1 Corinthians 8:8,9

“Now meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. 9. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling - block to them that are weak.” The transition between this verse and the foregoing is as follows: By eating such meats thou mayest therefore lead the weak brother to defile himself (1 Corinthians 8:8); but as for thyself thou hast nothing to gain, any more than thou hast to lose, by not eating. The conclusion is obvious.

The verb παριστάναι, to present, is often used of the presenting of offerings to God; comp. Romans 12:1; Romans 6:13, etc.; and if we read the verb in the present with the T. R., it is the most natural sense: “It is not in the power of meats to add anything to or take anything from the value which our consecration to His service has in the sight of God.” If we read the future with the Alex., we must, like Holsten and others, apply the verb to the day of judgment; comp. 2 Corinthians 4:14; Romans 14:10: “Meats will not make us stand before God in that day.” This meaning is much more foreign to the context; for the threat will not come till later (1 Corinthians 8:11-12). The parallels quoted in its favour prove nothing, the verb present being used in a wholly different relation. Here we have a general maxim, with which the present is in keeping. Bengel, Meyer, Hofmann, in order to explain more easily the connection of this proposition with the two following alternatives, give the verb a morally indifferent meaning: “Meats determine our relation to God neither for good nor evil (neque ad placendum, neque ad displicendum, Bengel).” This sense would be more natural in the philosophical style than in biblical language. The meaning which we have given may be suitable in the two following propositions; the privation of that which has no relation, causes no loss.

The order of the two following propositions in A B (see critical note) is condemned by the other Mjj. and by the ancient versions.

Calvin, Mosheim, and others have seen in this verse an objection of the Corinthians: “Meats not being able to procure either approval or condemnation, we may consequently act at will.” Paul, they say, answers in 1 Corinthians 8:9. But this argument would rather be opposed than favourable to the conduct of the strong. For if those meats neither caused them gain nor loss, but may through them cause their brother to sin (1 Corinthians 8:7), it is evident that they ought to abstain in cases where this last result may be produced. The consequence of 1 Corinthians 8:8 therefore is, that no importance whatever is to be attached to those meats in themselves. Hence 1 Corinthians 8:9: But there is importance in not causing one's brother to sin by means of those meats.

Vv. 9. The δέ is adversative: but. The term βλέπετε, consider well, is opposed to the lightness with which the Corinthians used their right.

In the word, ἐξουσία, power, right, here liberty, there is an allusion to the favourite formula of the strong at Corinth: “All things are lawful for me.” The connection must be observed between ἐξουσία and ἔξεστι.

The pronoun αὕτη, this liberty, strongly contrasts this power, which is in itself an advantage, with the evil effects which it may produce when imprudently exercised. And now from these general considerations the apostle comes to their application.