The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Corinthians — Section 262

replies that the majority of the Corinthians, does he tnnnt the inquirers with the foot being liberal in their views, heltl that it was that the whole weigbt of their personal a matter of perfect indifference to eat idol- desires and interests would lead them to offerings; and that, in acting upon this decide the question in their own favour. conviction, they contemptuously overrode the On the other hand, he has too deep a sym- convictions of those who could not help pathy with the weak to permit their thinking that when they did so they scruples to be overruled with a violence committed a sin. 'fhe practical decision of which would wound their consciences. the question was one of immense importance. While he accepts the right principle of If it were unlawful under any circumst1rnces Christian freedom, he carefully guards to eat idol-offerings, then the Gentile con- against its abuse. It migLt have been vert was condemned to a life of Levitism supposed that, as a Jew, and one who had almost as rigorous as that of the Jew. The been trained as a " Pharisee of Pharisees," distinction between clean and unclean St. Paul would have sided 'l";ith those who meats formed an insuperable barrier between forbade 11ny participation in iclol-offerings. Jews and Gentiles. Wherever they lived, Jewish rabbis referred to passages like Jews required a butcher of their own, who Exod. xxxiv. 15; Numb. xxv. 2; Ps. cvi. had been trained in the rules and ceremonies 28; Dan. i. 8; Tobit i. 10, 11. Rabbi which enabled him to decide and to ensure Ishmael, in 'Avo<la Zam,' saiu that a Jew that all the meat which they nte should be might not even go to a Gentile funeral, even clean (tahor), not unclean (tame). They if he took with him his own meat and his could touch no meat which was not certified own servants. The law of the drink offering as free from legal blemish or ceremonial forbids a Jew to dl'ink of a cask if any one pollution by the affixed leaden seal on has even touched e. goblet drawn from it which was engraved the word "lawful" with the presumed intention of offering o. (1,ashar). But Gentiles had always been little to the gods. Besides this, the Synod accDBtomed to buy meat in the markets. of Jerusalem had mentioned the ea.ting of Now, much of this meo.t consisted of rem- iuol-offerings as one of the four things nants of animals slain as sacrifices, after the which thoy forbade to Gentile converts, priests had had their share. So completely who were only bound by the Noachian was this case, that the word "to sacrifice" precepts (Acts xv. 2!J). Dut St. Paul had come to meCLn "to kill" in Hellenistic ju<lgo<l the matter in,lepenclcntly by his Greek. Theophrastus, in his ' Moral own o.postolic authority. The decision of Sketches,' defines the close-handed man 83 the synod ha<l only ho.d a. local vo.liclity ~ncl one who, at his daughter's wedcling feast, wns inapplico.ble to such a. community o.s sells all the victims offered except tho that of Corinth. St. Pnul had to suffor cruel sacred parts ; and the sliameless person as misrepresentation o.nd bitter persecution as one who, after offering a. sacrifice, sRlts the the consequence of this bre,,dth of view victim for future use, o.nd goes out to uiue (Acts xxi. 21-2-1); but that would not be with some one else. The nrnrket was there- likely to mo.ke him shrink from so.yiug the fore stocked with meflt which ho.d been trnth. This treRtment of the subject elosely connected with idol-so.crifices. 'fho Christian resembles that which he subsequently coulu never bo sure a.bout any meo.t which adopted in Rom. xiv. We know that we all he bought if be held it wrong to partuke of have knowledge. It is very probable that these offerings. Further thtm this, he woulcl this is a semi-ironicnl quotation of the -espech1lly if be were poor-feel it a. greo.t somowhat conceitcu remurk which ho.cl privution to be entirely cut off from the occmred in tho letter from Corinth. No public feo.sts (sussitia), which porho.ps were doubt there wns a sense in w!.iich it might often his only cha.nee of euting meat at all; (theoretically) bo rogardetl as truo; but it and also to be forbi<l<len to to.lrn a social meo.l wo.s St. Po.ul's duty both to t!ispai~,ge this with o.ny of his Gentileneighboursor relatives. kind of knowledge anti to show tlmt, uftor Tho question wo.s therefore a ••burning" all, there were somo o.mong thom who did one. It involved much of the comfort and not possess it (ver. 7). Knowledge pnJfeth brightness of ancient sociul lifo ('l'hucydides, up. 'fhe bl'ief energetic chrnse, "Knowlcdgu ii. 1JS; Aristotle, 'Eth.,' vii. 9, § 5; Cicero, puffeth up; lovo buiklcth up,'' shows the 'Off.,' ii. 16; Livy, viii. 32, etc.). It will be strnog feeling with which tho c>postlo enters seen that St. Pun! treuts it with consum- on the discussion. '!'hero is a wiclo tlistnnro mate wisdom o.nd tenderness. His liberality between theoretic knowletlgo and heavenly of thought shows itself in this-that he wisclom (Jas. iii. 13-18). "lie who is full sides with those who took the stron~, the is rich; he who is puft'etl up is empty" broad, the common-sense view, tho.t sin is (Sto.nley). "Tho first person puffed up was not II mechauico.l matter, ancl that sin is the devil" (Ilezn). Charity ediJieth. '!'here not committed whore no sin is intended. is no reason whatever for tho rendering of Ho neither o.dopts tho ascetio view nor cl.·;a1r71 sometimes by "love," s0U1etime11 by  2G! THE FIRST EPISTLE 'l'O 'l'HE CORINTHIANS. [cH. vm. 1-13.