Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 10:19
What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
19. What say I then? that the idol is any thing ] St Paul does not mean to say here, any more than in ch. 1Co 8:4, that an idol, or the god represented by it, has any real objective existence, or that the sacrifices offered to such idols are the property of any such being as that they are intended to represent. But for all that, it may stand as the representative of that which has a very real existence indeed; he kingdom of evil, and those beings which maintain it.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
What say I then? – This is in the present tense; ti oun phemi, 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 1Co 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; 1Co 10:20-21.
That the idol is anything? – That the block of wood or stone is a real living object of worship, to be dreaded or loved? See the note at 1Co 8:4.
Or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything? – 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.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 19. What say I then?] A Jewish phrase for, I conclude; and this is his conclusion: that although an idol is nothing, has neither power nor influence, nor are things offered to idols any thing the worse for being thus offered; yet, as the things sacrificed by the Gentiles are sacrificed to demons and not to God, those who partake of them have fellowship with demons: those who profess Christianity cannot have fellowship both with Christ and the devil.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
I do not by this contradict what I before said, nor now affirm that an idol is any thing, or the sacrifices offered to it any thing. An idol hath nothing in it of a Deity, nor can it either sanctify or pollute any thing that is set before it; the error is in your action, as you communicate with such as are idolaters; it is your own action that polluteth you, not the idol, nor yet the meat set before it.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
19, 20. What say I then?Theinference might be drawn from the analogies of the Lord’s Supper andJewish sacrifices, that an idol is really what the heathen thoughtit to be, a god, and that in eating idol-meats they hadfellowship with the god. This verse guards against such an inference:”What would I say then? that a thing sacrificed to an idol isany real thing (in the sense that the heathen regard it), or that anidol is any real thing?” (The oldest manuscripts read the wordsin this order. Supply “Nay“) “But [I say] thatthe things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils(demons).” Paul here introduces a new fact. It is true that, asI said, an idol has no reality in the sense that the heathen regardit, but it has a reality in another sense; heathendom being underSatan’s dominion as “prince of this world,” he andhis demons are in fact the powers worshipped by the heathen,whether they are or are not conscious of it (Deu 32:17;Lev 17:7; 2Ch 11:15;Psa 106:37; Rev 9:20).”Devil” is in the Greek restricted to Satan;”demons” is the term applied to his subordinate evilspirits. Fear, rather than love, is the motive of heathen worship(compare the English word “panic,” from PAN,whose human form with horns and cloven hoofs gave rise to the vulgarrepresentations of Satan which prevail now); just as fear is thespirit of Satan and his demons (Jas2:19).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
What say I then?…. Or may be objected to, or inferred from, what I say;
that an idol is anything, or that which is sacrificed to idols is anything? to which must be answered, as the Syriac version reads,
, “no”, by no means; by running the parallel between Christians having communion with the body and blood of Christ, in the Lord’s supper, through eating the bread and drinking the wine, the Israelites partaking of the altar, by eating of the sacrifices of it, and men’s joining with idols and idolaters, by eating things sacrificed to idols; it follows not that an idol has anything of deity in it, and is to be set upon a level with God, when, as he had said before, an idol was nothing, and what he now said did not at all contradict that; or that things offered to idols are to be had in the same account, or to be equalled to, or be thought to have any thing in them, as the elements of the bread and wine in the Lord’s supper, or the sacrifices that were offered by the Israelites on the altar, according to the divine command; he meant no such thing, but only argued from the greater to the lesser, and his sense is more fully declared in the next words.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
A thing sacrificed to idols (). See on Acts 15:29; 1Cor 8:1; 1Cor 8:4.
Idol (). Image of a god. See on Acts 7:41; Acts 15:20; 1Cor 8:4; 1Cor 8:7.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) ‘What say I then? (ti oun phemi) “What therefore do I say?” (You ask). In essence he said that Christians, church members, sinned when they sat in eating sacrifices with or worshipped before altars on ‘ which sacrifices were being offered to heathen gods.
