presence, why should they not go? Paul admits the non-reality of the idol in itself; but he discerns other terrible pre- sences behind the image—‘‘demons” are virtually worshipped at the idol-feast. and with these the celebrants are brought into contact. ‘What then do I affirm (the φημὶ of 15 resumed)? that an idol- sacrifice is anything (has reality) ? or that an idol is anything? (to say this would be to contradict viii. 4). No, but that (ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι) what the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons, and not to God; and I would not that you should be communi- cants of the demons!” How could the Cor., as ‘‘men of sense, judge ”’ of a situa- tion like this? The riot and debauch attending heathen festivals showed that foul spirits of evil presided over them: cf. vv. 6 ff., referring to the worship of Baal- Peor, with which the allusion here made to Deut. xxxii. 17 (cf. Ps. cvi. 37 f.) is in keeping. ‘‘ That the worship of heathen cults was offered qguoad eventum—not indeed quoad intentionem—to devils was, consistently with their strict monotheism, the general view of later Jews’’ (Mr.). Heathenism P. regarded as the domain of Satan (2 Cor. iv. 4, Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12; cf. Luke iv. 6, 1 John v. το), under whose rule the demons serve as the angels under that of God (2 Cor. xii. 7, r Tim. iv. 1; cf. Matt. xii. 24, xxv. 41, etc.); idolatry was, above everything, inspired by Satan. δαιμόνιον (=Saipwv, of which it is neut. adj.) was primarily synon. with θεῖον--- “Saipwv is related to Beds as numen to persona divina” (Cr.); τὸ δαιµόνιον οὐδέν ἐστιν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ θεὸς ἢ θεοῦ ἔργον (Arist., Rhet., ii., 23. 8); hence Socrates.
55
866
a (Nolo), XVi. 7; 2
20; Rom.