Rom 2:22, 1Cor 8:4, 7, 10:19, 2Cor 6:16, 1Th 1:9 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 22. Dost thou commit adultery ? There is no doubt that this was a crime very common among the Jews. ; and . The Jewish Talmud accuses some of the most celebrated of their rabbies, by name, of this vice. Grotius . Josephus also gives the same account of the nation. Thou that abhorest idols . It was one of the doctrines of their religion to abhor idolatry. This they were everywhere taught in the Old Testament; and this they doubtless inculcated in their teaching. It was impossible that they could recommend idolatry. Dost thou commit sacrilege ? Sacrilege is the crime of violating or profaning sacred things; or of appropriating to common purposes what has been devoted to the service of religion. In this question, the apostle shows remarkable tact and skill, he could not accuse them of idolatry, for the Jews, after the Babylonish captivity, had never fallen into it. But then, though they had not the form , they might have the spirit of idolatry. That spirit consisted in withholding from the true God that which was his due, and bestowing the affections upon something else. This the Jews did by perverting from their proper use the offerings which were designed for his honour; by withholding that which he demanded of tithes and offerings; and by devoting to other uses that which was devoted to him, and which properly belonged to his service. That this was a common crime among them is apparent from . It is also evident, from the New Testament, that the temple was, in many ways, desecrated and profaned in the time of our Saviour. , .

Romans 2:22

Verse 22. Dost thou commit adultery? There is no doubt that this was a crime very common among the Jews. Mt 12:39; Jn 8:1 and Jn 8:2-11. The Jewish Talmud accuses some of the most celebrated of their rabbies, by name, of this vice. Grotius. Josephus also gives the same account of the nation.

Thou that abhorest idols. It was one of the doctrines of their religion to abhor idolatry. This they were everywhere taught in the Old Testament; and this they doubtless inculcated in their teaching. It was impossible that they could recommend idolatry.

Dost thou commit sacrilege? Sacrilege is the crime of violating or profaning sacred things; or of appropriating to common purposes what has been devoted to the service of religion. In this question, the apostle shows remarkable tact and skill, he could not accuse them of idolatry, for the Jews, after the Babylonish captivity, had never fallen into it. But then, though they had not the form, they might have the spirit of idolatry. That spirit consisted in withholding from the true God that which was his due, and bestowing the affections upon something else. This the Jews did by perverting from their proper use the offerings which were designed for his honour; by withholding that which he demanded of tithes and offerings; and by devoting to other uses that which was devoted to him, and which properly belonged to his service. That this was a common crime among them is apparent from Mal 1:8,12-14, 3:8,9. It is also evident, from the New Testament, that the temple was, in many ways, desecrated and profaned in the time of our Saviour. Mt 21:12, Mt 21:13.

1 Corinthians 8:4

Verse 4. As concerning therefore, etc. The parenthesis closes with 1Cor 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 1Cor 8:4,5,6; and in 1Cor 8:7, he gives the answer to it. In 1Cor 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 1Cor 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, etc. Whether it is right to eat them. Here the question is varied somewhat from what it was in 1Cor 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. 1Cor 8:1. We Corinthians know; and Paul seems fully to admit that they had all the knowledge which they claimed, 1Cor 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 1Cor 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 rotaries. 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 heathen had this knowledge; and doubtless nearly all Christians possessed it, though a few who had been educated in the grosser views of heathenism 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 heathen 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 1Cor 8:7.

Is nothing. Is delusive; is imaginary. There may have been a reference here to the name of all idol among the Hebrews. They called idols (Elilim,) or, in the singular, , (Elil,) vain, null, nothing-worth, nothingness, vanity, weakness, etc.; indicating their vanity and powerlessness, Lev 26:1, 1Chr 16:26; Isa 2:8,18-20, 10:10, 19:1,3, 31:7, Ps 96:5, Eze 30:13; Hab 2:18; Zech 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 heathens 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. Mk 12:29. Comp. De 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.

(b) "idol" Is 41:24

1 Corinthians 8:7

Verse 7. Howbeit. But. In the previous verses Paul had stated the argument of the Corinthians--that they all knew that an idol was nothing; that they worshipped but one God; and that there could be no danger of their falling into idolatry, even should they partake of the meat offered in sacrifice to idols. Here he replies, that though this might be generally true, yet it was not universally; for that some were ignorant on this subject, and supposed that an idol had a real existence, and that to partake of that meat would be to confirm them in their superstition. The inference therefore is, that on their account they should abstain. See 1Cor 8:11-13.