2) “That the idol is any think. (hoti eidalothuton ti estin) “Or that an idol is any thing,” do I say? He would not contradict what he had previously said, that an idol was nothing in the world, 1Co 8:4.
3) “Or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols in any thing? ‘ (hoti eidolothuton ti estin?) “Or that an idolatrous sacrifice is anything?” do I say? Neither an idol nor a sacrifice to an idol, lifeless, senseless thing is anything. But Paul would not have men bow or worship before or toward them lest their influence be hurt and they cause others to stumble, Psa 115:1-8; 1Co 8:5-13.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
19. What do I say then? It might seem at first view as if the Apostle either argued inconclusively, or ascribed to idols something of existence and of power. Now it might readily be objected — “What comparison is there between the living God and idols? God connects us with himself by the sacraments. Be it so. How comes it that idols, which are nothing, (1Co 8:4,) have so much power, as to be able to do the like? Do you think that idols are anything, or can do anything?” He answers, that he does not look to the idols themselves; (583) but rather has in view the intention of those who sacrifice to idols. For that was the source of the pollution that he had indirectly pointed out. He confesses, therefore, that an idol is nothing. He confesses that it is a mere delusion when the Gentiles take it upon them to go through solemn rites of dedication, (584) and that the creatures of God are not polluted by such fooleries. But as the design of them is superstitious and condemnable, and as the work is base, he infers, that all who connect themselves with them as associates, are involved in pollution.
(583) “ Simplement, et en soy;” — “Simply, and in themselves.”
(584) “ Les ceremonies des dedicaces et consecrations solemlelles desquelles les Gentils vsent, ne sont que vent, et n’emportent rien;” — “The ceremonies of solemn dedications and consecrations, which the Gentiles make use of, are mere wind, and signify nothing.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(19) What say I then?It might have been argued from the preceding verse that the Apostle admitted the heathen offerings and the idols to which they were offered to be as real as were the offerings and Being to whom the altar was erected by Israel, whereas in 1Co. 8:4 he had asserted the contrary.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
19. What say I then? What is the import, then, of what I am now saying? Do I attribute any real existence to the imaginary gods and demigods represented by the idol, as Jupiter, Venus, Apollo? Or that the sacrifice is any thing more than a fiction?
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘What do I say then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? But I say, that the things which they sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God. And I do not wish that you should be sharers in common with demons.’
He firmly insists that he is not by this saying that a thing sacrificed to an idol is anything special, or that an idol is anything special. What he is saying is that in fact idolatrous worship is not just harmless superstition, it is backed by demons, by evil spirits, and that whoever offer sacrifices to idols, whether Israel in its false worship of the molten calf, or Gentiles in the worship of idols, are thus unknowingly offering sacrifices to demons (compare Deu 32:17). They are not to be seen as worshipping God in any way. Their way is not just another way to God, it provides contact with the supernatural world of evil. So what Paul is encouraging them to avoid is to actually have things in common with ‘the demons’, that is, the whole world of demons.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Co 10:19-20 . By these two analogues, 1Co 10:16-18 , the apostle has now justified his warning given above against the sacrificial feasts as a warning against idolatry (1Co 10:14 ). But from the case of the Jewish sacrificial eating last adduced, his readers might easily draw the inference: “You declare, then, the idolatrous offerings and the idols to be what the heathen count them?” For whereas the apostle adduced the of the Jewish , and that as an analogue of the heathen , he seemed thereby to recognise the of these too, and consequently also the real divine existence of the idols thus adored. He therefore himself puts the possible false inference in the shape of a question (1Co 10:19 ), and then annuls it in 1Co 10:20 by adducing the wholly different results to which 1Co 10:18 in reality gives rise. The inference, namely, is drawn only from 1Co 10:18 , not from 1Co 10:16-18 (de Wette, Osiander, Hofmann, al [1684] ), as 1Co 10:20 ( , correlative to the of 1Co 10:18 ) shows.
;] what do I maintain then ? namely, in following up 1Co 10:18 . Upon this way of exciting attention by a question , comp Dissen, a [1686] Demosth. de cor. p. 347. Krger, Anab. i. 4. 14.
