Godhead, and the original of the other two, stands here for the Deity, which yet comprehends all three, the name God being sometimes in scripture ascribed to the Father, kat' exochēn, or by way of eminency, because he is fons et principiam Deitatis (as Calvin observes), the fountain of the Deity in the other two, they having it by communication from him: so that there is but one God the Father, and yet the Son is God too, but is not another God, the Father, with his Son and Spirit, being the one God, but not without them, or so as to exclude them from the Godhead. 2. There is to us but one Lord, one Mediator between God and men, even Jesus Christ. Not many mediators, as the heathen imagined, but one only, by whom all things were created and do consist, and to whom all our hope and happiness are owing - the man Christ Jesus; but a man in personal union with the divine Word, or God the Son. This very man hath God made both Lord and Christ, Act 2:36. Jesus Christ, in his human nature and mediatorial state, has a delegated power, a name given him, though above every name, that at his name every knee should bow, and every tongue confess that he is Lord. And thus he is the only Lord, the only Mediator, that Christians acknowledge, the only person who comes between God and sinners, administers the world's affairs under God, and mediates for men with God. All the lords of this sort among heathens are merely imaginary ones. Note, It is the great privilege of us Christians that we know the true God, and true Mediator between God and man: the true God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent, Joh 17:3.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

As concerning, &c.--resuming the subject begun in Co1 8:1, "As touching," &c.

idol is nothing--has no true being at all, the god it represents is not a living reality. This does not contradict Co1 10:20, which states that they who worship idols, worship devils; for here it is the GODS believed by the worshippers to be represented by the idols which are denied to have any existence, not the devils which really under the idols delude the worshippers.

none other God--The oldest manuscripts omit the word "other"; which gives a clearer sense.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 4. Things that are offered in sacrifice] See on the first verse. See on the first verse, 1Co 8:1

An idol is nothing in the world] Dr. Lightfoot translates this, We know that there is no idol in the world; which he explains thus: ειδωλον, idol, is ὁμοιωμα, εικων, σημειον, χαρακτηριον, σκιοειδες, a likeness, an image, a sign, a character, a shadow: now ουδεν ειδωλον signifies there is no idol, no representation of GOD, in the world. Images there are of stone, wood and metal; but none of these is any representation of the infinite Spirit. But I prefer the meaning given in the note on verse 1; 1Co 8:1 as the expression, an idol is nothing in the world, was common in the Old Testament, and among the Jews; and was understood by them in this way: they are not אלהים Elohim, the true GOD; but they are אלילים, nothings, and הבלים habalim, VANITY.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

4. Concerning, therefore, the eating of those things He now returns to the statement with which he had set out, and speaks more plainly in reference to the pretext made use of by the Corinthians. For as the whole of the evil took its rise from this root — that they were pleased with themselves, and despised others, he condemns, in general, that contemptuous knowledge which is not seasoned with love. Now, however, he explains particularly, what is the kind of knowledge on which they valued themselves — that an idol is an empty figment of the human brain, and must therefore be reckoned as nothing; and accordingly, that the consecration, that is gone through in name of the idol, is a foolish imagination, and of no importance, and that a Christian man, therefore, is not polluted, who, without reverence for the idol, eats of things offered to idols. This is the sum of the excuse, and it is not set aside by Paul as false, (for it contains excellent doctrine,) but because they abused it, in opposition to love

