The interpretation timeline
1 Corinthians 8:1 Douay-Rheims

Now concerning those things that are sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up; but charity edifieth.

A.D. 202 – 1849 10 witnesses 12 excerpts

Patristic

before A.D. 750
202
A.D.
Irenaeus Patristic
c. A.D. 130–202
“It is therefore better and more profitable to belong to the simple and unlettered class, and by means of love to attain to nearness to God, than, by imagining ourselves learned and skilful, to be found [among those who are] blasphemous against their own God, inasmuch as they conjure up another God as the Father. And for this reason Paul exclaimed, "Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth:" not that he meant to inveigh against a true knowledge of God, for in that case he would have accused himself; but, because he knew that some, puffed up by the pretence of knowledge, fall away from the love of God, and imagine that they themselves are perfect, for this reason that they set forth an imperfect Creator, with the view of putting an end to the pride which they feel on account of knowledge of this kind, he says, "Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth." Now there can be no greater conceit than this, that any one should imagine he is better and more perfect than He who made and fashioned him, and imparted to him the breath of life, and commanded this very thing into existence. It is therefore better, as I have said, that one should have no knowledge whatever of any one reason why a single thing in creation has been made, but should believe in God, and continue in His love, than that, puffed up through knowledge of this kind, he should fall away from that love which is the life of man; and that he should search after no other knowledge except [the knowledge of] Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was crucified for us, than that by subtle questions and hair-splitting expressions he should fall into impiety.”
Source
215
A.D.
c. A.D. 150–215
“"If any man thinketh that he knoweth anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know." For truth is never mere opinion. But the "supposition of knowledge inflates," and fills with pride; "but charity edifieth," which deals not in supposition, but in truth. Whence it is said, "If any man loves, he is known."”
“But the knowledge of those who think themselves wise, whether the barbarian sects or the philosophers among the Greeks, according to the apostle, "puffeth up." But that knowledge, which is the scientific demonstration of what is delivered according to the true philosophy, is rounded on faith.”
“"We know that we all have knowledge"-common knowledge in common things, and the knowledge that there is one God. For he was writing to believers; whence he adds, "But knowledge (gnosis) is not in all," being communicated to few. And there are those who say that the knowledge about things sacrificed to idols is not promulgated among all, "lest our liberty prove a stumbling-block to the weak. For by thy knowledge he that is weak is destroyed."”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“"Now concerning things sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge." Leaving alone the weak, which he always doth, he discourses with the strong first. And this is what he did also in the Epistle to the Romans, saying, "But thou, why dost thou judge thy brother?" for this is the sort of person that is able to receive rebuke also with readiness. Exactly the same then he doth here also. And first he makes void their conceit by declaring that this very thing which they considered as peculiar to themselves, the having perfect knowledge, was common to all. Thus, "we know," saith he, "that we all have knowledge." For if allowing them to have high thoughts, he had first pointed out how hurtful the thing was to others, he would not have done them so much good as harm. For the ambitious soul when it plumes itself upon any thing, even though the same do harm to others, yet strongly adheres to it because of the tyranny of vain-glory. Wherefore Paul first examines the matter itself by itself: just as he had done before in the case of the wisdom from without, demolishing it with a high hand. But in that case he did it as we might have expected: for the whole thing was altogether blameworthy and his task was very easy. Wherefore he signifies it to be not only useless, but even contrary to the Gospel. But in the present case it was not possible to do this. For what was done was of knowledge, and perfect knowledge. Nor was it safe to overthrow it, and yet in no other way was it possible to cast out the conceit which had resulted from it. What then doeth he? First, by signifying that it