There is not, etc. There are some who are weak and ignorant; who have still remains of heathen opinions and superstitious feelings.

That knowledge. That there is but one God; and that an idol is nothing.

For some, with conscience of the idol. From conscientious regard to the idol; believing that an idol god has a real existence; and that his favour should be sought, and his wrath be deprecated. It is not to be supposed that converted men would regard idols as the only God; but they might suppose that they were intermediate beings, good or bad angels, and that it was proper to seek their favour or avert their wrath. We are to bear in mind that the heathen were exceedingly ignorant; and that their former notions and superstitious feelings about the gods whom their fathers worshipped, and whom they had adored, would not soon leave them, even on their conversion to Christianity. This is just one instance, like thousands, in which former erroneous opinions, prejudices, or superstitious views may influence those who are truly converted to God, and greatly mar and disfigure the beauty and symmetry of their religious character.

Eat it aa a thing, etc. As offered to an idol who was entitled to adoration; or as having a right to their homage. They supposed that some invisible spirit was present with the idol; and that his favour should be sought, or his wrath averted, by sacrifice.

And their conscience being weak. Being unenlightened on this subject; and being too weak to withstand the temptation in such a case. Not having a conscience sufficiently clear and strong to enable them to resist the temptation; to overcome all their former prejudices and superstitious feelings; and to act in an independent manner, as if an idol were nothing. Or their conscience was morbidly sensitive and delicate on this subject: they might be disposed to do right, and yet not have sufficient knowledge to convince them that an idol was nothing, and that they ought not to regard it.

Is defiled. Polluted; contaminated. By thus countenancing idolatry he is led into sin, and contracts guilt that will give him pain when his conscience becomes more enlightened, 1Cor 8:11,13. From superstitious reverence of the idol, he might think that he was doing right; but the effect would be to lead him to a conformity to idol worship that would defile his conscience, pollute his mind, and ultimately produce the deep and painful conviction of guilt. The general reply, therefore, of Paul to the first argument in favour of partaking of the meat offered in sacrifice to idols is, that all Christians have not full knowledge on the subject; and that to partake of that might lead them into the sin of idolatry, and corrupt and destroy their souls.

1 Corinthians 10:19

Verse 19. What say I then? This is in the present tense: τιουνφημι, what do I say? What is my meaning ? What follows from this? Do I mean to say that an idol is anything; that it has a real existence? Does my reasoning lead to that conclusion--and am I to be understood as affirming that an idol is of itself of any consequence? It must be recollected that the Corinthian Christians are introduced by Paul (1Cor 8:4) as saying that they knew that an idol was nothing in the world. Paul did not directly contradict that; but his reasoning had led him to the necessity of calling the propriety of their attending on the feasts of idols in question; and he introduces the matter now by asking these questions, thus leading the mind to it rather than directly affirming it at once. "Am I in this reasoning to be understood as affirming that an idol is anything, or that the meat there offered differs from other meat? No; you know, says Paul, that this is not my meaning. I admit that an idol in itself is nothing: but I do not admit, therefore, that it is right for you to attend in their temples; for though the idol itself--the block of wood or stone--is nothing, yet the offerings are really made to devils; and I would not have you engage in such a service," 1Cor 10:20,21.

That the idol is any thing? That the block of wood or stone is a real living object of worship, to be dreaded or loved? 1Cor 8:4.

Or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? Or that the meat which is offered differs from that which is not offered; that the mere act of offering it changes its qualities? I do not admit or suppose this.

2 Corinthians 6:16

Verse 16. And what agreement. συγκαταθεσις. Assent, accord, agreement;

what putting or laying down together is there? What is there in one that resembles the other?

The temple of God. What has a temple of God to do with idol worship? It is erected for a different purpose, and the worship of idols in it would not be tolerated. It is implied here that Christians are themselves the temple of God--a fact which Paul proceeds immediately to illustrate; and that it is as absurd for them to mingle with the infidel world, as it would be to erect the image of a heathen god in the temple of JEHOVAH. This is strong language; and we cannot but admire the energy and copiousness of the expressions used by Paul, "which cannot," says Bloomfield, "be easily paralleled in the best classical writers."