As to the words, Erasmus reads thus — “An idol has no existence.” I prefer the rendering of the old translation — An idol is nothing. For the argument is this — that an idol is nothing, inasmuch as there is but one God; for it follows admirably — “If there is no other God besides our God, then an idol is an empty dream, and mere vanity.” When he says — and there is none other God but one, I understand the conjunction and as meaning because. For the reason why an idol is nothing is, that it must be estimated according to the thing that it represents. Now it is appointed for the purpose of representing God: nay more, for the purpose of representing false gods, inasmuch as there is but one God, who is invisible and incomprehensible. The reason, too, must be carefully observed — An idol is nothing because there is no God but one; for he is the invisible God, and cannot be represented by a visible sign, so as to be worshipped through means of it. Whether, therefore, idols are erected to represent the true God, or false gods, it is in all cases a perverse contrivance. Hence Habakkuk calls idols teachers of lies, (Habakkuk 2:18,) because they deal falsely in pretending to give a figure or image of God, and deceive men under a false title. Hence οὐδεν (nothing) refers not to essence, but to quality — for an idol is made of some substance — either silver, or wood, or stone; but as God does not choose to be represented in this way, it is vanity and nothing as to meaning and use.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(4) As concerning therefore the eating of those things.—See 1Co_8:1. The subject resumed after the parenthesis. We have, perhaps, in this repetition of the words a characteristic of a letter written by another from the author’s dictation, as was the case with this and other epistles.

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

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4. we know that an idol is nothing in the world] Some have rendered, that there is no idol in the world, but the rendering in the text gives the clearest sense; “A name without a thing, a mere figment of the human heart.” Estius.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

As concerning therefore the eating of those things,.... The apostle having enlarged on the head of knowledge, which those who made an ill use of their Christian liberty urged in favour of their conduct; he returns to the subject in question, in relation to meats,

that are offered in sacrifice unto idols. The determinations of the Jewish schools concerning this affair are as follow, which admit of no manner of profit by them in any shape:

"a beast, the whole of which they offer to idols, is forbidden of profit, even its dung, and its bones, and its horns, and its hoofs, and its skin, all is forbid to be of any profit'' (y).

Again (z),

"flesh or wine, or fruits, which are brought in to be offered up to idols, are not forbidden to profit with, although they are brought into the idol's temple, until they offer them up before it; "but when offered up before it"; they become an offering; and though they may return them, and bring them out, lo, these are forbidden for ever; and all that is found in an idol's temple, even water and salt, are forbidden of profit by the law, , "and he that eats anything thereof" is to be beaten.''

Once more (a),

"an Israelite that lifts up a cheese to worship it, but does not worship it, but a Gentile worships it, it is forbidden of profit, became the lifting of it up is an action; and so if he lifts up an egg, and a Gentile comes and worships it, it is forbidden; he that cuts a gourd, or any such thing, and worships it, it is forbidden, &c.''

But by these decrees we Christians are not bound;

we know that an idol is nothing in the world; among the things created by God in the world; for though the matter of it may be of God, the form is of men; nor has it any share in the government of the world: and though that of which it may be made, as gold, silver, brass, &c. is something; yet as it is a form and representation of God, it is nothing, because there can be no representation of the invisible God; it is nothing, that is, it has no divinity in it, it is no God. Though it may have an existence, as the sun, moon, and stars, yet not divinity; and in that sense nothing. The apostle here speaks the language of the Jewish doctors, who say (b),

"why dost thou envy an idol? , "since it is nothing, or there is nothing it."''

And again (c),

"the Rabbins say, since , "there is nothing in an idol", why do they call them deities;''

Very likely the apostle may have reference to the Hebrew word for idols, which signifies things of nought, that are good for nothing, are of no value, and are as nothing, Isa 2:20.

And that there is none other God but one. This clause may be considered either as a reason of the former, why an idol is nothing, is no deity, is no God, "for there is none other God but one", as it may be rendered; or as a part of what believers know; for as they know an idol is nothing, so they know, both from reason and revelation, from the books of the Old and New Testament, that there is but one God, and consequently that idols are nothing, and that they cannot defile them, nor anything that is offered to them.

(y) Maimon. Hilch. Obede Cochabim, &c. c. 7. sect. 3. (z) Ib. sect. 15. (a) Ib. c. 8. sect. 3. (b) Prefat. ad Echa Rabbati, fol. 40. 3. (c) Debarim Rabba, fol. 236. 2. Tzeror Hammor, fol. 135. 2. & 138. 2. & 141. 4.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.