was common, he curbs that swelling pride of theirs. For they who possess something great and excellent are more elated, when they alone have it; but if it be made out that they possess it in common with others, they no longer have so much of this feeling. First then he makes it common property, because they considered it to belong to themselves alone. Next, having made it common, he does not make himself singly a sharer in it with them; for in this way too he would have rather set them up; for as to be the only possessor elates, so to have one partner or two perhaps among leading persons has this effect just as much. For this reason he does not mention himself but all: he said not, "I too have knowledge," but, "we know that we all have knowledge." This then is one way, and the first, by which he cast down their pride; the next hath greater force. What then is this? In that he shews that not even this thing itself was in all points complete, but imperfect, and extremely so. And not only imperfect, but also injurious, unless there were another thing joined together with it. For having said that "we have knowledge," he added, "Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth:" so that when it is without love, it lifts men up to absolute arrogance. "And yet not even love," you will say, "without knowledge hath any advantage." Well: this he did not say; but omitting it as a thing allowed by all, he signifies that knowledge stands in extreme need of love. For he who loves, inasmuch as he fulfils the commandment which is most absolute of all, even though he have some defects, will quickly be blest with knowledge because of his love; as Cornelius and many others. But he that hath knowledge but hath not love, not only shall gain nothing more, but shall also be cast out of that which he hath, in many cases falling into arrogance. It seems then that knowledge is not productive of love, but on the contrary debars from it him that is not on his guard, puffing him up and elating him. For arrogance is wont to cause divisions: but love both draws together and leads to knowledge. And to make this plain he saith, "But if any man loveth God, the same is known of Him." So that "I forbid not this," saith he, "namely, your having perfect knowledge; but your having it with love, that I enjoin; else is it no gain, but rather loss." Do you see how he already sounds the first note of his discourse concerning love? For since all these evils were springing from the following root, i.e., not from perfect knowledge, but from their not greatly loving nor sparing their neighbors; whence ensued both their variance and their self-satisfaction, and all the rest which he had charged them with; both before this and after he is continually providing for love; so correcting the fountain of all good things. "Now why," saith he, "are ye puffed up about knowledge? For if ye have not love, ye shall even be injured thereby. For what is worse than boasting? But if the other be added, the first also will be in safety. For although you may know something more than your neighbor, if you love him you will not set yourself up but lead him also to the same." Wherefore also having said, "Knowledge puffeth up," he added, "but love edifieth." He did not say, "Behaveth itself modestly," but what is much more, and more gainful. For their knowledge was not only puffing them up but also distracting them. On this account he opposes the one to the other.”
Source
430
A.D.
Augustine of Hippo Patristic
A.D. 354–430
“Paul means that knowledge only does good in company with love. Otherwise it merely puffs a man into pride.”

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1270
A.D.
1225–1276
“With the error concerning the correction of crimes excluded, in chapters V and VI; likewise concerning virginity and marriage, in chapter VII; here he excludes the error concerning the eating and abstaining from foods, in this chapter, and IX and X, speaking of those things which were sacrificed to idols, from which — although lawful in themselves — he counsels abstaining: first, by alleging to them the scandal of the weak, in this chapter; second, the example of himself, who on account of others abstains from receiving lawful wages, in chapter IX; third, the example of the punishment of the Jews, laid low in the desert after so many benefits of God, in chapter X. Therefore, on account of the scandal of the neighbor, by the example of the apostle, and not on account of fear of punishment, we ought sometimes to abstain from foods that are lawful. In the first part he shows that the eating of things offered to idols is lawful in itself; second, he counsels nevertheless to abstain on account of the scandal of the