Offence
OFFENCE
This word answers to two different terms in the original, the one signifying a breach of the law, 1Ch 5:15,17, the other a stumbling-block or cause of sin to others, Mat 5:29 ; 18:6-9; or whatever is perverted into an occasion or excuse for sin, Mat 15:12 ; Joh 6:61 ; 1Ch 9:33 ; Gal 5:11 .
Fuente: American Tract Society Bible Dictionary
Offence
The English word offence is derived from the Lat. offendere, to strike against or to injure (O.Fr. offens, Fr. offense), and is employed to translate various Heb. and Gr. nouns, in the sense of an injury, a trespass or a fall, or as an occasion of unbelief, doubt, or apostasy. The chief Heb. words in the OT are the verb , which has the meaning of to trespass or to be guilty, and the noun , in the well-known passages Isa 8:14; Isa 57:14, translated as a stone of stumbling, a stumbling-block. The other terms are generally synonyms of error and sin.
The most important NT words are and . The former is used with respect to a moral fall, a falling beside, and thus completes the conception of sin (, missing the mark) by that of falling short or falling aside. The one is a loss of aim, the other the perversion of aim or culpable error. As transgression, it is found in Rom 4:25; Rom 5:15 bis. Rom 5:16-18; Rom 5:20, where offence in the Authorized Version is rendered trespass in the Revised Version . is found only in Rom 14:20, signifying something to strike against: a man runs, as it were, against an obstacle, and does wrong when he eats contrary to the dictates of his conscience. In 2Co 6:3 is that which causes stumbling, and the Christians are enjoined to place no stumbling-block in the way of others. As an adjective, is used in Act 24:16 with respect to the conscience, also in 1Co 10:32 and in Php 1:10 as giving no occasion of stumbling.
The word (verb, ) is frequently brought into use especially in Matthew. It signifies a bait or stick in a trap and generally anything which causes a person to be entrapped or to fall. It is a modified form of the classic . Sometimes it is used in reference to persons, who may become stumbling-blocks to others. When Christ called St. Peter a stumbling-block, He evidently recognized in His disciples remonstrance the agency of the arch-enemy () who was tempting Him to do what was contrary to the will of God (Mat 16:23). Isaiahs description of the stone of stumbling and the rock of offence (Isa 8:14) is applied by St. Paul to Christ (Rom 9:33) because the lowliness of His origin and of His earthly surroundings as well as the deeply spiritual character of His ministry offended the religious leaders of His day (Mat 13:57). The rejection of His claims by the Pharisees was attended by some irritation and the spirit of opposition (Mat 15:12); thus they were offended or caused to stumble. This was later accentuated by the scandal of the Cross, which, when not accepted in faith as the symbol of the Divine redemption, became a stumbling-block. Its disgrace and ignominy made it difficult for the Jews to accept Christ as their Messiah, and it also roused their animosity to the preachers of the gospel (Gal 5:11). They expected a Messiah who should restore their political freedom and re-establish the kingdom in material success and splendour, and our Lords ministry being essentially spiritual made Him to be a stumbling-block to them. The fault was in their lack of faith and spiritual insight; but, on the other hand, Christs followers are to be on their guard against giving occasion to others to stumble through their own selfishness or folly. Thus the term is employed in reference to actions or habits which might prove to be a stumbling-block to those who are weak or inexperienced. To cause Christs little ones to stumble or to fall is severely condemned (Mat 18:6). The casuistry concerning meats offered to idols should involve the consideration of the hyper-sensitive consciences of the weaker brethren, who are not to be offended or made to stumble by those who are less scrupulous (Romans 14; Rom 15:1-3). In all such cases the exhilarating and newly-found consciousness of liberty is to be controlled by love.
Clement of Rome uses the word in combination with danger, in the sense of a fault incurred through disobedience to the counsels of the Fathers (Cor. 59). Ignatius, whilst not employing the word offence, warns the believers against the snares of the devil and against giving occasion to the heathen to triumph, and thus bringing discredit upon the whole body of believers through the folly of the few (Ep. ad Trall. 8). If love be the ruling principle of Christian morals, there is no , for love removes rather than creates difficulties.