] is something , i.e. has reality , namely, as , so that it is really flesh which is consecrated to a god, as the heathen think, and as , so that it really is a divine being answering to the conception which the heathen have of it; as if, for instance, there were such a being as Jupiter in existence, who actually possessed the attributes and so forth ascribed to him by the heathen. To accent the words (Billroth, Tischendorf, comp Ewald) would give the sense: that any idol-sacrifice (and: any idol ) exists , in the capacity, that is to say, of idol-sacrifice and of idol . Either rendering harmonizes with 1Co 8:4 . In opposition to the latter of the two, it must not be said, with Rckert, that would need to come immediately after , for the last place, too, is the seat of emphasis (Khner, II. p. 625); nor yet, with de Wette, that the one half ( ) is not so suitable, for the context surely makes it perfectly plain that Paul is not speaking of absolute existence. But since both renderings are equally good as regards sense and expression, we can only decide between them on this ground, that with the second the would be superfluous, whereas with the first which, following the Vulgate, is the common one it has significance, which should give it the preference. At the same time, we must not insert any pregnancy of meaning like that in 1Co 3:7 ( of influence and effect ) into the , as Hofmann does without warrant from the context; but it is the simple aliquid , the opposite of the non-real, of the non-ens .
] refers to the negative sense of the preceding question. Hence: “ No; on the contrary, I maintain ,” etc. See Hartung, Partikell . II. p. 37; Baeumlein, p. 10 f.
] see the critical remarks. The subject is self-evident: the sacrificers (the heathen , who sacrifice). Khner, II. p. 35 f.
The assertion, again, that the heathen sacrifices are presented to demons and not to a real God ( ), follows ( , in 1Co 10:19 ) from the fellowship in which the Jew who ate of the sacrifices stood to the altar on which they were offered; inasmuch as confessedly it was only the Jewish with its sacrifice that belonged to a real God, and consequently the heathen and their offerings could not have reference to a God, but only to beings of an opposite kind, i.e. demons.
] does not mean idols , false or imaginary gods (Bos, Mosheim, Valckenaer, Zachariae, Rosenmller, Heydenreich, Flatt, Pott, Neander), which is contrary to the uniform usage of the LXX. and the N. T., [1688] and would, moreover, yield a thought quite out of keeping with the context; for it was the apostle’s aim to point to a connection with an antichristian reality . The word means, as always in the N. T., demons, diabolic spirits . That the heathen worships quoad eventum (of course not quoad intentionem ) were offered to devils, was a view derived by all the later Jews with strict logical consistency from the premisses of a pure monotheism and its opposite. See the LXX. rendering of Deu 32:17 ; Psa 106:37 , a reminiscence of which we have in Paul’s expression here,
Psa 95:5 ; Bar 4:7 ; Tob 3:8 ; Tob 6:14 , and the Rabbinical writers quoted in Eisenmenger’s entdeckt. Judenth . I. pp. 805 ff., 816 ff. So Paul, too, makes the real existences answering to the heathen conceptions of the gods, to be demons , which is essentially connected with the Christian idea that heathendom is the realm of the devil; for, according to this idea, the various individual beings regarded by the heathen as gods can be nothing else but diabolic spirits, who collectively make up the whole imperial host of the (Eph 2:2 ; Eph 6:12 ), who is himself the . [1689] Comp Hahn, Theol. des N. Test. I. p. 366 f.; Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 279. The ancient church, too, followed Paul in remaining true to this idea. See Grotius on this passage. Usteri, Lehrbegr. p. 421 ff. As to the consistency of this view with that expressed in 1Co 8:4 , see the remarks on the latter verse. Rckert therefore (with Grotius) is wrong in altering the representation to this effect, that according to Paul the demons had “ given the heathen to believe ” that there were gods to whom men should sacrifice, in order to obtain for themselves under their name divine worship and offerings, and that in so far the sacrifices of the heathen were presented to demons. The LXX. rendering of Deu 32:17 and Psa 95:5 should of itself have been enough to prevent any such paraphrase of the direct dative-relation.