weak brothers, where: "see lest perhaps," etc. In the first, first he proposes that the greater among them have knowledge concerning things offered to idols; second, he shows what kind of knowledge they have concerning them, where: "but concerning the foods that are sacrificed to idols," etc.; third, that certain weak ones lack this knowledge, where: "but knowledge is not in all," etc.; fourth, that others ought not to eat things offered to idols in their presence, where: "food however does not commend us to God." In the first, first he says that they have knowledge concerning things offered to idols; second, that they have it uselessly without charity, where: "but knowledge puffs up," etc.; third he shows by whom this knowledge is had insufficiently, where: "but if any man think"; fourth, by whom sufficiently, where: "but if any man love," etc. He says therefore, "but concerning these things," etc., as if to say: concerning the aforesaid things you asked of me, namely concerning things pertaining to marriage; but concerning other things, as concerning things sacrificed to idols, it was not necessary to ask, because you all know the truth on this matter. And this is what he says: "but concerning these things that are sacrificed to idols," whether it is lawful to eat or not, I and you know that it is lawful to eat them, according to that word to Titus 1:15: "all things are clean to the clean." "We know that we all have knowledge" — namely I and you who are perfect among others — that is, knowledge concerning the creator and creatures; and therefore we are less excusable if we do evil. Then, when he says "but knowledge puffs up," etc., here he shows how they have knowledge uselessly without charity, as if to say: you indeed have knowledge, but it does not avail you, because from it you grow proud against the ignorant; but knowledge, if it stands alone, puffs up. Ecclesiastes 1:18: "in much wisdom there is much indignation." Acts 26:24: "much learning doth make thee mad." For this was the plague of the Egyptians, that is, of the wise of this world: "swelling blisters," Exodus 9:9. But charity builds up the weak, which lets go of what could harm them, because it does not seek the things that are its own. Whence charity must be added to knowledge. Augustine: "add therefore charity to knowledge, and knowledge will be useful." In itself indeed it is useless, but from charity it is useful. The Philosopher: "to know profits either nothing, or little, toward virtue." Then, when he says "but if any man think," etc., here he shows by whom this knowledge is had insufficiently, namely by those who use it to the harm of the neighbor. And his reasoning is this: whoever has knowledge and not the manner of using it, has knowledge insufficiently; but he who has knowledge without charity is of this kind; therefore he who has knowledge without charity, has knowledge insufficiently. First, therefore, he supposes knowledge without charity; second, he shows the insufficiency of such knowledge, where: "he hath not yet known," etc.; third, the reason of the insufficiency, where: "as it behooveth," etc. He says therefore, "but if any man," etc., as if to say: you have knowledge, but not sufficient, because if any of you thinks that he knows, having knowledge without charity, he knows something, namely that it is lawful to eat things offered to idols. Nevertheless he has not yet known, because he shows by his deed that he does not know how it behooves him to know, that is, how he ought to use knowledge — namely unto edification, not unto the harm of others. But to know happens in two ways, namely to have knowledge and to use knowledge: just as to see is to have sight, and to use sight. The Gloss of Bernard: here the apostle does not approve one who knows many things, if he has not known the manner of knowing. For the manner of knowing is that you know in what order, with what zeal, to what end it behooves each thing to be known: in what order, so that what is more urgent unto salvation comes first; with what zeal, so that what is more efficacious unto love be sought more ardently; to what end, so that you do not wish to know something for empty glory or curiosity, but for the edification of yourself and your neighbor. For there are those who wish to know for this end only, that they may know, and it is curiosity; some, that they may be known, and it is vanity; some, that they may sell their knowledge, and it is base gain; some, that they may be edified, and it is prudence; some, that they may edify, and it is charity. Then, when he says "but if any man love," etc., here he shows by whom this knowledge is had sufficiently, namely by those who use it out of