Literature.-articles Offence in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) and in Dict. of Christ and the Gospels ; Sanday-Headlam, International Critical Commentary , Romans, 5 1902, p. 390; F. J. A. Hort, The First Epistle of St. Peter, I. 1-II. 17, 1898, p. 121; F. W. Robertson, Sermons, new ed., 1876, 3rd ser., xvi.; J. Moffatt, Jesus upon Stumbling-blocks, in Expository Times xxvi. [1914-15] 407 ff.
J. G. James.
Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church
Offence
may be either active or passive. We may give offense by our conduct, or we may receive of peace from the conduct of others. The original word (), in our version usually rendered offend, literally signifies to cause to stumble, and by an easy metaphor, to occasion afall into sin (Mat 5:29). It may, therefore, apply to ourselves as well as to others (Mat 18:6-14). Hence the noun signifies not only an offense, in our common use of that word, but also a stumbling- stone, a trap, a snare, or whatever impedes our path to heaven (Mat 18:17; Rom 14:13; 1Co 10:32). Sometimes offense is taken unreasonably; men, as Peter says, stumble at the word, being disobedient. Hence we read of the offense of the cross (Gal 5:11; Gal 6:12). To positive truth or duty we must adhere, even at the hazard of giving’ offense; but a woe is on us if we give it unnecessarily (Rom 14:13-21; 1Co 8:9-13). We should be very careful to avoid giving just cause of offense, lest we prove impediments to others in their reception of the truth, in their progress in sanctification, in their peace of mind, or in their general bourse towards heaven. We should abridge or deny ourselves in some things, rather than, by exercising our liberty to the utmost, give uneasiness to Christians weaker in mind or weaker in the faith than ourselves (1Co 10:32). On the other hand, we should not take offense without ample cause, but endeavor by our exercise of charity, and perhaps by our increase of knowledge, to think favorably of what is dubious, as well as honorably of what is laudable.
It was foretold of the Messiah that he should be a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense (Isa 8:14; Rom 9:32-33; 1Pe 2:8). Perhaps predictions of this kind are among the most valuable which Providence has preserved to us, as we see by them that we ought not to be discouraged because the Jews, the natural people of the Messiah, rejected him, and still reject him; since the very offense they take at his humiliation, death, etc., is in perfect conformity to and fulfillment of those prophecies which foretold that, however they might profess to wish for the great Deliverer, yet when he came they would overlook him, and stumble at him.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Offence
(1.) An injury or wrong done to one (1 Sam. 25:31; Rom. 5:15).
(2.) A stumbling-block or cause of temptation (Isa. 8:14; Matt. 16:23; 18:7). Greek skandalon, properly that at which one stumbles or takes offence. The “offence of the cross” (Gal. 5:11) is the offence the Jews took at the teaching that salvation was by the crucified One, and by him alone. Salvation by the cross was a stumbling-block to their national pride.
Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Offence
OFFENCE.This article deals with the ideas connected with the words and , and, in so far as they are applied in the same moral sphere, with those suggested by , , and . The literal meaning of , which is probably the Alexandrian form of , may be the part of a trap to which the bait is fastened, and which, when it is touched, springs up and catches the victim; but in Scripture the sense is not so definite. It may be questioned, indeed, whether it is ever used literally; and the figurative or ethical use of it, which is peculiar to Scripture, is what we are now to investigate. The one idea which is constant in every use of the word, literal or figurative, is that of hurt sustained; it may even be of ruin incurred, by the person who encounters the . It will be convenient to exhibit the Scriptural view of the subject by referring (1) to the experience of Jesus; (2) to the teaching of Jesus; and (3) to the application of this in the Apostolic Church.
