But as for the meats that are sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one.

“The Evangelists, too, when they declared that the one Father was "the only true God," did not omit what concerned our Lord, but wrote: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made." And concerning the incarnation: "The Word," says [the Scripture], "became flesh, and dwelt among us." And again: "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." And those very apostles, who said "that there is one God," said also that "there is one Mediator between God and men." Nor were they ashamed of the incarnation and the passion. For what says [one]? "The man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself" for the life and salvation of the world.”

“And the Apostle Paul also, saying, "For though ye have served them which are no gods; ye now know God, or rather, are known of God," has made a separation between those that were not [gods] and Him who is God. And again, speaking of Antichrist, he says, "who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped." He points out here those who are called gods, by such as know not God, that is, idols. For the Father of all is called God, and is so; and Antichrist shall be lifted up, not above Him, but above those which are indeed called gods, but are not. And Paul himself says that this is true: "We know that an idol is nothing, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth; yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we through Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him." For he has made a distinction, and separated those which are indeed called gods, but which are none, from the one God the Father, from whom are all things, and, he has confessed in the most decided manner in his own person, one Lord Jesus Christ. But in this [clause], "whether in heaven or in earth," he does not speak of the formers of the world, as these [teachers] expound it; but his meaning is similar to that of Moses, when it is said, "Thou shalt not make to thyself any image for God, of whatsoever things are in heaven above, whatsoever in the earth beneath, and whatsoever in the waters under the earth." And he does thus explain what are meant by the things in heaven: "Lest when," he says, "looking towards heaven, and observing the sun, and the moon, and the stars, and all the ornament of heaven, falling into error, thou shouldest adore and serve them." And Moses himself, being a man of God, was indeed given as a god before Pharaoh; but he is not properly termed Lord, nor is called God by the prophets, but is spoken of by the Spirit as "Moses, the faithful minister and servant of God," which also he was.”

“Such, then, being the case, the Greeks ought by the Law and the Prophets to learn to worship one God only, the only Sovereign; then to be taught by the apostle, "but to us an idol is no, thing in the world," since nothing among created things can be a likeness of God; and further, to be taught that none of those images which they worship can be similitudes: for the race of souls is not in form such as the Greeks fashion their idols. For souls are invisible; not only those that are rational, but those also of the other animals. And their bodies never become parts of the souls themselves, but organs-partly as seats, partly as vehicles-and in other cases possessions in various ways. But it is not possible to copy accurately even the likenesses of the organs; since, were it so, one might model the sun, as it is seen, and take the likeness of the rainbow in colours.”

“We have, I think, faithfully carried out our plan of showing in how many different ways the sin of idolatry clings to the shows, in respect of their origins, their titles, their equipments, their places of celebration, their arts; and we may hold it as a thing beyond all doubt, that for us who have twice renounced all idols, they are utterly unsuitable. "Not that an idol is anything," as the apostle says, but that the homage they render is to demons, who are the real occupants of these consecrated images, whether of dead men or (as they think) of gods.”

“"Concerning therefore the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol is anything in the world, and that there is no God but one." Look what a strait he hath fallen into! For indeed his mind is to prove both; that one ought to abstain from this kind of banquet, and that it hath no power to hurt those who partake of it: things which were not greatly in agreement with each other. For when they were told that they had no harm in them, they would naturally run to them as indifferent things. But when forbidden to touch them, they would suspect, on the contrary, that their having power to do hurt occasioned the prohibition. Wherefore, you see, he puts down their opinion about idols, and then states as a first reason for their abstaining the scandals which they place in the way of their brethren; in these words: "Now concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol is anything in the world." Again he makes it common property and doth not allow this to be theirs alone, but extends the knowledge all over the world. For "not among you alone," says he, "but every where on earth this doctrine prevails." What then is it? "That no idol is anything in the world; that there is no God but one." What then? are there no idols? no statues? Indeed there are; but they have no power: neither are they gods, but stones and demons. For he is now setting himself against both parties; both the grosser sort among them, and those who were accounted lovers of wisdom. Thus, seeing that the former know of no more than the mere stones, the others assert that certain powers reside in them, which they also call gods; to the former accordingly he says, that "no idol is anything in the world," to the other, that "there is no God but one." Do you mark how he writes these things, not simply as laying down doctrine, but in opposition to those without? A thing indeed which we must at all times narrowly observe, whether he says anything abstractedly, or whether he is opposing any persons. For this contributes in no ordinary way to the accuracy of our doctrinal views, and to the exact understanding of his expressions.”

“For although man made gods, it did not follow that he who made them was not held captive by them, when, by worshipping them, he was drawn into fellowship with them,—into the fellowship not of stolid idols, but of cunning demons; for what are idols but what they are represented to be in the same scriptures, "They have eyes, but they do not see," and, though artistically fashioned, are still without life and sensation? But unclean spirits, associated through that wicked art with these same idols, have miserably taken captive the souls of their worshippers, by bringing them down into fellowship with themselves. Whence the apostle says, "We know that an idol is nothing, but those things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons, and not to God; and I would not ye should have fellowship with demons."”

