1 Corinthians Chapter 8
Living by Knowledge or by Love
A. A Question about Meat Sacrificed to Idols: Beginning Principles
1. (1 Corinthians 8:1-3) The principles of love and knowledge.
“Now concerning things offered to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him.”
Paul transitions to another pressing question from the Corinthians, shifting from his teaching on marriage and singleness in chapter 7 to the issue of eating food offered to idols in chapters 8 through 10. Corinth, with its multitude of pagan temples, was saturated with idolatrous practices. Much of the meat available in the markets had been sacrificed to false gods. This raised practical and theological dilemmas for Christians trying to live faithfully in a pagan culture.
The system worked in three parts: one portion of the meat was burned in honor of the idol, one portion went to the worshipper to take home, and one portion was given to the priest. If the priest chose not to keep it, he sold it either in the temple restaurant or in the public marketplace. Because this meat was often cheaper, many people—including Christians—were drawn to purchase it. The Corinthian believers now wrestled with questions: Is it acceptable to eat this meat from the marketplace? What if a believer is served such meat in someone’s home? Can a Christian eat in the temple dining halls where idolatry was practiced?
Paul begins not with a direct answer, but by setting forth two guiding principles—knowledge and love. He reminds them, “We know that we all have knowledge” (verse 1). The Corinthians prided themselves on their understanding, yet Paul warns that knowledge alone is not sufficient. “Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies.” Knowledge without love breeds arrogance, like a bubble swollen with air. Love, however, builds up like a solid structure. The distinction is the difference between vanity and true spiritual maturity.
Paul further cautions, “And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know” (verse 2). In other words, the one who is proud of his knowledge proves by his pride that he lacks true understanding. Genuine wisdom is marked by humility, not self-importance. Yet there is one kind of knowledge that truly matters: being known by God. Paul concludes, “But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him” (verse 3). The emphasis is not on how much knowledge we can accumulate, but on whether our love for God evidences that we belong to Him.
This perspective reshapes the debate. The Christian life is not ultimately about how much we know, but about how much we love God and love others. Knowledge without love is dangerous because it disregards the weaker brother, but love rightly applies knowledge for the edification of others.
Living by Knowledge or by Love
2. (1 Corinthians 8:4-6) Understanding the reality of the idols meat is offered to.
“Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.”
Paul makes it clear that idols have no real existence. The idol, whether carved from wood, stone, or metal, is nothing more than a lifeless object. The gods that people claimed these idols represented were not true deities, but inventions of human imagination. Thus, “an idol is nothing in the world, and there is no other God but one.” This statement reflects the consistent testimony of Scripture: there is only one true and living God, and He alone is to be worshiped.
Paul’s words correct both pagan superstition and any misplaced Christian fears. If a piece of meat had been sacrificed to Zeus, the Christian must remember that Zeus does not exist. He is no rival deity; he is merely a so-called god. Adam Clarke rightly observed, “There are many images that are supposed to be representations of divinities: but these divinities are nothing, the figments of mere fancy; and these images have no corresponding realities.”
This truth helps us understand difficult passages where the word “god” is used in a different sense. In John 10:34, Jesus quotes Psalm 82:6-7, “I said, ‘You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High. But you shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.’” The psalm refers to human judges in Israel who, because of their office, determined the fate of others. God called them “gods” in a metaphorical sense, as representatives of divine authority. In Exodus 21:6 and Exodus 22:8-9, judges are again referred to as “gods” because of their role in rendering judgment. Jesus, in John 10, was not declaring humanity to be divine, nor was He teaching that believers become gods. He was demonstrating that if even unjust judges could be called “gods” in this limited sense, then it was not blasphemy for Him, the Son of God, to claim the title in light of His works and testimony.
Another example is found in 2 Corinthians 4:4, where Paul refers to Satan as “the god of this age.” This does not make Satan a true god or rival to the Almighty. Instead, it reflects the tragic reality that so many in the world treat Satan as though he were a god, yielding to his lies and power. He is worshiped by their devotion to sin, though he is ultimately a defeated enemy under the sovereignty of God.
Paul acknowledges the religious climate of the Greco-Roman world when he writes, “as there are many gods and many lords.” Indeed, paganism abounded with countless deities. Corinth itself boasted temples to Apollo, Aphrodite, Poseidon, and even an altar to the “unknown god” (Acts 17:23). These so-called gods and lords were innumerable, yet all of them were false. They had no power to rival the Creator.
In contrast to these worthless idols, Paul makes the Christian confession of faith: “yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.” This is not a denial of the deity of Christ, nor a suggestion that Jesus is lesser than the Father. Rather, Paul is affirming both the unity of God and the distinction of persons within the Godhead. The term “Lord” (kurios) was used in the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint) to translate the divine name Yahweh. Thus, when Paul calls Jesus “Lord,” he is applying to Him the very title used for the covenant God of Israel. Leon Morris notes, “Christians who used this as their Bible would be familiar with the term as equivalent to deity.”
The Father is described as the source: “of whom are all things, and we for Him.” All creation originates with the Father, and the redeemed live for His glory. The Son is described as the agent: “through whom are all things, and through whom we live.” He is the divine Word by whom all creation came into being (John 1:3), and through His death and resurrection believers now live spiritually. This profound statement affirms both the sovereignty of the Father and the deity of Christ in perfect unity.
Some Corinthians may have reasoned that if idols are truly nothing, then it must not matter whether they ate meat sacrificed to idols, even in the very precincts of pagan temples. But Paul will go on to demonstrate that while their knowledge was correct in principle, their application lacked love. The issue was not only whether an idol was real but whether eating in such contexts would stumble weaker brothers and dishonor Christ.