1. Experience of Jesus.When Jesus visited Nazareth, and taught in the synagogue so that all were astonished, astonishment soon passed into a kind of carping criticism. Whence hath this man these things, and what is the wisdom that has been given to him? And these mighty works that are being done by him? Is not this the carpenter? And so on (Mar 6:2 f. ||). The people had been used to Jesus in one aspect or character, and they could not adjust themselves to Him in another. There was something in His present appearance and claims which they could not get over: as the Evangelists put it, . Jesus Himself was the with which, for the time at least, they collided: it was to their hurt even at the moment (He could do no mighty work there because of their unbelief, Mar 6:5), and it would be their ruin if it were their final attitude. Probably before Jesus can become a , men must have felt the attraction in Him: it is only when closer acquaintance reveals something in Him, or in the consequences of attachment to Him, which is repellent to the natural man, that He becomes a , and those who were once attracted fall away. They stumble at something which attachment to Him involves; they cannot get over it, and so they desert Him. This is the connexion in which occurs in Mar 14:27; Mar 14:29 and ||. Jesus on the last night of His life recalls to the Twelve the prophecy of Zechariah (Zec 13:7): I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered, and applies it by adding, All ye . They had felt the charm of Jesus, and continued with Him in His temptations so far; but a Messiah who should be seized, tortured, and crucified by sinners would be too much for them. In spite of all they had seen and felt in Him, they would stumble at this, and leave Him in the lurch. It is the same idea, mutatis mutandis, which is found in Mar 4:17 and || Mt.; the rocky ground hearers, who have shown a warm appreciation of the word, are taken aback when they find that they have to endure, persecution because of it, and immediately they are offended. Luk 8:13 gives the correct interpretation: in time of temptation they fall away. The parable of the Sower, standing where it does, is not so much a prophecy, though it is prophetic, as a summary of the disenchanting experiences of Jesus. He had seen many enthusiasms chill, the moment fidelity to Him exacted any sacrifice. In one sense this is the offence of the cross, though it is not what St. Paul means by this expression. We are in the same circle of ideas in Mat 24:1 f., Joh 16:9 f. Jesus warns His disciples of coming persecutions; they as well as He have the cross to bear; and while many will stumble at it,that is, find it too much for them, a thing which they cannot get over, and must simply decline,He tells the Twelve beforehand, that being forewarned they may be forearmed against the peril of apostasy.
One of the most striking instances of in the experience of Jesus is that which is connected with John the Baptist. John was evidently disappointed somehow in Jesus. He had had reason to regard Him as the Messiah, but He was not the Messiah John had expected. Where were the axe and the fan and the consuming fire? Why, if the Messiah had really come, were not all wrongs irresistibly righted? Why was a true servant of God like himself left to suffer for fidelity to his Master? It is to this temper in John that Jesus says, Blessed is he whosoever shall not be offended in me (Mat 11:6, Luk 7:23). We must not impose our preconceptions on God, and dictate to Him the terms on which He may have recognition from us. This always implies the risk that we may stumble at what He actually doesrefuse to recognize Him in Jesus because the manifestation does not square with our demands. The Baptist here is a perfect illustration of St. Pauls words, written in immediate connexion with his idea of Christ as : Jews claim signs. They say, Let God signalize His presence; let Him make bare His holy arm, and break in pieces the oppressor, and we will see and believe Him; and when they see nothing of this in Jesus, they stumble at Him. He becomes a to them. And just as Jesus in His acts may become an offence to those who anticipated something quite different, so may He be by anything disconcerting or too challenging in His teaching. Thus the Pharisees in Mat 15:12 were offended by the word in which He seemed to abolish the distinction between clean and unclean meats: they could not get over the idea that a distinction on which so much of their sanctity depended should be so summarily swept away. It finally repelled them from Jesus. And in Joh 6:61 we find disciples put out, as it were, by the hard sayings about eating the flesh of the Son of Man, and drinking His blood: it is almost more than they can stand, and Jesus asks ; Doth this cause you to stumble? Almost anything in Jesus may become a ground of stumblingthe demands He makes, the sacrifices which fidelity to Him entails, His disappointment of our expectations, the paradoxical and apparently impossible elements of His teaching. And all these become grounds of stumbling to those who have made some acquaintance with Him, been to some degree attracted and held by Him. To be offended in Him is the sin of those who have had the opportunity of being disciples.
Even though the words , , are not used at every point, the whole of the central division of the Gospel according to Matthew (chs. 1118) may he read as a series of illustrations of them. In ch. 11 we have the Baptist, the whole generation (Mat 11:16 ff.), the favoured cities (20 ff.), and especially the wise and prudent (Mat 11:25), offended in Jesus. In ch. 12 we have first the Pharisees, and then His mother and brothers. In ch. 13 the parable of the Sower gives the keynote: it is the experience of one who knows what it is to be an offence: cf. Mat 13:21; Mat 13:41. In ch. 14 there is the miraculous feeding with which, the great offence proved in Joh 6:14 f., Joh 6:66 is connected. Then cf. Mat 15:12; Mat 16:23; Mat 17:17; Mat 17:27; Mat 18:6 ff.