“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.”

“We know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but One . An idol is not what it is commonly supposed to be, not what it stands for, is not God. It has no Divine power; materially it is of wood, formally it is nothing. It is an image of a falsehood, or of a non-existent God. Consequently that which is offered to idols is as such nothing, has no Divinity or sanctity derived from the idol to which it was offered. The word “idol” itself is derived from the Greek «8os, which Tertullian says denotes appearance ; and from it the diminutive, cS8a>A.ov, was formed (de Jdolol. ciii.). An “ idol ” among the earlier Greek writers denoted any empty and untrustworthy image, such as hollow phantasms, spectres, the shades of the dead, and the like. In the same way Holy Scripture and Church writers have limited the term idol to an image of God which is regarded as God, and is not really so, as is evident from this verse. The LXX., too, throughout the Old Testament, apply the same term to the statues and gods of the heathen. Digitized by v^,ooQle IDOLS AND IMAGES 193 Hence Henry Stephen and John Scapula are deceived and deceive, when they lay down in their lexicons that the term idol is applied by ecclesiastical writers to any image representing some deity to which honour and worship are paid. It is not every statue or image of every god that is an idol, but only the image of a false god. Cf. Cyprian (de Exhort Mart c. i.), Tertullian (de Idolol . ), Athanasius ( contra Idola). The Protestant fraud, therefore, must be guarded against which confounds idol with image, and concludes that all images are forbidden by those passages of Scripture which condemn idolatry. Cf. Bellarmine (de Imagin . lib. ii. c. 5), who shows unanswerably that an idol is the representation of what is false, an image of what is true. Vers. 5, 6. — For though there be that are called gods , ... to us there is but one God , &c. The pagans have gods many and lords many, as the sun, moon, and stars, or terrestrial gods, as Jupiter, Apollo, Hercules ; but we have only one God, for whose glory and honour we were created. Notice that Scripture speaks of the Father as He of whom are all things, as their first principle ; and of the Son as He ^ whom are all things, as the archetype and word by whom all things were made ; and of the Holy Spirit as in whom are all things, inasmuch as He is the bond of love between the Father and the Son. Cf. notes to Rom. xi. 36. Notice also against the Arians that, when S. Paul says One God he is only excluding false gods, not the Son and the Holy Spirit. When he says One Lord Jesus Christ , he is only excluding false lords, not the Father and the Holy Spirit”

“In this passage he shows the vanity of idols: As to the eating of things that have been sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world; or, there is no idol in the world; or, an idol can do nothing in the world: for the form of expression in the original is elliptical. The meaning in the general is, that heathen idols have no divinity in them; and therefore the Old Testament they are commonly called lies and vanities, or lying vanities. They are merely imaginary gods, and many of them no better than imaginary beings; they have no power to pollute the creatures of God, and thereby render them unfit to be eaten by a child or servant of God. Every creature of God is good, if it be received with thanksgiving, Ti1 4:4. It is not in the power of the vanities of the heathens to change its nature. - And there is no other God but one. Heathen idols are not gods, nor to be owned and respected as gods, for there is no other God but one. Note, the unity of the Godhead is a fundamental principle in Christianity, and in all right religion. The gods of the heathens must be nothing in the world, must have no divinity in them, nothing of real godhead belonging to them; for there is no other God but one. Others may be called gods: There are that are called gods, in heaven and earth, gods many, and lords many; but they are falsely thus called. The heathens had many such, some in heaven and some on earth, celestial deities, that were of highest rank and repute among them, and terrestrial ones, men made into gods, that were to mediate for men with the former, and were deputed by them to preside over earthly affairs. These are in scripture commonly called Baalim. They had gods of higher and lower degree; nay, many in each order: gods many, and lords many; but all titular deities and mediators: so called, but not such in truth. All their divinity and mediation were imagery. For, 1. To us there is but one God, says the apostle, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in or for him. We Christians are better informed; we well know there is but one God, the fountain of being, the author of all things, maker, preserver, and governor of the whole world, of whom and for whom are all things. Not one God to govern one part of mankind, or one rank and order of men, and another to govern another. One God made all, and therefore has power over all. All things are of him, and we, and all things else, are for him. Called the Father here, not in contradistinction to the other persons of the sacred Trinity, and to exclude them from the Godhead, but in contradistinction to all creatures that were made by God, and whose formation is attributed to each of these three in other places of scripture, and not appropriated to the Father alone. God the Father, as Fons et fundamentum Trinitatis - as the first person in the Godhead, and the original of the other two, stands here for the Deity, which yet comprehends all three, the name God being sometimes in scripture ascribed to the Father, kat' exochēn, or by way of eminency, because he is fons et principiam Deitatis (as Calvin observes), the fountain of the Deity in the other two, they having it by communication from him: so that there is but one God the Father, and yet the Son is God too, but is not another God, the Father, with his Son and Spirit, being the one God, but not without them, or so as to exclude them from the Godhead. 2. There is to us but one Lord, one Mediator between God and men, even Jesus Christ. Not many mediators, as the heathen imagined, but one only, by whom all things were created and do consist, and to whom all our hope and happiness are owing - the man Christ Jesus; but a man in personal union with the divine Word, or God the Son. This very man hath God made both Lord and Christ, Act 2:36. Jesus Christ, in his human nature and mediatorial state, has a delegated power, a name given him, though above every name, that at his name every knee should bow, and every tongue confess that he is Lord. And thus he is the only Lord, the only Mediator, that Christians acknowledge, the only person who comes between God and sinners, administers the world's affairs under God, and mediates for men with God. All the lords of this sort among heathens are merely imaginary ones. Note, It is the great privilege of us Christians that we know the true God, and true Mediator between God and man: the true God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent, Joh 17:3.”