. . [1691] ] that I, however, do not wish , still dependent upon , the reply to being only thus completed. The points back to . in 1Co 10:18 . The article in . denotes this class of beings.
[1684] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[1686] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1688] Act 17:18 is uttered by Greeks according to their sense of the word; but in Rev 9:20 we are to understand demons as meant.
[1689] Mosheim objects that if Paul held this belief, he must have pronounced the sacrificial meat to be positively unclean. But it had surely received no character indelebilis through its being set apart for the altar. If not partaken of in its quality as sacrificial meat , it had lost its relation to the demons, and had become ordinary meat, just as Jewish sacrificial flesh, too, retained the consecration of the altar only for him who ate it as such .
[1691] . . . .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
Ver. 19. What say I then ] He prevents a mistake. See 1Co 8:4 . Ministers must in their discourses meet with all objections as much as may be.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
19, 20. ] The inference from the preceding analogies would naturally be, that Paul was then representing the idols as being in reality what the heathen supposed them to be and the eater of meats offered to them, as partaking with the idol. This objection he meets, but with the introduction of a new fact to their consideration that the things which the heathen sacrifice, they sacrifice really to devils .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
19. ] ; what am I then assuming? so Xen. Anab. i. 14. 4, ;
. ] that a thing sacrificed to an idol is any (real) thing (so sacrificed)? (i.e. has any real existence as a thing sacrificed ? The accentuation ; would come nearer to the sense of ch. 1Co 8:4 , , ‘ that there is any (such thing as an) offering to an idol ?’ and in a matter so ambiguous it is impossible to decide between the two) or that an idol is any thing ( real ? e.g. that Jupiter is Jupiter in the sense of a living power)? ( Not so : this ellipsis of the negative, taken up by , is found in classical Greek: e.g. Xen. Mem. i. 2. 2, ; , , &c. See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 37.) But (I say) that the things which they (i.e. the Gentiles) sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God ( ., not ‘ false-gods ,’ nor in the sense in which it is used in the mouth of idolaters themselves, Act 17:18 , and Xen. Mem. i. 1. 1, deities (see Stanley’s note, in which this idea is ingeniously combined with the Christian sense given below), but, as always in LXX and N. T. when used by worshippers of the true God, ‘DEVILS,’ ‘ evil spirits .’ The words are from Deut. (ref.), see also Psa 95:5 ( Bar 4:7 , . ). Heathendom being under the dominion of Satan ( ), he and his angels are in fact the powers honoured and worshipped by the heathen, however little they may be aware of it): but (the inference being suppressed ‘and ye therefore by partaking in their sacrifices would be partakers with devils: but’) I would not have you become partakers with devils ( generic).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 10:19-20 . Paul’s appeal to the meaning of the Lord’s Supper is leading up to a prohibition of attendance at the idol-feasts. Against this veto the men of “knowledge” will argue that idolatry is illusion (1Co 8:4 ff.), its rites having no such ground in reality as belongs to Christian observances; the festival has no religious meaning to them, and does not touch their conscience (contrast 1Co 8:7 ); if friendship or social feeling invites their presence, why should they not go? Paul admits the non-reality of the idol in itself; but he discerns other terrible presences 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 of 1Co 10:15 resumed)? that an idol-sacrifice is anything ( has reality )? or that an idol is anything? (to say this would be to contradict 1Co 8:4 ). No, but that ( ) what the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons , and not to God; and I would not that you should be communicants of the demons!” How could the Cor [1529] , as “men of sense, judge” of a situation like this? The riot and debauch attending heathen festivals showed that foul spirits of evil presided over them: cf. 1Co 10:6 ff., referring to the worship of Baal-Peor, with which the allusion here made to Deu 32:17 ( cf. Psa 106:37 f.) is in keeping. “That the worship of heathen cults was offered quoad eventum not indeed quoad intentionem to devils was, consistently with their strict monotheism, the general view of later Jews” (Mr [1530] ). Heathenism P. regarded as the domain of Satan (2Co 4:4 , Eph 2:2 ; Eph 6:12 ; cf. Luk 4:6 , 1Jn 5:19 ), under whose rule the demons serve as the angels under that of God (2Co 12:7 , 1Ti 4:1 ; cf. Mat 12:24 ; Mat 25:41 , etc.); idolatry was, above everything, inspired by Satan. (= , of which it is neut. adj [1531] ) was primarily synon. with “ is related to as numen to persona divina ” (Cr [1532] ); (Arist., Rhet ., ii. 23. 