Ver. 4. Is nothing in the world] A mere fiction it is, that the idol representeth a brat of man’s brain. We may well say of it, as one doth of Scaliger’s doctrine De emendatione temporum, Concerning the correction of times, that it is in a manner wholly fictitious, and founded upon the confines of nothing. Nothing the idol is, in respect of the divinity ascribed unto it, as the foIlowing words show. Or nothing, that is, of no virtue or value. "Shall I bow down to yonder jackanapes?" {a} said that martyr (Julius Palmer), pointing to the rood (crucifix) in Paul’s.

None other God but one] This the wiser heathen also acknowledged, and for opposing the multitude of gods Socrates suffered. Cicero in his books of the Nature of the Gods, takes pains to show the vanity of heathen deities. And after all, wisheth that he were as well able to find out the true God as to discover the false.

{a} Applied contemptuously to a crucifix. Obs. OED

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

An idol is nothing. The apostle seems to allude in this place to the Greek signification of this word, Greek: eidolon, signifying a false representation; as for instance in ghosts, which are said to appear sometimes at night. Umbræ tenues, simulacra luce carentium. (Calmet)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols; meat which is part of that sacrifice which hath been offered to an idol, whether it be to be eaten in the idol’s temple, or in a private house.

We know that an idol is nothing in the world; we know that an image, or an idol, the representation of some other thing, though in respect of the matter it be something, either wood, stone, or earth, and in respect of form it be something, yet it is nothing formally, or representatively; though it is set up to represent to us a Deity, there is nothing of a Divine nature, or the representation of a Divine nature, in it. It

is nothing of what the poor blind heathen take it to be, and therefore in the Hebrew it hath its name from a word לא that signifieth nothing; Job 13:14; Zec 11:17; or it is nothing, that can either sanctify or pollute any meat that is set before it. And we know that there is none other God but one: the apostle may be conceived to have spoken these words as from himself, granting what those said who took themselves to be men of knowledge; or else in the language of those who thus spake, repeating their words.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

4. We know—We have, indeed, this knowledge.

Nothing in the world— A literal rendering would be: There is no idol (that is, idol-god) in the world. The definition idol-god is given to the Greek word Ειδωλον in Robinson’s N.T. Lexicon, and sustained by quoting Sept. of Num_25:2; 2Ki_17:33, and other texts. The import of the gnosis, therefore, is, that there is no statue or image with any divinity or other important significance in it. An idol is a nothing in the world, expresses the true, contemptuous idea of Paul, both as a Jew and a Christian. But the more exact verbal rendering preserves more clearly Paul’s antithesis: There is no idol-god in the world, none other God but one.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

We know that an idol is nothing in the world. After his brief but pregnant digression on the nature of true knowledge, he returns to these questions, and probably once more quotes their own words. They had given this reason for open and public indifference with respect to meat offered to idols. With respect to idols, three views were possible to Christians: either

(1) that they were "demons the spirits of deified dead men; or

(2) that they were evil spirits a favorite view among the Jews (via Deu_32:17; 2Ch_11:15; Psa_106:37; Rev_9:20) or

(3) that they were merely (lead images corresponding to nothing at all (Isaiah 44 etc.). That there is none other God but one. This belief is the signature of Judaism, according to their daily and oft repeated shema. (Deu_6:4, etc.)

Vers. 4-13.

Aspects of responsibility.

concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols," etc. This paragraph suggests three general remarks.

I THAT THE MORAL OBLIGATIONS OF ALL MEN ARE DETERMINED BY THEIR RELATION TO THE ONE GOD AND HIS SON. "As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one." There are many objects in the world that men call gods, and treat as gods, but they are really nothing, their existence imposes on them no moral obligation. There is One, however, and only One, from your relation to whom there grows up all moral obligations. "One God." Monotheism is demon strated by all nature, by all consciences, as well as by the Bible.