“As concerning therefore the eating of those things,.... The apostle having enlarged on the head of knowledge, which those who made an ill use of their Christian liberty urged in favour of their conduct; he returns to the subject in question, in relation to meats, that are offered in sacrifice unto idols. The determinations of the Jewish schools concerning this affair are as follow, which admit of no manner of profit by them in any shape: "a beast, the whole of which they offer to idols, is forbidden of profit, even its dung, and its bones, and its horns, and its hoofs, and its skin, all is forbid to be of any profit'' (y). Again (z), "flesh or wine, or fruits, which are brought in to be offered up to idols, are not forbidden to profit with, although they are brought into the idol's temple, until they offer them up before it; "but when offered up before it"; they become an offering; and though they may return them, and bring them out, lo, these are forbidden for ever; and all that is found in an idol's temple, even water and salt, are forbidden of profit by the law, , "and he that eats anything thereof" is to be beaten.'' Once more (a), "an Israelite that lifts up a cheese to worship it, but does not worship it, but a Gentile worships it, it is forbidden of profit, became the lifting of it up is an action; and so if he lifts up an egg, and a Gentile comes and worships it, it is forbidden; he that cuts a gourd, or any such thing, and worships it, it is forbidden, &c.'' But by these decrees we Christians are not bound; we know that an idol is nothing in the world; among the things created by God in the world; for though the matter of it may be of God, the form is of men; nor has it any share in the government of the world: and though that of which it may be made, as gold, silver, brass, &c. is something; yet as it is a form and representation of God, it is nothing, because there can be no representation of the invisible God; it is nothing, that is, it has no divinity in it, it is no God. Though it may have an existence, as the sun, moon, and stars, yet not divinity; and in that sense nothing. The apostle here speaks the language of the Jewish doctors, who say (b), "why dost thou envy an idol? , "since it is nothing, or there is nothing it."'' And again (c), "the Rabbins say, since , "there is nothing in an idol", why do they call them deities;'' Very likely the apostle may have reference to the Hebrew word for idols, which signifies things of nought, that are good for nothing, are of no value, and are as nothing, Isa 2:20. And that there is none other God but one. This clause may be considered either as a reason of the former, why an idol is nothing, is no deity, is no God, "for there is none other God but one", as it may be rendered; or as a part of what believers know; for as they know an idol is nothing, so they know, both from reason and revelation, from the books of the Old and New Testament, that there is but one God, and consequently that idols are nothing, and that they cannot defile them, nor anything that is offered to them. (y) Maimon. Hilch. Obede Cochabim, &c. c. 7. sect. 3. (z) Ib. sect. 15. (a) Ib. c. 8. sect. 3. (b) Prefat. ad Echa Rabbati, fol. 40. 3. (c) Debarim Rabba, fol. 236. 2. Tzeror Hammor, fol. 135. 2. & 138. 2. & 141. 4.”

“Things that are offered in sacrifice - See on the first verse, (Co1 8:1 (note)). An idol is nothing in the world - Dr. Lightfoot translates this, We know that there is no idol in the world; which he explains thus: Ειδωλον, idol, is ὁμοιωμα, εικων, σημειον, χαρακτηριον, σκιοειδες, a likeness, an image, a sign, a character, a shadow: now ουδεν ειδωλον signifies there is no idol, no representation of God, in the world. Images there are of stone, wood and metal; but none of these is any representation of the infinite Spirit. But I prefer the meaning given in the note on Co1 8:1; (Co1 8:1 (note)) as the expression, an idol is nothing in the world, was common in the Old Testament, and among the Jews; and was understood by them in this way: they are not אלהים Elohim, the true God; but they are אלילים, nothings, and הבלים habalim, Vanity.”

“As concerning, &c.--resuming the subject begun in Co1 8:1, "As touching," &c. idol is nothing--has no true being at all, the god it represents is not a living reality. This does not contradict Co1 10:20, which states that they who worship idols, worship devils; for here it is the GODS believed by the worshippers to be represented by the idols which are denied to have any existence, not the devils which really under the idols delude the worshippers. none other God--The oldest manuscripts omit the word "other"; which gives a clearer sense.”