1 Corinthians 8

Introduction

In chapter 8, Paul turns to a new topic raised by the Corinthians in their letter to him (signaled by the phrase "now about," peri de, which introduces each new question from their correspondence -- cf. 7:1, 7:25, 12:1, 16:1). The issue is whether Christians may eat food that has been sacrificed to idols. In the Greco-Roman world, this was not an abstract theological question but an intensely practical one. Meat sold in the marketplace (macellum) often came from animals that had been sacrificed in pagan temples, and social meals -- business dinners, guild meetings, family celebrations -- were frequently held in temple dining rooms. For converts from paganism, the question of whether to eat such food touched every aspect of daily social and economic life.

The Corinthians apparently believed they had already resolved this question with a theological principle: since idols are not real gods, food sacrificed to them is spiritually meaningless -- therefore they are free to eat it. Paul does not disagree with the theological premise, but he challenges the conclusion the Corinthians draw from it. The chapter pivots on a sharp contrast between gnosis ("knowledge") and agape ("love"). Knowledge, Paul argues, inflates; love builds up. The person who thinks he "knows" something has not yet grasped the most important kind of knowing -- being known by God. True knowledge does not assert its rights at the expense of a weaker brother or sister; it voluntarily limits its own freedom for the sake of another's conscience. Paul thus introduces a principle that will govern the next three chapters (8-10): Christian liberty is real, but it is always subordinate to love.

Knowledge Puffs Up, but Love Builds Up (vv. 1-3)

BSB

Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The one who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know. But the one who loves God is known by God.

Translation

Now concerning food sacrificed to idols: we know that "we all possess knowledge." Knowledge inflates, but love builds up. If anyone supposes that he has come to know something, he does not yet know it as he ought to know it. But if anyone loves God, this person has been known by him.

Notes

• εἰδωλοθύτων (eidolothytōn, "food sacrificed to idols") -- This compound adjective is formed from eidōlon ("idol, image") and thytō ("to sacrifice"). The term refers to meat from animals slaughtered as offerings in pagan temples. In the ancient world, only a portion of the sacrificed animal was typically burned on the altar; the rest was either eaten at a banquet in the temple precinct or sold in the public meat market. The word itself carries a pejorative Jewish nuance -- it labels the food by its association with idolatry -- whereas the pagan equivalent would simply be hierothyton ("sacred offering"). Paul's use of the Corinthians' own term signals that he is engaging their question on their own terms.

• πάντες γνῶσιν ἔχομεν (pantes gnōsin echomen, "we all have knowledge") -- Most scholars believe Paul is quoting a Corinthian slogan here, which is why I have placed it in quotation marks in the translation. The Corinthians prided themselves on their gnosis -- their theological sophistication. Paul's response is not to deny that knowledge exists but to relativize it. The first-person plural ("we all") may be Paul echoing the Corinthians' own self-confident claim back to them before qualifying it. This rhetorical pattern -- quoting a slogan and then correcting it -- appears repeatedly in this letter (cf. 6:12, "all things are lawful for me"; 10:23).

• φυσιοῖ (physioi, "puffs up, inflates") -- The verb physioō means "to inflate, to puff up like a bellows." It is a signature word in 1 Corinthians, appearing seven times (4:6, 18, 19; 5:2; 8:1; 13:4) and only once elsewhere in Paul (Col 2:18). The image is of something swollen with air -- outwardly impressive but hollow. Paul contrasts this with οἰκοδομεῖ (oikodomei, "builds up"), from oikodomeo ("to build a house, to construct"). Knowledge by itself creates a balloon; love constructs a building. The architectural metaphor connects to Paul's earlier language about the church as God's building (3:9-17). Love does not merely feel good -- it builds something solid and lasting in the community.