There is another side to the experience of Jesus, that in which the is not found in Him, but presented to Him. In Mat 16:23 He says to Peter . He had been telling His disciples for the first time of the necessity of His death, and Peter had made a vivacious remonstrance. He had tried, in short, to put Jesus at fault about the path appointed for Him by the Father. He had the human temper which avoids suffering at all costs, not the Divine love which at any cost is faithful to its calling; and in yielding to his human temper he had made himself a stumbling-block in Jesus way. It is a signal illustration of a mans foes shall be they of his own household. But Jesus does not stumble: in , , He sweeps the from His path.
2. Teaching of Jesus.It is remarkable that almost the only thing approaching to a discourse of Jesus in our earliest Gospel (if we omit the chapter of parables (ch. 4) and the eschatological discourse (ch. 13)) deals with the subject of offences, and this in both the aspects in which we have seen offence appear in the experience of Jesus: Mar 9:42 ff.
(a) There is first the giving of offence to others. The others are conceived as discipleslittle ones who believe (Mat 18:6 says who believe in me). To offend such means to be responsible for leading them into sin; and when we think what and whose they are, it means to be responsible for their separation by sin from Christ. Thus to mislead the little ones who believe is for Jesus the sin of sins: all the Evangelists record the terrific words in which He denounced it (Mar 9:42, Mat 18:6, Luk 17:2). It is singular that side by side with this both Mt. and Lk. preserve a saying in which the inevitableness of offences coming is admitted, while unabated woe is pronounced on him through whom they come. Nothing is said by Jesus about how they come, that is, about the ways in which the little ones who believe are led into sins which put them at fault about Him; but what has been said above about Jesus as a has its application here. What is meant is in principle to seduce them to ways of thinking or acting such as led men to stumble at Jesus while He lived. It is only in the Christian society that this sin can be committed, and there is something peculiarly solemn in the picture of the Last Judgment in Mat 13:41 the Son of Man shall send His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom . There is in the life of Jesus one very interesting illustration of His own care in avoiding what might cause others to stumble (Mat 17:24-27). Here we seewhat will repeatedly come up laterthat an inconsiderate use of our spiritual liberty as children of God may prove a stumbling-block to those who do not understand it; and we are taught by the example and word of Jesus that conduct is never to be decided merely by the abstract principle that this or that is in itself legitimate; part of the motive on which a Christian must always act is consideration for others, and the moral significance of his conduct for them. Of course, there is the complementary consideration of what the principle requires, and though it is not to be pressed to the hurt of little ones who believe, it is not to be sacrificed to obscurantists or hypocrites (see for an illustration of this Mat 15:12-14). All this will reappear in what is sometimes regarded as the characteristically Pauline part of NT teaching.
(b) Equally important with His sayings on causing others to stumble are those in which Jesus warns His disciples against allowing anything to cause themselves to stumble. There are three of these in Mar 9:43; Mar 9:45; Mar 9:47 (Mar 9:44; Mar 9:46 are spurious), and they are found twice in Mt. (Mat 5:29 f., Mat 18:8 f.). It is a fair inference from this that, though Lk. does not give them, they were found in the collection of discourses used by him and Mt. as well as in Mk. (Mt. inserting them in his Gospel from both sources), and therefore that they belong to the most surely authenticated words of Jesus. What Jesus contemplates is that ones hand or foot or eye may cause one to stumblein other words, that something in his nature, something which is in itself legitimate, may mislead one in the spiritual region and alienate him from Christ; and He declares that to prevent such a catastrophe no severity to nature can be too great. The right eye is to be plucked out, the right hand or foot cut off and cast away: it is better to enter into life halt or maimed or with one eye, than to go with two eyes and feet and hands into the everlasting fire. It is easy to argue against this from the point of view of self-realization and the development of all sides of our nature, but the peremptory and vehement tone of Jesus does not suggest arguing. For men whose nature is what ours is, living in the world in which we live, and called to discipleship to Jesus, situations will emerge in which salvation depends simply on whether we have it in us to subject nature to summary and surgical treatment. If a man will do no violence to his nature, but claims liberty for it on every side,if he will go wherever his feet can carry him, do whatever his hands itch to do, look at whatever his eyes long to see,the end will not be a complete and rounded character, it will be the forfeiture of all character; it will not be an abundant entrance into life, it will be hell fire. This is the philosophy of Puritanism. It is relative no doubt to human nature as Jesus knew it and as we know it; but as that is the only human nature we have to do with, it is absolute enough. It is as much a matter of life and death in the teaching of Jesus that we should not allow natural impulses to put us at fault about Him, as that we should not become responsible for putting others at fault. The most passionate words that ever fell from His lips deal with and in both these vital aspects.