charity. First, therefore, he supposes knowledge with charity; second, he shows the sufficiency of such knowledge, where: "the same is known." He says therefore, "if any man," etc., as if to say: he does not know perfectly who does not know how it behooves him to know. "But if any man love God," and thus has charity together with knowledge, "the same is known" — that is, approved — by him. "For the Lord knoweth who are his," 2 Timothy 2:19. Whence such a one truly knows, with God approving, because he uses knowledge well on account of the charity joined to it. It should be noted here that for someone to know how it behooves him to know, nine things are necessary. First, humbly, without puffing up. Philippians 4:12: "I know how to be humbled." Psalm 130:2: "if I did not feel humbly." Second, soberly, without presumption. Above, chapter 2:2: "I did not judge myself to know." Romans 12:3: "not to be wiser than it behooveth." Third, with certainty, without hesitation. 2 Timothy 1:12: "I know whom I have believed, and I am certain." Fourth, truly and without error. 2 Timothy 3:7: "ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth." Fifth, simply, without deception. 1 Timothy 6:20: "oppositions of knowledge falsely so called." Sixth, wholesomely, with charity and love. Below, 13:2: "if I should have all knowledge, but should not have charity." Seventh, usefully, with the edification of neighbors. Below, 12:8: "to another is given the word of knowledge in the same spirit." Eighth, liberally, with free communication. Wisdom 6:24: "I will place her wisdom in the light." Ninth, effectively, with good work. James 4:17: "for to him that knoweth good, and doth it not, it is sin to him." The first, namely the humility of knowledge, reproves the proud wise; sobriety, the curious; certainty, the doubtful; truth, the heretics; simplicity, the advocates; wholesomeness, the great; usefulness, the wicked; liberality, the avaricious; effectiveness, the idle. Then, when he says "but concerning the foods that are sacrificed to idols," etc., here he shows what kind of knowledge they have concerning things offered to idols, showing first that they know an idol to be nothing; second, that they know all things to be from God, where: "for although there be that are called gods." In the first, first he says that an idol is nothing; second, next to this, for the sake of clarification, he shows that God is only one, where: "and that there is no God," etc. He says therefore, "but concerning the foods," etc., as if to say: in the aforesaid ways knowledge does not avail, but nevertheless, concerning the foods that are sacrificed to idols, we know — namely with true knowledge — that they are in themselves lawful, nor are they unclean on account of the idol; and this because an idol is nothing in the world. This is explained in three ways. In the first way, thus: an idol is nothing in the world, that is, among the creatures of the world as regards the form of the idol; for although the matter of the idol is something, namely gold, or silver, or the like, nevertheless the form is nothing — namely that which is believed to be there by the idolaters, who believe the idol to be God. Isaiah 41:24: "behold you are of nothing, and your work of that which hath no being." In the second way, thus: an idol is nothing, namely a subsisting person made of an image and a presiding spirit; for from these two nothing comes to be, as is thought by the idolaters. Jeremiah 10:14: "every artificer is confounded by the graven thing, for that which he hath cast is false, and there is no spirit in it." In the third way, thus: an idol is nothing in the world, that is, having the likeness of no thing that is in the world. For there is a difference between an idol and an image, because an image is said to be that which is made to the likeness of some natural thing; but an idol is the likeness of no thing, as if a horse's head were added to a human body. Isaiah 40:18: "to whom then have you made God like," etc. And we know also that there is no God but one. Deuteronomy 6:4: "hear, Israel, the Lord thy God is one God." Then, when he says "for although there be that," etc., here he shows that they know all things to be from God, not from gods so-called or adopted, as are idols, or the saints, but from the one most high. First, therefore, he tells how a plurality of gods can be understood, namely through adoption or naming; second, how there is a unity of divinity, namely through essence, where: "yet to us there is but one God," etc. Where first he touches the unity in the Father; second in the Son, where: "and one Lord," etc. In the first he touches three things, namely essence, because "one God"; person, because "the