8); hence Socrates called the mysterious guiding voice within him . Ed [1533] observes a tendency, beginning with Eurip. and Plato and accentuated in the Stoics, “to use the word in a depreciatory sense”; already in Homer it often suggested the uncanny , the supernatural as an object of dread. The word was ready to hand for the LXX translators, who used it to render various Heb. epithets for heathen gods. Later Judaism, which peopled the unseen with good and evil spirits, made a general term for the latter, apart from any specific refer. to idols (see, already, Tob 3:8 , etc.); hence its prominence in the Gospels, and the origin of the word demoniac ( ): on the whole subject, see Cr [1534] s.v ., also Everling’s Paulinische Angelologie u. Dmonologie . For . , cf. Isa 44:2 , where the “fellows” of the idol signify a kind of religious guild, brought into mystic union with their god through the sacrificial meal (see Cheyne ad loc [1535] ); also Isa 65:11 . 1Co 10:20 c is calculated to bring home to the Cor [1536] the fearful danger of trifling with idolatry.
[1529] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[1530] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[1531] adjective.
[1532] Cremer’s Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N.T. Greek (Eng. Trans.).
[1533] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians . 2
[1534] Cremer’s Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N.T. Greek (Eng. Trans.).
[1535] ad locum , on this passage.
[1536] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
that which, &c. Greek. eidolothutos. See Act 15:29.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
19, 20.] The inference from the preceding analogies would naturally be, that Paul was then representing the idols as being in reality what the heathen supposed them to be-and the eater of meats offered to them, as partaking with the idol. This objection he meets,-but with the introduction of a new fact to their consideration-that the things which the heathen sacrifice, they sacrifice really to devils.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 10:19. , what) In the Protasis, he has derived his argument from the sacred rites of the Christians and Jews; and now about to give the apodosis, he uses , precaution in the way of anticipation, and sets down by implication the apodosis itself with pious caution, , in 1Co 10:20 : he who eats things offered to idols, cultivates communion with demons. An idol[88] is a piece of wood, and nothing else; what is offered to an idol is a piece of flesh, and nothing else; but that cup and that bread, which have been spoken of at 1Co 10:16, are not a mere cup and mere bread.
[88] By inverting the order, the margin of both editions intimates, that is to be placed first, and that should be second in the order; but the Germ. Ver. follows the reading of the text.-E. B.
BC corrected later, D Vulg., d Memph., Theb. Versions, have the order -. A omits .-ED.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 10:19
1Co 10:19
What say I then? that a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?-He does not mean to say that the idol is anything or that which is offered to the idol is anything. [This however does not alter the case. For although there are no such beings as those whom the heathen conceive their gods to be, and though their sacrifices – are not what they consider them, still their worship is real idolatry, and has a destructive influence on the soul.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
that the: 1Co 1:28, 1Co 3:7, 1Co 8:4, 1Co 13:2, Deu 32:21, Isa 40:17, Isa 41:29, 2Co 12:11
Reciprocal: Lev 26:1 – Ye shall Deu 32:17 – not to God Jos 24:23 – put away 1Ki 16:13 – vanities 1Ki 18:26 – no voice Psa 106:28 – of the dead Psa 115:4 – Their idols Zec 11:17 – idol Act 19:26 – that they Rom 3:9 – what then Rom 10:19 – I say Rom 11:7 – What then Rom 15:8 – I say 1Co 8:1 – touching 1Co 14:15 – What Gal 3:17 – this Gal 4:8 – ye did Eph 2:12 – without Phi 1:18 – What
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Co 10:19. In chapter 8:4 Paul had said that an idol was “nothing,” and yet he showed that if a man participated in the sacrifices offered to the idol, it made him guilty of a real sin, that of idolatry. In the present passage he sees that a wrong impression as to the importance of the idols, might have been made of his comparison to the body and blood of Christ. He wishes to prevent such an erroneous conclusion, which he does with this introductory question. It is as if he would say, “Do you think I have changed my mind, and am granting to the idols some important existence?”