1. He is a Father. "The Father, of whom," etc. The Creator of the universe, but the Father of spirits; spirits are his offspring.

2. He is the Source of all things. "Of whom are all things." The mighty universe and all it contains are but streams from him, the Fountain of life.

3. He is our End. "We in him," or "unto him," more properly. The supreme End of our existence and Object of our love. In connection with him there is another, "one Lord Jesus Christ." This one Lord Jesus Christ was not only his creative Agent, "by whom are all things," but his redemptive Agent, the Mediator between God and men. And we by him," or "through him." As Christians, we are what we are through him. Now, the will of this one God, as coming through Christ to us, we are morally bound to fulfil. An obligation this which not only can never be abrogated, but never modified by any circumstances, age, or revolution.

II THAT WHAT MIGHT BE WRONG FOR ONE MAN TO DO MIGHT NOT BE SO FOR ANOTHER. The apostle teaches that those in the Corinthian Church who had reached the conviction that an idol was nothing in the world, and that consequently there was no harm to them personally in eating of the sacrifices that were offered to idols, would commit no wrong in doing so. The meat itself had not been corrupted because it had been offered to idols, it was as good as any other meat, and as their consciences were not against it there would be no wrong in them participating in it as food. On the other hand, those who had a superstitious idea that they ought not to touch the meat they saw the priests feeding upon in heathen temples, would commit wrong in using it as food. "Meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse." The right or the wrong depended on each man"s conscience. That which is against a man"s conscience may not be against the eternal law of right, but is against his own sense of right, and therefore should be avoided; and that which is in accord with a man"s conscience, though it may not be in accord with the principles of absolute rectitude, would not be wrong to him. Though sincerity is not a virtue, it is always relatively binding; insincerity is always an absolute sin. Thus what is relatively wrong to one man is not so to another. Here is the principle, "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin." "To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin." Therefore, "let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

III THAT TO OFFEND THE CONSCIENCE OF A GOOD MAN, HOWEVER WEAK, IS A WRONG IN ALL. "Take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak." Respect for the weak consciences of good men:

1. May require self denial on our part. A truly enlightened and healthy minded Christian may feel at perfect liberty to do that from which a weak minded disciple would recoil with horror. The apostle, for example, might have felt at perfect liberty to sit down in heathen temples, and feast on meat that had been offered to idols, for his great soul had risen up out of the letter and form of religion, concerning meats, and drinks, and ceremonies, and statutory laws, and exulted in that "liberty wherewith Christ makes his people free." Therefore any restriction in such matters would involve more or less self denial, and this Paul willingly accepted, rather than "offend" a "weak brother." On this principle it becomes all to act. Men who have reached the higher stages of Christly life may feel at liberty to do many things; but if they are surrounded by good people whose consciences are in the strongest antagonism to all such things, it is their duty to deny themselves of such liberty.

2. Is urged on the strongest considerations.

(1) The lack of it may inflict serious injuries on the weak.

(a) It may "become a stumbling block to them that are weak." This means, I presume, an occasion of sin. Their faith may be shaken, and they may become apostates; and, more,

(b) they may be "emboldened," encouraged to do the wrong. Without your moral strength, imitation of you will be pernicious.

(c) It may ruin them. "And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?" Christ died for all, tasted death for every man; yet his death, it seems, does not necessarily ensure the salvation of any. What a solemn thought, that the conduct even of an advanced Christian may lead to the spiritual ruin of others!

(2) The lack of it is a sin both against the weak brethren and against Christ. "When ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.

3. Is exemplified in the sublime resolve of the apostle. "If meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." Here is benevolent expediency, the strongest ground on which the temperance reformation can be wisely and effectively advocated. In this sublime utterance you have the self sacrificing and magnanimous spirit of the gospel. Give up all rather than ruin souls. Such an utterance as this is characteristic of Paul. "But I could wish that I myself were accursed for my brethren"s sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh.