With idols. Those objects which God hates, and on which he cannot look but with abhorrence. The sense is, that for Christians to mingle with the sinful world--to partake of their pleasures, pursuits, and follies--is as detestable and hateful in the sight of God, as if his temple were profaned by erecting a deformed, and shapeless, and senseless block in it as an object of worship. And assuredly, if Christians had such a sense of the abomination of mingling with the world, they would feel the obligation to be separate and pure.

For ye are the temple of the living God. See this explained 1Cor 3:16, 1Cor 3:17 The idea is, that as God dwells with his people, they ought to be separated from a sinful and polluted world.

As God hath said. The words here quoted are taken substantially from Ex 29:45, Lev 26:12, Eze 37:27. They are not literally quoted, but Paul has thrown together the substance of what occurs in several places. The sense, however, is the same as occurs in the places referred to.

I will dwell in them. ενοικησω. I will take up my indwelling in them. There is an allusion, doubtless, to the fact that he would be present among his people by the Shechinah, or the visible symbol of his presence. 1Cor 3:16, 1Cor 3:17. It implies, when used with reference to Christians, that the Holy Spirit would abide with them, and that the blessing of God would attend them. See Rom 8, Col 3:16, 2Ti 1:14.

And walk in them. That is, I will walk among them. I will be one of their number. He was present among the Jews by the public manifestation of his presence by a symbol; he is present with Christians by the presence and guidance of his Holy Spirit.

And I will be their God. Not only the God whom they worship, but the God who will protect and bless them. I will take them under my peculiar protection, and they shall enjoy my favour. This is certainly as true of Christians as it was of the Jews, and Paul has not departed from the spirit of the promise in applying it to the Christian character. His object in quoting these passages is to impress on Christians the solemnity and importance of the truth that God dwelt among them and with them; that they were under his care and protection; that they belonged to him, and that they therefore should be separate from the world.

(a) "ye are the temple" 1Cor 3:16,17, 6:19, Eph 2:21,22 (b) "I will dwell " Ex 29:45, Lev 26:12, Jer 31:1,33, 32:38, Eze 11:20 Eze 36:28, 27:26,27, Zech 8:8 (**) "in" "among"

1 Thessalonians 1:9

Verse 9. For they themselves. They who have visited you, and they whom you have sent out: all persons testify of your piety. The apostle seems to refer to all whom he had met or had heard of "in all places," who said anything about the Thessalonians. They were unanimous in bearing testimony to their fidelity and piety.

Show of us what manner of entering in we had unto you. The testimony which they bear of you is, in fact, testimony of the manner in which we preached the gospel, and demeaned ourselves when we were with you. It shows that we were intent on our Master's work, and that we were not actuated by selfish or sinister motives. The argument is, that such effects could not have been produced among them if Paul, Silas, and their fellow-labourers had been impostors. Their sound conversion to God; their change from idolatry to the true religion, and the zeal which had been the result of their conversion, was an argument to which Paul and his fellow-labourers might appeal in proof of their sincerity and their being sent from God. Paul often makes a similar appeal, Comp. 2Cor 3:2, 2Cor 3:3. It is certain that many of the Jews in Thessalonica, when Paul and his fellow-labourers were there, regarded them as impostors, Acts 17:6,8; and there is every reason to suppose that after they left the city, they would endeavour to keep up this impression among the people. To meet this, Paul now says that their own undoubted conversion to life of holiness and zeal under their ministry, was in unanswerable argument that this was not so. How could impostors and deceivers have been the means of producing such effects?

And how ye turned to God from idols. That is, under our preaching. This proves that the church was, to a considerable extent, composed of those who were converted from idolatry under the preaching of Paul. Comp. Intro. paragraph 5. The meaning here is, that they who came from them, or they who had visited them, bore abundant testimony to the fact that they had turned from idols to the worship of the true God. Comp. 1Cor 12:2, Gall 4:8.

To serve the living and true God. He is called the "living God" in opposition to idols --who are represented as dead, dumb, deaf, and blind. Comp. Ps 135:15-17. Isa 44:10 and following; Mt 16:16; Jn 5:26; Acts 14:15.