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Co 10:19. What say I then? that a thing sacrificed to idols is any thing, or that an idol is any thing?[1] That such an inference might be drawn from the strain of the apostles reasoning, is only conceivable on supposition of a pretext being wanted to justify attendance on idolatrous feasts. No, says the apostle.
[1] Such is the correct order of these clauses.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Eating At the Idol’s Table
It was certainly true, as Paul admitted in 1Co 8:3 , that an idol was not a real god. However, there was some reality behind the idol. The Greeks considered an idol to be a “demigod or minor deitya being between God and men” (McGarvey). To the Christian it would have been a demon or an evil spirit. To eat of meat offered to idols, then, would have brought a Christian into fellowship with a demon.
Since the wine at an idolatrous feast was blessed and dedicated to the idol, just as the wine in the Lord’s Supper is consecrated to the Lord, Paul said the Corinthians had to choose which one they would be dedicated to. They could not serve both. Otherwise, they would have been like a “wife who would provoke her husband to jealousy by showing her affection for another man” (Lipscomb). Paul wanted those who would risk arousing Christ’s anger to know he was strong enough to destroy them ( 1Co 10:19-22 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
1Co 10:19-22. What say I then Do I, in saying this, allow that an idol is any thing divine? Or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing Is a sacrifice to a real deity? Or is made either better or worse, or to differ from ordinary meat, by being thus offered to idols? You well know that I intend to maintain nothing of this kind: so far from it, that I aver the things which the Gentiles sacrifice To supposed deities; they sacrifice to devils For, though I grant the idol is nothing, yet those spirits that sometimes dwell in the images of these idols, and give answers from them, are something: they are demons, most wicked and unclean spirits, defiling every person and thing that has any relation to them. We may observe here, The word , demons, is used in the LXX. to denote the ghosts of men deceased; and Josephus (Bell., lib. 1Co 7:6) says, demons are the spirits of wicked men. It is therefore probable, that the writers of the New Testament use the word demons in the same sense, especially as it is well known that the greatest part of the heathen gods were dead men. The heathen worshipped two kinds of demons: the one kind were the souls of kings and heroes, deified after death, but who could have no agency in human affairs; the other kind of demons were those evil spirits who, under the names of Jupiter, Apollo, Trophonius, &c., moving the heathen priests and priestesses to deliver oracles, greatly promoted idolatry. Macknight. Such in reality, as if he had said, are the gods of the heathen, and with such only can ye hold communion in those sacrifices. And not to God The heathen in general had no idea of God; that is, of an unoriginated, eternal, immutable, and infinitely perfect being, the Creator and Governor of all things. And I would not ye should have fellowship with devils Or with their votaries, either in their worship, their principles, their practices, or their hopes; ye who have at your baptism solemnly renounced the devil and all his adherents. For certainly it is not a small sin, nor a thing to be made light of, to have fellowship with them. Ye cannot of right Or in reason, you ought not, it is contrary to your Christian profession so to do; drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils Ye cannot have communion with both; cannot reasonably make profession of the worship of God, (which you do in the Lords supper in the highest instance,) and also of the worship of devils, (as you do in the idol feasts,) these being so contrary one to the other. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy Namely, by joining devils in competition with him? or by thus caressing his rivals? Are we stronger than He? Able to resist or to bear his wrath? Can we secure ourselves against his judgments, when he comes forth to punish for such sins?
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vv. 19, 20. What say I then? that the meat offered to the idol is anything? Or that an idol is anything?…20. But the things which they sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God. Now I would not that ye should be in communion with demons.