CONCLUSION. Where, in the state or in the Church, can you find a man who approaches in spirit the sublime philanthropy of Paul? In the state we have men who call themselves reformers, who grow eloquent in proclaiming the rights of man and the glories of liberty; but can you find either in their speeches or deeds the matchless spirit of philanthropy, beaming and booming in these words of the apostle? if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth." Are not our reformers, alas! more or less traders and hirelings? Where even in our Churches do we find preachers aglow with this unconquerable love for man? And yet this is Christianity, this is what the world wants, what it must have ere it can be morally redeemed. "There never did," says Sir Walter Scott., "and never will, exist anything permanently noble and excellent in a character which was a stranger to the exercise of resolute self denial. Teach self denial, and make its practice pleasurable, and you create for the world a destiny more sublime than ever issued from the brain of the wildest dreamer."

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

We know that an idol is nothing - A mere nominal god, having no divinity, virtue, or power.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The knowledge of idols and the knowledge of God:

v. 4. As concerning, therefore, the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.

v. 5. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many and lords many,)

v. 6. 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.

After the parenthetical sentence the apostle here returns to his subject: Concerning now the food of idol sacrifices, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, that no idol has any existence in the world. The horror which the Christians, especially the weaker ones in their midst, felt with regard to the meat which had been offered to idols, is very easily explained, since they had turned from them as from the powers of darkness. This feeling, therefore, is not only justifiable, but highly commendable. At the same time it serves for the reassurance of the readers that all the strange gods which were described in the hymns of the day were not realities into whose power one would come in case he partook of the meat of the sacrifices, but were nothing; they had no existence, there was really no such thing. For all times it stands as incontrovertible truth: There is no God but the One. See Deu 6:4. Monotheism is the one true religion, as revealed in the Bible, the only religion which has the right to exist.

The apostle expands this thought for the sake of clearness and emphasis: For indeed, if one should grant the existence of so-called gods, although indeed one speaks of those pictures of man’s fantasy in this way, whether they are supposed to be in heaven or on the earth. The Greeks and Romans had filled both earth and sky with their idols, with the products of their imagination, an astonishing multitude of reputed deities. And the Bible itself, for the sake of argument, sometimes speaks of idols as gods, in order to show their nothingness beside the true God, Deu 10:17; Psa 136:2. Thus the word "gods" would apply to the assumed deities of the Gentiles, and the word "lords" to their assumed dominion. But to us Christians there is only one God, namely, the Father, of whom are all things and we for Him, and one Lord, namely, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through Him. There is only one God, and He is distinguished by the fact that He is the Father, the eternal Father of the eternal Son, who is the Source of all things and has destined all things for His use and glory. Therefore we also are to Him, the aim and object of our life should be to serve Him as His true children and thus to hallow His name, 1Pe 2:9; Jas 1:18; Joh 17:9-10. And Christ, whose true deity is here testified to, is the Lord in the absolute sense, for through Him is everything, the universe is a work of His creative power. See Col 1:16; Rev 4:11; Heb 1:3. And we are through Him, Rom 11:36, we owe our Christian state to Christ’s work of redemption, Eph 2:18; Rom 8:29. There are not two gods or two lords, but there is only one God and one Lord. Our new life is directed toward God, a result of Christ’s mediation in our behalf, and these two are one; the Father and the Son, the Triune God, is the Mediator of our salvation. Note how clearly and emphatically a part of the doctrine of God, of His person and of His chief work toward us, is here brought out. And there is not the smallest spot in all the universe left for other deities.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

One argument which the Gnostics used to prove the lawfulness of eating things offered unto idols was this, That an idol was nothing in the world.