Living by Knowledge or by Love
B. Acting on the Principle of Love
1. (1 Corinthians 8:7) Not all have the same knowledge.
“However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.”
Paul acknowledges that not all believers in Corinth possessed the same depth of understanding regarding idols. Some Christians, though genuinely converted, still carried over from their pagan past a consciousness of the idol. When they ate meat sacrificed to idols, they could not dissociate the meat from the idolatrous worship with which it had been connected. Thus, to them, eating such food was not a neutral act but an act of participation in idol worship. Their conscience, being weak, was defiled because it condemned them in what they believed to be sinful.
It is important to note that their conscience was not weak because it failed to function, but rather because it was overly scrupulous and misinformed. A weak conscience is not a dead conscience, but one that overreacts due to incomplete knowledge. It treats something indifferent as though it were sinful. The danger here is twofold: first, the believer himself feels guilt and defilement before God, and second, if he follows the example of a “stronger” brother against his conscience, he trains himself to ignore the inner voice of conviction. To repeatedly wound one’s conscience in this way can eventually dull it to true conviction of sin.
Paul’s point is that knowledge must never be divorced from love. It is not enough for the stronger believer to insist, “But we’re right!” Being right is secondary to being loving. Knowledge without love exalts the individual; love seeks to build up the body of Christ.
2. (1 Corinthians 8:8) What we eat or do not eat does not make us more spiritual.
“But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse.”
Paul establishes the principle of Christian liberty in matters indifferent. Food, in itself, has no power to commend us to God or to distance us from Him. Eating meat sacrificed to idols does not bring us closer to God, nor does abstaining make us holier. The danger lies in attaching spiritual significance to things God has not called spiritual.
This point is confirmed by the decision of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:29, which commanded Gentile believers “that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.” That directive was not meant as a permanent regulation for the entire church across all ages but as a pastoral concession for the sake of Jewish-Gentile fellowship in the first-century context. Paul’s teaching here does not contradict the Council’s decision; rather, it clarifies that abstaining in that context was a matter of love and unity, not of inherent spirituality.
Therefore, whether one eats or abstains from meat is spiritually neutral. What matters is the motive and the effect of one’s actions on others. This principle extends to other issues of Christian liberty in every age—whether one’s choices in entertainment, recreation, or personal habits. Many stumble by equating their particular stance with greater spirituality, assuming superiority because they abstain or indulge. Paul demolishes this false standard by reminding us that God does not measure our holiness by food, drink, or similar externals, but by faith working through love (Galatians 5:6).
Living by Knowledge or by Love
3. (1 Corinthians 8:9-13) What does matter: love towards those in God’s family.
“But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak. For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.”
Paul now shifts from the principle of knowledge to the principle of love. It is not enough to insist on Christian liberty; believers must also guard against misusing liberty in a way that becomes a stumbling block to weaker brothers or sisters in Christ. A Corinthian Christian with “superior knowledge” may have felt free to eat meat sacrificed to idols—even in the temple dining halls—but Paul warns that this freedom could actually destroy the conscience of another believer.
Paul presses the issue with a piercing question: “And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?” Knowledge is never given to destroy, but to build up. As Matthew Poole observed, “God hath not given people knowledge that they thereby should be a means to harm and to destroy, but to do good, and to save others; it is a most absurd thing for any to use their knowledge, therefore, to the destruction of others.” To parade liberty without considering its impact on others is to misuse knowledge and to sin against the very purpose of Christian freedom.
The weak brother here is not one who lacks self-control, but one who lacks proper knowledge. His conscience is oversensitive and easily defiled, because he still associates the meat with idol worship. If he sees a stronger Christian eating in a pagan temple, he may be emboldened—literally “built up”—to do the same, but in doing so, he violates his conscience. Instead of being built up in faith, he is built up in sin. What seems like a small matter to the knowledgeable Christian is actually a serious sin against Christ Himself, for Paul writes, “when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.” To wound a believer is to wound the Head of the church.
Paul concludes with his own resolution: “Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.” This is love in practice. Paul does not make his choices based solely on what is right for him; he also considers what is right for his brothers and sisters. His principle is not, “I answer to God and God alone,” but, “I answer to God for how I have treated my brother.”
At the same time, Paul clarifies that stumbling refers to causing someone to sin, not simply offending someone’s legalistic standards. This distinction is crucial. In Galatians 2, Peter withdrew from eating with Gentiles, giving the impression that they had to follow Jewish customs to be saved. Paul rebuked Peter because his actions endangered the gospel. Paul would never allow legalists to use the language of stumbling as a tool of manipulation. To tempt a brother to violate his conscience is to make him stumble; to merely offend a legalist’s man-made rules is another matter entirely. As Paul himself would say, he would gladly refrain from actions that might tempt someone to sin, but he would not cater to the false religion of legalism.
Adam Clarke insightfully warned against those who misuse this principle: “Many persons cover a spirit of envy and uncharitableness with the name of godly zeal and tender concern for the salvation of others; they find fault with all; their spirit is a spirit of universal censoriousness; none can please them; and every one suffers by them. These destroy more souls by tithing mint and cummin, than others do by neglecting the weightier matters of the law. Such persons have what is termed, and very properly too, sour godliness.” True Christian love is not sour, censorious, or manipulative. It is patient, sacrificial, and careful never to lead another believer into sin.