3. The Apostolic Church.When we pass from Jesus to the Apostolic writings, we find new illustrations and applications of His teaching, but no new ethical ideas. Thus the conception recurs (a) of Christ Himself as . In the gospel which presented a crucified man as the power and the wisdom of God, there was something which people could not get over; they stumbled at it and turned away. This was especially true of the Jews (1Co 1:23). They could not accommodate themselves to a Messiah who had been hanged, especially when they thought of Deu 21:23. As the act of striking against an obstacle is often painful and irritating, it was this offence of the cross which explained the persecution of St. Paul by the Jews, and even by Christians who did not know what Christianity meant (Gal 5:11): it was the reaction of their soreness against what caused it. The early Christians, who had naturally difficulty in understanding how Christ could be a stumbling-block, found relief for their minds in this as in similar perplexities by discovering that the disconcerting fact had been predicted in the OT. It lay not outside of, but within the Divine counsel and plan. In Rom 9:33, 1Pe 2:8, Christ is spoken of as (a loose stone on the road against which the traveller strikes his foot = ) and (a rock projecting through the soil, over which he falls = ). [On the relation of these two passages to each other and to Isa 8:14; Isa 28:16, see Sanday and Headlam on Romans, and Hort on 1 Pet.]. What it was in Christ over which men stumbled, Peter does not say: but in Paul it is clear that what the Jews could not get over was the demand involved in Christs atoning death, that they should renounce the pursuit of a righteousness of their own, and humble themselves to receive in faith the gift of a Divine righteousness. It was the cross that was a stumbling-block, and it was a stumbling-block to pride.
(b) In the main, however, is discussed in the Apostolic writings in connexion with the possibility that Christians may cause others, especially weaker Christians, to stumble, and so to forfeit their connexion with Christ. The danger of doing this is the more serious that it is possible to do it (so to speak) with a good conscience. It comes up mainly in 1 Corinthians 8-10 and Romans 14. In both these passages the central idea is that of Christian liberty, and the problem is what are the Christian conditions of its exercise. There are minds which are intoxicated by it, and will not hear anything of conditions. They know what the Christian principle is, and to determine their conduct they do not need to think of anything else. They know, for example, that an idol is nothing in the world, and that is enough to answer all questions about their relation to idolatryabout buying and eating meat which had been sacrificed in a pagan temple, about attending a pagan friends feast in the temple, and so forth. They know that the earth is the Lords, and all that it contains; and that is enough to answer all questions about eating and drinking. In this region all things are lawful for them. It is at this point that St. Paul interposes in the spirit of Mat 17:24-27 (see above, 2 a). The knowledge of the Christian principle, he insists, is not enough. He accepts the principle, with a half-ironical depreciation of it: We know that we all have knowledgeas if he would say, but that does not carry us far (1Co 8:1). In dealing with conduct we must always consider its moral consequences, both to others and to ourselves; we must consider not only an abstract principle, which may in itself be sound enough, but the practical effect of acting upon it in given conditions. We must consider, in particular, whether it may not cause others or ourselves to stumble. These are distinct questions, yet involved in each other. If we cause another to stumble by what we do, our own ruin is inseparable from his. St. Paul accepts the principle of liberty, but qualifies it in both directions to avoid and . Thus he writes, All things are lawful for me, but all things do not edify, sc. the Church (1Co 10:23); and the edifying or building up of the Church is the rule of all Christian action (1Co 14:26, Rom 14:19; Rom 15:2). To be Christian, in other words, conduct has to be guided not merely by knowledge, but by love. It has to include a reference to Christs interest in others, especially in the weak; a Christian sins grievously when he asserts his liberty in disregard of that. The extraordinary vehemence of St. Pauls language in discussing this subject reminds us vividly of our Lords words in the same connexion. For meat destroy not the work of God (Rom 14:20). Through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whose sake Christ died (1Co 8:11). If meat maketh my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore (1Co 8:13). Who is made to stumble, and I am not on fire with pain? (2Co 11:29). These are flashes of the same fire which glows in Mat 18:6-9. The use of Christian liberty in an environment of paganism no doubt presented many moral problems, all with possibilities of in them. A false solution, legitimating a free relation to pagan worship and its ordinary festive and sensual accompaniments, which no doubt caused many to stumble, is denounced in Rev 2:14; possibly in the Apostolic decree of Act 15:28 f. we have a more considerate and Christian solution for a special set of circumstances. (For the interpretation of the decree, practically in this sense, see Lightfoot, Galatians, 306 ff.; Chase, Credibility of the Acts, 96 f.). In the whole region in which liberty can be asserted, it is to be exercised only in subordination to love; to violate this rule and so injure others in their conscience and in their relation to Christ is the most un-Christian sin of which a Christian can be guilty. But Paul is aware of the other side of alsothat in which a man so acts as to lead to his own stumbling, and the perdition of his own soul. All things are lawful for me, but not only do all things not build up the Church, but I will not be tyrannized over by any (1Co 6:12). A man may be befooled by his wisdom: if he is puffed up in the consciousness that he comprehends the principles of Christianity, he is quite capable of yielding to his natural appetites under the delusion that he is exercising a Christian liberty. St. Paul dreaded this for himself. 1Co 9:24-27especially after v. 1 Am I not free?is written in the very spirit of Mar 9:43-47, and in 1 Corinthians 10 the Apostle warns his converts of the peril which awaits them, if secure in their Christianity they slip into easy relations with paganism. In the end of this chapter the idea of offence is generalized. Show yourselves. persons in whom there is no occasion of stumblingboth to Jews and Gentiles and to the Church of God (1Co 10:32). This is a final if not the supreme maxim of Christian ethics; there must be nothing in the Christians conduct which could mislead, disconcert, or repel any person seeking or enjoying relations with Christ. Put positively, it is the rule of the Apostles own action: I have become all things to all men if by all means I might save some (1Co 9:22); which again is but one form of the Golden Rule. Hence the teaching of the NT on offences can be summed up in Mat 7:12. The only passage in which occurs in Jn. (1Jn 2:10) perhaps combines the two references which it has elsewhere. When a Christian loves his brother, there is no in him; he does not cause others to stumble, and he does not create difficulties in his own path. The triumph of love is that it creates no prejudice against the Truth (Wescott, ad loc.).
Literature.Cremer, Bibl.-Theol. Lex. s.vv.; Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible iii. 586; Sanday-Headlam, Romans, p. 390; Hort, First Peter, p. 121; Garr, Hor. Bibl. 58: F. W. Robertson, Sermons, 3rd ser. xvi.; Bushnell, Serm. on Liv. Subjects, xix.; Dale, Weekday Serm, p. 216; Martensen, Chr. Ethics, i. 418 ff.; ExpT [Note: xpT Expository Times.] v. [1894] 147; Life of John Cairns, 438; J. B. Lightfoot, Cambridge Sermons (1890), 248; W. G. Rutherford, The Keg of Knowledge (1901), 134.
James Denney.
Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels
Offence
OFFENCE.The Greek word skandalon is properly used of a stick in a trap on which the bait is placed, and which, when touched by the animal, springs up and shuts the trap (Liddell and Scott). The word is used by Christ (Mat 18:7, Luk 17:1) of offences in the form of hindrances to the faith of believers, especially of Christs little ones. The context makes it clear what kind of stumbling-blocks are referred to. In the corresponding passage in the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5:29-30; cf. Mar 9:45; Mar 9:47) the right eye and right hand are given as instances of the kind of offences that may arise. The members here cited are not only in themselves good and serviceable, but necessary, though they are capable, in certain circumstances, of becoming the occasion of sin to us. In the same way the Christian may find pursuits and pleasures, which in themselves are innocent, bringing unexpected temptations and involving him in sin. The possible applications of this are numerous, whether the warning be referred to artistic gifts (the hand and eye), or abuses of certain kinds of food and drink, or any other circumstances which may lead a man from the higher life or divert him from his aims. All these may be compared to the stumbling-blocks which cause a man to fall. Such things must be dispensed with, for the sake of entering the eternal life, which is the Christian mans goal.
T. A. Moxon.
Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible
Offence
See SIN.
Fuente: Concise Bible Dictionary
Offence
originally was “the name of the part of a trap to which the bait is attached, hence, the trap or snare itself, as in Rom 11:9, RV, ‘stumblingblock,’ quoted from Psa 69:22, and in Rev 2:14, for Balaam’s device was rather a trap for Israel than a stumblingblock to them, and in Mat 16:23, for in Peter’s words the Lord perceived a snare laid for Him by Satan.
“In NT skandalon is always used metaphorically, and ordinarily of anything that arouses prejudice, or becomes a hindrance to others, or causes them to fall by the way. Sometimes the hindrance is in itself good, and those stumbled by it are the wicked.”
Thus it is used (a) of Christ in Rom 9:33, “(a rock) of offense;” so 1Pe 2:8; 1Co 1:23 (AV and RV, “stumblingblock”), and of His CROSS, Gal 5:11 (RV, ditto); of the “table” provided by God for Israel, Rom 11:9 (see above); (b) of that which is evil, e.g., Mat 13:41, RV, “things that cause stumbling” (AV, “things that offend”), lit., “all stumblingblocks;” Mat 18:7, RV, “occasions of stumbling” and “occasion;” Luk 17:1 (ditto); Rom 14:13, RV, “an occasion of falling” (AV, “an occasion to fall”), said of such a use of Christian liberty as proves a hindrance to another; Rom 16:17, RV, “occasions of stumbling,” said of the teaching of things contrary to sound doctrine; 1Jo 2:10, “occasion of stumbling,” of the absence of this in the case of one who loves his brother and thereby abides in the light. Love, then, is the best safeguard against the woes pronounced by the Lord upon those who cause others to stumble. See FALL, B, Note (3). Cp. the Sept. in Hos 4:17, “Ephraim partaking with idols hath laid stumblingblocks in his own path.”
“an obstacle against which one may dash his foot” (akin to proskopto, “to stumble” or “cause to stumble;” pros, “to or against,” kopto, “to strike”), is translated “offense” in Rom 14:20, in Rom 14:13, “a stumblingblock,” of the spiritual hindrance to another by a selfish use of liberty (cp. No. 1 in the same verse); so in 1Co 8:9. It is used of Christ, in Rom 9:32-33, RV, “(a stone) of stumbling,” and 1Pe 2:8, where the AV also has this rendering. Cp. the Sept. in Exo 23:33, “these (the gods of the Canaanites) will be an offense (stumblingblock) unto thee.”
like No. 2, and formed from the same combination, occurs in 2Co 6:3, RV, “occasion of stumbling” (AV, “offense”), something which leads others into error or sin. Cp. the Sept. in Pro 16:18, “a haughty spirit (becomes) a stumblingblock” (i.e., to oneself).
Notes: (1) In the AV of Rom 4:25; Rom 5:15 (twice), Rom 5:16-18, Rom 5:20, paraptoma, “a trepass,” is translated “offense.” See TRESPASS. (2) In 2Co 11:7, AV, hamartia, a sin, is translated “an offense.” See SIN.
akin to A, No. 3, with a, negative, prefixed, is used (a) in the Active sense, “not causing to stumble,” in 1Co 10:32, metaphorically of “refraining from doing anything to lead astray” either Jews or Greeks or the church of God (i.e., the local church), RV, “no occasion of stumbling” (AV, “none offense”); (b) in the Passive sense, “blameless, without stumbling;” Act 24:16, “(a conscience) void of offense;” Phi 1:10, “void of (AV, without) offense.” The adjective is found occasionally in the papyri writings.