But how nothing? It was not materially nothing, for it was wood or stone: but formally it was nothing, it was nothing of God’s creation, nothing that the idolater took it to be, there was nothing of a deity in it, and nothing of a deity could be represented by it: an idol is the vainest thing in the world, it is a mere vanity, a perfect nothing, (called therefore the vanities of the Gentiles,) it is of no worth or value, it has no power or virtue.

Some observe, That the same Hebrew word signifies both an idol, and sorrow,and labour; partly because idols are made and formed with much labour and great exactness; the wood or stone, figuratively speaking, is put to pain; you must cut it and carve it to make an idol or statute of it; partly because idols are served and worshipped with much pain and labour.

False worship is more painful than true: the service of the true God is an holy and honourable service, and noble and ingenuous service, an easy and delightful service; but the service of idols is slavish, a toil rather than worship.

Idols are troublesome both in making and worshipping, and after all the bustle made about them, an idol is nothing in the world, because there is no God but one.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4. “Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that the idol is nothing in the world; and that there is no God but one.” It is a matter of fact that the great and mighty gods of Greece, Rome, Egypt and India, so celebrated in history, immortalized in poetry and worshipped by countless millions, after all never existed. They were mere creatures of human imagination.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Concerning therefore the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol is anything in the world [ Isa_44:9-20 ], and that there is no God but one .

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

4–6. We know that an idol is nothing. Not a god, not even a living being. Only wood, stone, or metal.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

General Information:

"We" and "us" here refer to all believers and include Paul's audience. (See: Inclusive "We")

We know that an idol in this world is nothing and that there is no God but one

Paul is probably quoting phrases that some Corinthians used. Being "nothing" represents having no power. AT: "We all know, as you yourselves like to say, that an idol in this world has no power and that there is no God but one" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information and Metaphor)

so-called gods

"things that people call gods"

many "gods" and many "lords."

Paul does not believe that many gods and many lords exist, but he recognizes that the pagans believe they do.

Yet for us there is only one God

"Yet we know that there is only one God"

translationWords

sacrifice

false god

know

false god

heaven

earth

God the Father

life

lord

Jesus

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

4. [ἕτερος] after θεός omit אABDEFG Vetus Lat. Vulg. Irenaeus. Rec. inserts with Peshito. Most probably a marginal gloss.

4. περὶ τῆς βρώσεως. The Apostle now comes more closely to the point than in the οἴδαμεν of 1Co 8:1. There the question is described as concerning meats offered to idols. Now he specifies more exactly that his remarks apply to the eating of such meats. βρῶσις is strictly the act of eating, βρῶμα the food eaten.

οὖν. ‘Therefore;’ a conclusion from what has gone before. This militates against the idea that the former verses are to be regarded as a parenthesis.

εἴδωλον. Some have translated, ‘there is no idol in the world.’ But a reference to the original sense of the word makes this rendering more than doubtful. Originally applied to the forms of the spirits in Hades, it came to mean mere phantoms of the mind (see Plat. Phaed. 66 c). Even in the LXX., where it has the modern meaning of our word idol, it came to have that meaning as the rendering of a Hebrew word signifying ‘vain, empty shadows’ (μάταια often in LXX.). Sir W. Scott, in his Introduction to the Fortunes of Nigel, speaks of the ‘Eidolon or representative Vision’ of the Author of Waverley. There can be no doubt that both significations of the word were present to St Paul’s mind. ‘There is no such thing as that which the idol represents. It is but a shadow, a figment of the imagination.’

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4.] The subject is resumed, and further specified by the insertion of τῆς βρώσεως.

οὖν resumes a broken thread of discourse: so Plato, Apol. p. 29, ὥστε οὐδʼ εἴ με ἀφίετε … εἴ μοι πρὸς ταῦτα εἴποιτε, &c.… εἰ οὖν με, ὅπερ εἶπον, ἐπὶ τούτοις ἀφίοιτε … See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 22.