The way in which Paul had just cited the two previous examples evidently assumed that he ascribed a diabolical influence to the sacrificial feasts of the heathen; now this idea seemed to be in contradiction to chap. 1Co 8:4; 1Co 8:6, where it had been declared that the gods of the heathen are not real divinities, and that the meat offered on their altar is consequently neither more nor less than simple meat, like any other. Paul therefore anticipates the objection which he foresees: Art thou not now, contrary to thy previous declarations, allowing a disturbing influence to meats devoted to idols, and consequently, a Divine reality to the idols themselves? In the order of questions, I follow the reading of the Vatic. and the Cantabrig., for it seems to me logical that Paul should begin with the question relating to the meat offered, to ascend therefrom to the question relating to the idol. I admit, however, that the opposite order may also be justified.
The omission of the question relating to the idol in the Sinat., etc., is one of those many lacunae, especially in this MS., which are caused by the recurrence of the same letters at the distance of a few words. In the first question: That the meat offered to the idol is anything? the word anything signifies anything exceptional, having power to exercise a particular influence. In the second question: That an idol is anything? the anything signifies anything real. Sometimes the word has been taken as an adjective: That any idol whatever is, that is to say exists ( , instead of ). But the would be superfluous in this sense. It is more natural to take it as the predicate in the two questions.
Vv. 20. The apostle does not even take the trouble of stating the negative answer which he gives to these two questions; he passes directly to the affirmation which concerns him: Jupiter, Apollo, Venus, certainly, are not real beings; but Satan is something. Behind all that mythological phantasmagoria there lie concealed malignant powers, which, without being divinities, are nevertheless very real, and very active, and which have succeeded in fascinating the human imagination, and in turning aside the religious sentiment of the heathen nations to beings of the fancy; hence the idolatrous worships, worships addressed to those diabolical powers and not to God.
The subst. , the Gentiles, is omitted by the Vatic. and the Greco-Lats.; it is certainly an explanatory addition. This neuter substantive, once introduced, dragged into the T. R. the singular , instead of the plural .
The subject of this latter verb is understood; it is self-evident.
The term , demon, which occurs nowhere else in Paul’s writings except in 1Ti 4:1, has quite another meaning in the New Testament than in the classics. In the latter it is synonymous with , something Divine. Plato in the Symposium, says that demon is something intermediate between God and mortals; and, in another passage: That the demons interpret to the gods the things of men, and to men the things of the gods. Imported into biblical language by the version of the LXX., the word there denotes the fallen angels, so often spoken of in Scripture. Thus Deu 32:17, the LXX. translate the words: jizebekou laschschdim…, (sched probably denoting in Hebrew idols, from schad, to rule). The Jews identified heathen divinities with the demons themselves; thus it is that the LXX. translate in Isa 65:11, the phrase: to prepare a table for the host of heaven, by: to prepare a table for the demon. The pagan Plutarch (De defectu orac., chap. 13) ascribes to wicked spirits all that was barbarous and cruel, for example, human sacrifices in heathen religions. We may compare also Psa 96:5 : For all the gods of the heathen are demons (in Hebrew idols), and Baruch, chap. 4: They sacrifice to demons, not to God. It is in this Jewish acceptation that the term is used here. But the words of the apostle do not imply the idea that every false god worshipped by the heathen corresponds to a particular demon; they signify merely that heathen religions emanate from those malignant spirits, and that consequently the man who takes part in such worship puts himself under their influence. How was it possible, says Heinrici, to sit at such a feast, to be sprinkled with the holy water, to obey the prescription of sacred silence, to take part in the joy of the hymns and dances which filled the interval between the sacrifice and the banquet, and finally to be given up to the joy of the feast which crowned the festive day to the glory of the false god, without acting as a worshipper of the heathen divinity? The diabolical character of idolatry could be masked to a certain extent in Greek heathenism by the charm or majesty of the forms; but is it not clearly unveiled in modern heathen religions, particularly in Hindoo and African forms of worship, in which God’s holy image has come at last to give place completely to hideous and ignoble figures? Besides, the inspiring sentiment of these worships is solely that of fear.