• ἔγνωκέναι ... ἔγνω ... γνῶναι (egnōkenai ... egnō ... gnōnai, "to have known ... he knew ... to know") -- In verse 2, Paul uses the verb ginōskō ("to know") three times in rapid succession, creating a wordplay on knowledge itself. The first is a perfect infinitive ("to have come to know," implying settled, confident knowledge), the second is an aorist ("he did not yet know"), and the third is an aorist infinitive ("as he ought to know"). The ironic point is that the person who thinks he has achieved knowledge has not yet even begun to know properly. True knowing requires humility about the limits of one's own understanding. The verb dokei ("thinks, supposes") adds a note of delusion: it is the self-assessment of someone who may be wrong.

• ἔγνωσται ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ (egnōstai hyp' autou, "this person has been known by him") -- Paul's climactic statement in verse 3 is startling. He does not say "the one who loves God truly knows God" -- which is what we might expect as the resolution. Instead, the verb shifts to the passive: the one who loves God "has been known by God." The perfect tense egnōstai indicates a settled, ongoing state. Paul redirects the entire discussion away from human knowledge as an achievement and toward divine knowledge as a gift. What ultimately matters is not that we know God but that God knows us (cf. Gal 4:9, "now that you have come to know God -- or rather, to be known by God"). This inversion undercuts the Corinthians' pride in their gnosis at its root: the most important "knowing" in the relationship between God and humanity flows from God to us, not from us to God.

One God, One Lord (vv. 4-6)

BSB

So about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world, and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many so-called gods and lords), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.

Translation

Therefore, concerning the eating of food sacrificed to idols: we know that an idol has no real existence in the world, and that there is no God except one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth -- as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords" -- yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

Notes

• οὐδὲν εἴδωλον ἐν κόσμῳ (ouden eidōlon en kosmō, "an idol is nothing in the world") -- The word eidōlon originally meant "image, phantom, apparition" (from eidos, "form, appearance"). In the Septuagint, it was adopted as the standard Greek translation for the Hebrew words for pagan idols. Paul affirms the Corinthians' basic theological conviction: an idol has no real ontological existence. It is not a rival deity but a nothing. This echoes the Old Testament prophetic tradition mocking idols as lifeless objects (Isa 44:9-20; Ps 115:4-8). However, Paul will later nuance this in 10:19-20, where he argues that while the idol itself is nothing, demonic forces stand behind pagan worship -- the spiritual danger is real even if the idol is not.

• εἴπερ εἰσὶν λεγόμενοι θεοί (eiper eisin legomenoi theoi, "even if there are so-called gods") -- The particle eiper ("if indeed, even if, granting that") introduces a concessive clause. The participle legomenoi ("so-called, reputed") is crucial: these are called gods by human convention, not by nature. Paul acknowledges the cultural reality that the Greco-Roman world was populated by a vast pantheon -- Zeus, Apollo, Artemis, Isis, Serapis, the deified emperors, and local deities of every kind. The parenthetical remark "as indeed there are many gods and many lords" is not a concession to polytheism but a recognition of social and spiritual reality: these entities are worshiped and exercise real cultural power, even if they are not truly divine. In Corinth particularly, temples to Aphrodite, Apollo, Asclepius, Demeter, and others dominated the cityscape.

• εἷς Θεὸς ὁ Πατήρ ... εἷς Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (heis Theos ho Patēr ... heis Kyrios Iēsous Christos, "one God, the Father ... one Lord, Jesus Christ") -- This verse is one of the earliest and most important christological confessions in the New Testament. Paul takes the Shema -- the foundational Jewish confession of monotheism (Shema Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai Echad, "Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is one," Deut 6:4) -- and reformulates it in a way that includes Jesus Christ within the identity of the one God. In the Shema, "God" (Elohim) and "Lord" (YHWH/Adonai) both refer to the one God of Israel. Paul distributes these two titles between the Father and Christ: the Father is the "one God," and Jesus Christ is the "one Lord." This is not a departure from monotheism but a radical reinterpretation of it from within.

• ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς αὐτόν ... δι᾽ οὗ τὰ πάντα καὶ ἡμεῖς δι᾽ αὐτοῦ (ex hou ta panta kai hēmeis eis auton ... di' hou ta panta kai hēmeis di' autou, "from whom all things and we for him ... through whom all things and we through him") -- The prepositions carry enormous theological weight. The Father is the source (ex, "from, out of") and goal (eis, "for, toward") of all things -- all reality originates in him and exists for his purposes. Christ is the agent (dia, "through") of both creation and redemption -- all things were made through him (echoing John 1:3; Col 1:16) and believers exist through him. The parallelism is carefully balanced: both clauses contain "all things" (ta panta) and "we" (hēmeis), but with different prepositions, distinguishing the Father's role as originator from Christ's role as mediator. This compact formula encapsulates an entire theology of creation and salvation in a single sentence.

• Κύριος (Kyrios, "Lord") -- In the Septuagint, Kyrios translates the divine name YHWH over six thousand times. When Paul calls Jesus Kyrios in a confession deliberately modeled on the Shema, he is applying to Jesus the title that belongs to Israel's covenant God. This would have been immediately recognizable to any Jew familiar with synagogue worship. At the same time, the title kyrios was used in the Roman imperial cult for the emperor and for various pagan deities (hence "many lords" in v. 5). Paul's confession thus functions on two fronts: it affirms Jesus' divine identity within Jewish monotheism and simultaneously challenges the lordship claims of every competing power in the Greco-Roman world.

The Weak Conscience and the Stumbling Block (vv. 7-13)

BSB

But not everyone has this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that they eat such food as if it were sacrificed to an idol. And since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us closer to God: We are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.

Be careful, however, that your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. For if someone with a weak conscience sees you who are well informed eating in an idol's temple, will he not be encouraged to eat food sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. By sinning against your brothers in this way and wounding their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.

Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to stumble.

Translation

But this knowledge is not in everyone. Some, through their former association with the idol until now, eat the food as genuinely sacrificed to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. Now food will not present us before God -- we are neither worse off if we do not eat, nor better off if we do.

But watch out that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. For if someone sees you, the one who has knowledge, reclining at table in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, weak as it is, be "built up" to eat food sacrificed to idols? For the weak person is being destroyed by your knowledge -- the brother for whom Christ died. And in this way, sinning against your brothers and sisters and striking their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.

Therefore, if food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I may not cause my brother to stumble.

Notes

• συνηθείᾳ ... τοῦ εἰδώλου (synētheia ... tou eidōlou, "former association with the idol") -- The word synētheia means "custom, habit, familiarity" -- it denotes long-standing practice that has become second nature. Some manuscripts read syneidēsei ("conscience") instead, but synētheia is the better-attested reading and makes stronger sense: these are people who have spent years in the habit of pagan worship. Their entire previous life was shaped by the assumption that idols are real spiritual beings. Even after conversion, when they eat food associated with the temple, they cannot shake the old associations. The food is not merely protein to them -- it still feels like participation in idol worship. Paul takes their subjective experience seriously, not because their theology is correct (it is not), but because their conscience is genuinely affected.

• συνείδησις (syneidēsis, "conscience") -- This is a key term in the passage, appearing four times (vv. 7, 10, 12, and implicitly throughout). The word derives from syn ("with") and oida ("to know") -- literally "co-knowledge," the inner awareness that accompanies one's actions and passes moral judgment on them. The concept of conscience as an internal moral witness was well developed in Greco-Roman philosophy, particularly Stoicism. Paul describes some believers' consciences as ἀσθενής (asthenēs, "weak") -- not morally inferior, but lacking the robustness that comes from secure theological understanding. A weak conscience is one that is easily wounded and destabilized, not one that is more sensitive and therefore superior.

• παραστήσει τῷ Θεῷ (parastēsei tō Theō, "will present us before God") -- The verb paristēmi means "to place beside, to present, to bring before." It has a judicial or ceremonial sense: to present someone before a judge or ruler. Paul's point is that food has no power to commend or condemn us in God's presence. Eating or not eating idol-meat is spiritually neutral in itself. The Corinthians' theological instinct was correct on this point. But Paul is about to show that being "right" about food is not the end of the conversation -- it is only the beginning.