We know that there is no idol in the world, i.e. that the εἴδωλα of the heathen (meaning not strictly the images, but the persons represented by them) have no existence in the world. That they who worship idols, worship devils, the Apostle himself asserts ch. 10:20; but that is no contradiction to the present sentence, which asserts that the deities imagined by them, Jupiter, Apollo, &c., have absolutely no existence. Of that subtle Power which, under the guise of these, deluded the nations, he here says nothing. The rendering of Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl. Œcum., Vulg., E. V., Luther, Beza, Grot., Est., al. (‘an idol is nothing in the world,’ ch. 10:19; Jer 10:3. Sanhedr. 63. 2 (Wetst.), “noverant utique Israelitæ idolum nihil esse”), is certainly wrong here, on account of the parallel οὐδεὶς θεὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς which follows.

And that there is no god, but One: the insertion of ἕτερος has probably been occasioned by the first commandment, οὐκ ἔσονταί σοι θεοὶ ἕτεροι πλὴν ἐμοῦ.

5,

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4. Περὶ τῆς βρώσεως οὖν. After these preliminary considerations (vv. 1-3), which indicate the direction in which a solution of the question is likely to be found, he returns with a resumptive οὖν (Gal 3:5) to the question mentioned in v. 1, and states it more definitely. We now learn that it was respecting the lawfulness of eating what had been offered to idols that the Corinthians wanted to have his decision. It was a question of very frequent occurrence. In private sacrifices certain portions of the animal were the perquisite of the priests, but nearly all the rest might be taken away by the offerer, to be eaten at home or sold. In public sacrifices made by the state the skins and carcases, which at Athens sometimes amounted to hundreds, were an important source of revenue and patronage, the skins being sold for the state (τὸ δερματικόν), and the flesh being distributed to magistrates and others, who would sell what they did not need for home consumption. Smith, Dict. of Grk. and Rom. Ant. 11. p. 585. In the markets and in private houses εἰδωλόθυτα were constantly to be found.

οἲδαμεν. Here again he seems to be quoting from the Corinthian letter; ‘What you say about the nullity of idols is quite true, but it does not settle the matter.’ Cf. 1Ti 1:8.

ὅτι οὐδὲν ἔδωλον … ὅτι οὐδεὶς Θεός. These two clauses are parallel, and they should be translated in a similar way; and, as οὐδείς cannot be the predicate, οὐδέν is not the predicate, although most versions take it so (quia nihil est idolum to mundo, Vulg.; dass ein Götze nichis in der Welt sei, Luth.). Either, ‘that there is no idol in the world, and that there is no God but one,’ or ‘that nothing in the world is an idol, and that no being is God except one,’ is probably right, and the former is far better: cf. Mar 10:18; Luk 18:19. An idol professes to be an image of a god, not of the only God, and such a thing does not, and cannot, exist, for you cannot represent what has no existence. If there is no Zeus, an ἔδωλον of Zeus is an impossibility. It represents ‘a no-god’ (see Driver on Deu 32:17, Deu 32:21), and the maker of it ἔπλασων αὐτὸ εώνευμα, φαντασίαν ψευδῆ (Hab 2:18). This is what is meant by ‘they ate the sacrifices of the dead’ (Psa 106:28; cf. 115:4-8, 135:15-18), deaf and dumb idols (12:2) in contrast to the living God. They are called νεκροί, Wisd. 13:10, 15:17. Jews regarded them as ‘nothing’ (aven), mere ‘lies’ (elîlîm).

With ἐν κόσμῳ here compare Rom 5:13. In the ordered universe there can be only one God, viz., the God who made it.

D3 E 17, Vulg. read περί δὲ τῆς βρώσεως without οὖν. D* has περὶ δὲ τῆς γνὠσεως, and P 121, περὶ τῆς γνώσεως οὖν. After οὐδεὶς Θεός, א 3 K L, Syrr. add ἕτερος, as in AV. None of these readings is likely to be right.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.