The is progressive: Now I would not. This authoritative form is accounted for by the solicitude of love. A father cannot allow his children to deliver themselves into bad hands.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
What say I then? that a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? [“But, Paul,” say the Corinthians, “your reasoning can not apply to feasts or sacrificial meat offered to idols; for you have already admitted (1Co 8:4) that an idol is a nonentity. By sacrifice a man may establish a communal relationship with God, for God is; but he can establish no such relationship with an idol, for an idol is not-it has no existence.” The understanding of the Corinthians with regard to idols was true, but it was not the whole truth, for there was some reality back of the idol.]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
THE COMMUNION
19. As the blood in the human system is the vitalizer of the whole body, circulating into every member, so the blood of Christ circulates into every member of His mystical body, in Heaven and in earth, imparting to all His own vitality. Hence close communion is out of harmony with the life of Christ, common to all the members of His body and interpenetrating all, great and small. This blood, which is the life, is emblematized by the wine which should be participated in alike by all the members of our Lords body. The bread also emblematizes the body of Christ, and is consequently to be the common participation of all. Since bread is the staff of physical life on which every human body subsists, so it typifies Christ, the Creator and Nourisher of every human spirit. Hence the Eucharist is the visible bond of union, identifying the saints of all ages and nations with the one body of Christ.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
1Co 10:19-20. Application of 1Co 10:16 f and 1Co 10:18 to the idol-feasts, in a form which answers an objection.
What then etc.: in bringing the Christian and Jewish feasts, so full of spiritual significance, as analogies of the heathen feasts, am I not conceding to heathenism the reality of its idol-gods?
Is anything: that any reality underlies the name; that an idol-sacrifice is anything more than common meat, and an idol than a block of wood or stone.
Idol-sacrifices, idol: a climax. The answer to these questions is so plain that Paul does not give it, but merely tells us what he does assert about idols. He does not say that idol-sacrifices or even idols themselves are anything at all, but that the sacrifices offered to them are really offered to demons. Same word in Tob 3:8; Tob 6:15 f; Mat 9:33 f, etc.,
Joh 8:48 f; 1Ti 4:1 : in classic Greek, a superhuman being, (Act 17:18,) generally of an inferior class; elsewhere in the New Testament, an evil superhuman being.
To demons and not to God: word for word from Deu 32:17, LXX.; (cp. Psa 106:37; Bar 4:7;) and probably a correct rendering of the rare Hebrew word there used. That heathen sacrifices are a service rendered to evil spirits, is but an application of the broad principle of Rom 6:16 to the specific matter of idolatry. For it is assumed everywhere in the New Testament that the abstract power and rule of sin have taken concrete form in superhuman beings, acting under one personal head, and bringing evil influences to bear on the human race: Eph 6:12; Eph 2:2; 2Ti 2:26; Rom 16:20; 2Co 4:4. Therefore, every act of sin, being (Rom 6:16) obedience to sin, is also obedience to these superhuman enemies, and tends to carry out their purposes of death. Now idolatry is the ritual of sin. It is, therefore, the ceremonial of the rule of evil spirits over men. Consequently, though the heathen neither intend nor know it, every act of idolatry and whatever tends to support it, is a sacrifice laid on the altar of demons. And nowhere and never was this more evident than at Corinth in Paul’s day. The variety of idols suggests demons rather than Satan.
1Co 10:20 b. Dissuasive from idol-feasts. It is explained and justified by the analogy, in 1Co 10:18, of the Mosaic sacrifices. Those who took part in the sacrificial feasts of the temple were, perhaps unconsciously, supporting by their presence the Mosaic ritual, and thus helping forward the educational and spiritual purposes for which it was ordained by God. And they who sat down at a heathen feast were, really though perhaps unintentionally, giving by their presence countenance to idolatry, and thus helping to maintain it and to accomplish its deadly tendencies. They were thus aiding the work of, and making themselves partners with, demons.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
Paul proceeded to clarify what he meant. He was not saying that sacrifices to idols or idols themselves were anything. That is, sacrifices to idols were not in themselves sinful nor were idols genuine entities. On this point he and the Corinthians agreed. Idols were only pieces of wood or stone, not gods with supernatural powers. Nevertheless these idols represented supernatural powers (1Co 10:20), and so eating cultic meals had genuine significance.