• ἐξουσία (exousia, "right, authority, freedom") -- In verse 9, the BSB translates this as "freedom," but the Greek word is exousia, which more precisely means "right" or "authority" -- the legitimate power to do something. Paul does not dispute that the Corinthians have this right. The question is what they do with it. The word carries a note of authorized power, which makes Paul's warning all the more striking: your very authority -- the right you legitimately possess -- can become a πρόσκομμα (proskomma, "stumbling block," literally "something struck against"). The image is of an obstacle in the path that causes someone to trip and fall. Rights exercised without love become instruments of harm.

• οἰκοδομηθήσεται εἰς τὸ τὰ εἰδωλόθυτα ἐσθίειν (oikodomēthēsetai eis to ta eidōlothyta esthiein, "will be built up to eat food sacrificed to idols") -- This is one of the most bitterly ironic phrases in the chapter. The verb oikodomeō ("to build up") appeared in verse 1 in a positive sense: "love builds up." Here Paul uses the same word sarcastically: the weak person's conscience will be "built up" -- but built up to do something that violates it. The "edification" that knowledge-without-love produces is the opposite of genuine building: it emboldens someone to act against their own conscience, which is a form of destruction, not construction. I have placed "built up" in quotation marks in the translation to signal this ironic reversal.

• ἀπόλλυται ... ὁ ἀδελφὸς δι᾽ ὃν Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν (apollytai ... ho adelphos di' hon Christos apethanen, "is being destroyed ... the brother for whom Christ died") -- The verb apollymi means "to destroy, to ruin, to bring to utter loss." Paul uses the present tense (apollytai, "is being destroyed"), depicting an ongoing process of spiritual ruin. The contrast is devastating: Christ valued this person enough to die for him, but you do not value him enough to skip a meal. The phrase di' hon Christos apethanen ("for whom Christ died") is placed in emphatic final position in the Greek, forcing the reader to confront the supreme price paid for the very person they are carelessly damaging. The cross becomes the measure of how a brother or sister should be treated.

• τύπτοντες αὐτῶν τὴν συνείδησιν ἀσθενοῦσαν (typtontes autōn tēn syneidēsin asthenousan, "striking their weak conscience") -- The verb typtō means "to strike, to beat, to hit." It is a word of physical violence -- the same verb used when the soldiers struck Jesus in the face (Matt 27:30; Luke 22:64). Paul deliberately uses this visceral, violent language to describe what the "knowledgeable" Corinthians are doing to their brothers' and sisters' consciences. They may think they are simply exercising a legitimate right, but Paul reframes their action as an assault. And then comes the climactic statement: εἰς Χριστὸν ἁμαρτάνετε (eis Christon hamartanete, "you sin against Christ"). The sin escalates from brother to Christ himself. Because believers are members of Christ's body (cf. 6:15, 12:12-27), to wound a fellow member is to wound Christ. This anticipates Jesus' own principle in Matthew 25:40: "whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

• Διόπερ ... οὐ μὴ φάγω κρέα εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα (Dioper ... ou mē phagō krea eis ton aiōna, "Therefore ... I will never ever eat meat forever") -- Paul concludes with a personal vow of extraordinary force. The conjunction dioper ("for this very reason, therefore") is a strengthened form of dio, expressing strong consequence. The double negative οὐ μή (ou mē) with the aorist subjunctive is the most emphatic form of negation in Greek -- "I will absolutely never." The phrase εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα (eis ton aiōna, "into the age, forever") adds infinite temporal scope. Paul does not merely say he will be careful or moderate; he says he will permanently renounce all meat if necessary. The word κρέα (krea, "meat, flesh") is broader than eidōlothyta -- Paul generalizes from idol-meat to all meat, showing that the principle of self-limitation for love's sake has no artificial boundaries. This verse embodies the thesis of the entire chapter: knowledge says "I have the right"; love says "I will give up my right for your sake."