different to justify us in performing it. If our doing what is in itself innocent be the occasion of leading others into sin, it IS for that reason sinful for us, v. 9. If, therefore, a weak brother should be led, against the convictions of his own mind, to join his stronger brethren in eating such sacrifices, he would bring himself into condemnation. It was, therefore, a breach of charity and a sin against Christ, to eat of the heathen sacrifices under circumstances which emboldened others to sin, vs. 10-12. The apostle avows his own determination never to eat meat at all, if by so doing he should cause his brethren to sin, v. 13.
1. Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.
The idolatry of the Greeks and Romans pervaded their whole life. Their social intercourse, their feasts, the adminis- tration of justice, the public amusements, the offices and hon- ours of the government, were aU more or less connected with religious services. Christians, therefore, were constantly ex- posed to the danger of being involved in some idolatrous homage without even knowing it. This gave rise to nume- rous and perplexing questions of conscience, which were often decided differently by different classes of Christians. One of the most perplexing of these questions related to the use of things offered to idols. Some had no scruples on this point ; others thought it sinful to eat of such sacrifices under any cir- cumstances. This was a question which it was necessary to have authoritatively settled, because it came up every day for decision. The victims offered m sacrifices were usually divided into three parts. One was consumed on the altar, another was given to the priest, and a third was retained by the offerer. The portion given to the priest, if not needed for himself, was sent to the market. The portion retained by the offerer was either eaten at his own table, or within the precmcts of the temple. The Christians, therefore, if they bought meat in the market, or if invited to the houses of their heathen friends, or to the festivals in the temples, were liable to have these sacri- fices placed before them. The two grounds on which the more liberal of them defended the use of such meat, were, first, that the idols were nothing, they were not really gods ; and secondly, that meat cannot commend us to God. Both