Father"; power, "of whom are all things"; clemency, because "and we in him"; and he likewise touches these same things in the Son. He says therefore, "for although there be," etc., as if to say: and truly there is but one God, for although there be that are called gods — truly by participation in the divinity, as the saints, Psalm 81:6: "I have said, you are gods," whether "in heaven," as the saints in possession, or "in earth," as the saints on the way — since indeed there are many gods truly by participation in the divinity, as the saintly and just lords, apostles, and prelates — yet to us, etc. In another way it is read thus: "for although there be that are called gods" by the gentiles, namely by false naming, whether "in heaven," as the sun and moon, or "in earth," as Mercury and Diana. "If indeed there be gods many" — namely only by naming, according to the gentiles. Psalm 95:5: "the gods of the gentiles are devils." "And lords many," who rule over others — "yet to us there is but one God" essentially, namely the Father, "of whom are all things" according to nature and through paternal authority, Romans 11:36: "of whom are all things," and we in him through grace. Acts 17:28: "in him we live, and move, and are." And one, with the Father, God, the Lord Jesus Christ. John 10:30: "I and the Father are one." "By whom are all things," namely made according to nature, John 1:3: "all things were made by him." "And we by him," namely we are in God through grace. Romans 1:5: "by whom I have received grace," etc. Therefore the most high creator of all is one, omnipotent. From these things such a reasoning is drawn: there is but one God who made all things, but idols are many; therefore they are not the God who made all things, nor are they believed to be anything; therefore they are nothing. "But knowledge is not in all." Having established that the greater among them have knowledge concerning things offered to idols, here he shows that the lesser lack this knowledge. Where first he shows that in certain ones the aforesaid knowledge concerning things offered to idols was lacking; second, that on account of this — namely the eating of things offered to idols — their conscience is polluted. Where first he touches the reason of the polluted conscience; second, the pollution itself, where: "and their conscience," etc. He says therefore, "but not in all," etc., as if to say: this we know, namely that an idol is nothing, but not in all, as in the weak, is this knowledge. And truly it is not in all: "some however," etc. Or thus: we know that an idol is nothing in the world; for some, "with the conscience of the idol" — because, namely, they think the idol to be something divine — "even until now," that is, after their conversion, just as before, "eat the thing offered to idols," that is, of things consecrated to idols, and this not as food simply, but as a thing offered to an idol, namely in reverence of the idol; and "their conscience, being weak, is defiled" — namely by those who have right knowledge, but not with charity, by whom the weak are led into this error. Deuteronomy 27:19: "cursed be he that maketh the blind to wander in the way." Here he hints that it is not the food, but the conscience, that is polluted through sin, by eating according to the example of the wicked. Then, when he says "but food does not commend," etc., here, fourthly, he shows that they ought not to eat things offered to idols in their presence. Where first he shows that eating of this kind profits nothing before God; second, he proves that it confers no increase of good, where: "for neither if you eat not." He says therefore, "but food," etc., as if to say: your eating harms them, but it does not profit you. "For food does not commend us to God," but right faith in eating. For neither was Esau justified by the eating of lentils, nor was Elijah defiled by the eating of meats. Romans 14:17: "the kingdom of God is not meat and drink." Hebrews, last chapter: "it is good to establish the heart with grace, not with meats." Then, when he says "for neither, if we shall not eat," etc., here he proves what he proposed, and his reasoning is this: not to eat a thing offered to idols does not diminish good, to eat it does not increase good; therefore such food, taken or not taken, profits nothing before God. And this is what he says: "for neither, if we shall not eat, shall we fail" — that is, shall we have less on that account — "nor if we shall eat, shall we abound" in virtues, because food profits the belly, not the mind; and thus, since it does not pertain to the truth of life, justice, and doctrine, it is to be given up on account of scandal.”

Reformation

c. 1500 – 1650
1637
A.D.
1567–1637
“Now as touching things offered unto idols we know that we all have knowledge. We all know, though some of you may think differently, that things offered to idols are the same as other food, and have no greater sanctity or power. All of us who are fairly well instructed in the faith of Christ know that they belong to the class of adiaphora. Knowledge puffeth up. This knowledge of yours, that idols are nothing, and that consequently it is lawful to eat of things offered to idols, which accordingly you do to the great offence of those who know it not, makes you proud towards the ignorant, and makes you look down on them. The word for puffeth up points to a bladder distended with wind. Such, he says, is this windy knowledge. S. Augustine (Sent. n. 241) says: “ It is a virtue of the humble not to boast of their knowledge ; because , as all alike share the lights so do they the truth.” But charily edifieth. The weak and ignorant It brushes aside such things as the eating of idol-sacrifices, which may be stumblingblocks to them, so as to keep them in the faith of Christ, and help them forward in it. Windy knowledge, therefore, makes a man proud, if it be not tempered with charity. So Anselm. Digitized by v^,ooQle CHARITY AND KNOWLEDGE IQI It plainly appears that this knowledge, which puffeth up, is contrary to charity, for it induces contempt of one’s neighbours, while charity is anxious to edify them. S. Bernard (Serm. 36 in Can tic.) says appositely : “ As food , if not digested , generates unhealthy humours , and harms rather than nourishes the body , so if a mass of knowledge be bolted into the mind's stomachy which is the memory , and be not assimilated by the fire of Christy and if it be so passed along through the arteries of the soul viz ., the character and acts , will it not be regarded as sin , being food changed into evil and noxious humours ? ””
Source

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1714
A.D.
Matthew Henry Reformed
1662–1714
“The apostle comes here to the case of things that had been offered to idols, concerning which some of them sought satisfaction: a case that frequently occurred in that age of Christianity, when the church of Christ was among the heathen, and the Israel of God must live among the Canaanites. For the better understanding of it, it must be observed that it was a custom among the heathens to make feasts on their sacrifices, and not only to eat themselves, but invite their friends to partake with them. These were usually kept in the temple, where the sacrifice was offered (Co1 8:10), and, if any thing was left when the feast ended, it was usual to carry away a portion to their friends; what remained, after all, belonged to the priests, who sometimes sold it in the markets. See Co1 10:25. Nay, feasts, as Athenaeus informs us, were always accounted, among the heathen, sacred and religious things, so that they were wont to sacrifice before all their feasts; and it was accounted a very profane thing among them, athuta esthiein, to eat at their private tables any meat whereof they had not first sacrificed on such occasions. In this circumstance of things, while Christians lived among idolaters, had many relations and friends that were such, with whom they must keep up acquaintance and maintain good neighbourhood, and therefore have occasion to eat at their tables, what should they do if any thing that had been sacrificed should be set before them? What, if they should be invited to feast with them in their temples? It seems as if some of the Corinthians had imbibed an opinion that even this might be done, because they knew an idol was nothing in the world, Co1 8:4. The apostle seems to answer more directly to the case (ch. 10), and here to argue, upon supposition of their being right in this thought, against their abuse of their liberty to the prejudice of others; but he plainly condemns such liberty in ch. 10. The apostle introduces his discourse with some remarks about knowledge that seem to carry in them a censure of such pretences to knowledge as I have mentioned: We know, says the apostle, that we all have knowledge (Co1 8:1); as if he had said, "You who take such liberty are not the only knowing persons; we who abstain know as much as you of the vanity of idols, and that they are nothing; but we know too that the liberty you take is very culpable, and that even lawful liberty must be used with charity and not to the prejudice of weaker brethren." Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth, Co1 8:1. Note, 1. The preference of charity to conceited knowledge. That is best which is fitted to do the greatest good. Knowledge, or at least a high conceit of it, is very apt to swell the mind, to fill it with wind, and so puff it up. This tends to no good to ourselves, but in many instances is much to the hurt of others. But true love, and tender regard to our brethren, will put us upon consulting their interest, and acting as may be for their edification. Observe, 2. That there is no evidence of ignorance more common than a conceit of knowledge: If any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. He that knows most best understands his own ignorance, and the imperfection of human knowledge. He that imagines himself a knowing man, and is vain and conceited on this imagination, has reason to suspect that he knows nothing aright, nothing as he ought to know it. Note, It is one thing to know truth, and another to know it as we ought, so as duly to improve our knowledge. Much may be known when nothing is known to any good purpose, when neither ourselves nor others are the better for our knowledge. And those who think they know any thing, and grow fain hereupon, are of all men most likely to make no good use of their knowledge; neither themselves nor others are likely to be benefited by it. But, adds the apostle, if any man love God, the same is known of God. If any man love God, and is thereby influenced to love his neighbour, the same is known of God; that is, as some understand it, is made by him to know, is taught of God. Note, Those that love God are most likely to be taught of God, and be made by him to know as they ought. Some understand it thus: He shall be approved of God; he will accept him and have pleasure in him. Note, The charitable person is most likely to have God's favour. Those who love God, and for his sake love their brethren and seek their welfare, are likely to be beloved of God; and how much better is it to be approved of God than to have a vain opinion of ourselves!”
Source
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“Now as touching things offered unto idols,.... This was another of the things the Corinthians wrote to the apostle about, desiring to have his judgment in; it was a controversy that had been before moved, whether it was lawful to eat things that had been sacrificed to idols. This was considered in the council at Jerusalem, Act 15:28 and it was agreed to, for the peace of the churches, that the Gentiles, among other things, be advised to abstain from them; which, it seems, the church at Corinth knew nothing of, for the controversy was now moved among them: some that were weak in the faith, and had not, at least, clear notions of Gospel liberty, thought it very criminal and sinful to eat them; others that had, or boasted they had, more knowledge, would not only eat them privately at home, having bought them of the Heathen priests, or in the common meat markets, where they were exposed to sale, and at public feasts, to which they were invited by their friends; but would even go into an idol's temple, and sit and eat them there, to the great grief and prejudice of weak Christians; and what they had to plead in their own defence was their knowledge, to which the apostle here replies: we know that we all have knowledge; said either affirmatively and seriously; and the meaning is, that the apostles and other Christians knew, and were conscious to themselves of their light and knowledge, and were assured, and might affirm with confidence, that they all, or the most part, only some few excepted, see Co1 8:7 had the same knowledge of Christian liberty as they had; knew that an idol was nothing, and that eating meats offered to them could not defile, or do them any hurt; for they were very sensible there was nothing common or unclean of itself, and yet did not think fit to make use of their knowledge to the grieving and wounding of their fellow Christians: or else this is said ironically, we are wise folks; you particularly are men of knowledge, and wisdom will die with you; you know that you know; you are very knowing in your own conceits, and very positive as to your knowledge. It was the saying of Socrates, that that this one thing he knew, that he knew nothing; but men wise in their own opinions know everything: knowledge puffeth up; not true knowledge; not that which comes from above, which is gentle and easy to be entreated; not sanctified knowledge, or that which has the grace of God going along with it; that makes men humble, and will not suffer them to be puffed up one against another; but a mere show of knowledge, knowledge in conceit, mere notional and speculative knowledge, that which is destitute of charity or love: but charity edifieth; that is, a man that has knowledge, joined with love to God, and his fellow Christians, will seek for that which makes for the edification of others; and without this all his knowledge will be of no avail, and he himself be nothing.”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“As touching things offered unto idols - This was another subject on which the Corinthians had asked the apostle's advice, and we shall understand the whole of this chapter the better when we consider one fact, viz. That there had long subsisted a controversy between the Karaites and the Traditionists, how far it was lawful to derive any benefit or advantage from things used by the Gentiles. The Karaites were a sect of the Jews who scrupulously held to the letter of the sacred writings, taking this alone for their directory. The Traditionists were those who followed the voice of the elders, interpreting the Divine testimonies by their decisions. From a work of the Karaites, entitled Addereth Eliyahu, Triglandus has extracted the following decisions, which will throw light upon this subject. "It is unlawful to receive any benefit from any kind of heathen worship, or from any thing that has been offered to an idol." - "It is unlawful to buy or sell an idol, and if, by accident, any such thing shall come into thy power, thou shalt derive no emolument from it." - "The animals that are destined and prepared for the worship of idols are universally prohibited; and particularly those which bear the mark of the idol. This should be maintained against the opinion of the Traditionists, who think they may lawfully use these kinds of animals, provided they be not marked with the sign of the idol." Thus far the Karaites; and here we see one strong point of difference between these two sects. The Karaites totally objected to every thing used in idolatrous services: the Traditionists, as the Talmud shows, did generally the same; but it appears that they scrupled not to use any animal employed in idolatrous worship, provided they did not see the sign of the idol on it. Now the sign of the idol must be that placed on the animal previously to its being sacrificed, such as gilded horns and hoofs, consecrated fillets, garlands, etc. And as, after it had been sacrificed, and its flesh exposed for sale in the shambles, it could bear none of these signs, we may take it for granted that the Jews might think it lawful to buy and eat this flesh: this the Karaite would most solemnly scruple. It may be just necessary to state here, that it was customary, after the blood and life of an animal had been offered in sacrifice to an idol, to sell the flesh in the market indiscriminately with that of other animals which had not been sacrificed, but merely killed for common use. Even the less scrupulous Jews, knowing that any particular flesh had been thus offered, would abhor the use of it; and as those who lived among the Gentiles, as the Jews at Corinth, must know that this was a common case, hence they would be generally scrupulous; and those of them that were converted to Christianity would have their scruples increased, and be as rigid on this point as the Karaites themselves. On the other hand, those of the Gentiles who had received the faith of Christ, knowing that an idol was nothing in the world, nor was even a representation of any thing, (for the beings represented by idol images were purely imaginary), made no scruple to buy and eat the flesh as they used to do, though not with the same intention; for when, in their heathen state, they ate the flesh offered to idols, they ate it as a feast with the idol, and were thus supposed to have communion with the idol; which was the grossest idolatry. From these observations it will at once appear that much misunderstanding and offense must have existed in the Corinthian Church; the converted Jews abominating every thing that they knew had been used in the heathen worship, while the converted Gentiles, for the reasons above assigned, would feel no scruple on the account. We know that we all have knowledge - I am inclined to think that these are not St. Paul's words, but a quotation from the letter of the Corinthians to him, and a proof of what the apostle says below, knowledge puffeth up; but however the words may be understood as to their origin, they contain a general truth, as they relate to Christians of those times, and may be thus paraphrased; "All we who are converted to God by Christ have sufficient knowledge concerning idols and idol worship; and we know also the liberty which we have through the Gospel, not being bound by Jewish laws, rites, ceremonies, etc.; but many carry their knowledge in this liberty too far, and do what is neither seemly nor convenient, and thus give offense to others." Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth - This knowledge is very nearly allied to pride; it puffeth up the mind with vain conceit, makes those who have it bold and rash, and renders them careless of the consciences of others. And this knowledge, boasted of by the Corinthians, led them to contemn others; for so the word φυσιοι is understood by some eminent critics.”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“Now concerning those things. It appears from this whole passage that the Corinthians had, in a former letter, consulted this apostle, upon the subject of eating meats offered to idols. It was not unusual to reserve some part of the sacrifice of which they made a supper, either in their own family, with their friends, or sometimes even in the temple. Some of the Christians of Corinth attended without scruple at these sorts of feasts, and eat of the meats offered to idols; whilst others, on the contrary, took scandal at this conduct, and thought it a tacit approbation of idolatry. St. Paul being consulted upon this difficulty, gives them his advice in this chapter. (Calmet) — We know that we all have knowledge about it. That is, all we, who are sufficiently instructed, have knowledge enough to be convinced, that idols are nothing in themselves, nor the meats offered to them better nor worse upon that account. (Witham) — Knowledge puffeth up, &c. Knowledge, without charity and humility, serveth only to puff persons up. (Challoner)”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.