<p>8:1<i> Now concerning things sacrificed to idols. We know that we all have knowledge; yet knowledge puffs up, but love builds up-&nbsp; </i>Paul&rsquo;s whole position about meat offered to idols reflects the fact that he recognised that there would be some believers who still could not escape the sense that the idol is really something to be feared, that in some sense it is alive and accepting the sacrifice offered to it, even though the believer in the other half of his brain knew full well that idols are nothing and there is only one true God. We <i>all know this</i>, Paul reasons, and yet some still can&rsquo;t escape their sense that the idol is there, and that if they eat meat offered to it they are fellowshipping with it, even though it doesn&rsquo;t exist.&nbsp; Our tendency would be to be hard on such a person, insisting that they cannot worship the true God and yet also have this sense of the idol. And yet Paul knew that there is a dualism within each of us; we can still have a sense of the false even whilst we believe the true. And the Lord is more gracious than many of us seem to be to this feature of our nature.</p><p>It is hard to piece together what was really going on in the politics of the early church, because Paul seems to have submitted to their wishes apart from where essential principle was concerned. Luke in Acts 15 and Galatians 2 make the record sound so positive- as if the conference in Jerusalem solved all the problems, even though it is clear that it didn&rsquo;t, and the Gentile believers were still classed as second rate. It was after this that Paul wrote here: &ldquo;As touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth&rdquo; (AV). This sounds like an allusion to the agreements hammered out at Jerusalem-&lsquo;we all know what was agreed&rsquo;, Paul seems to be saying. There was nothing wrong in itself with the compromises agreed. But it was love that edifies, not a legalistic use of those decrees as &lsquo;knowledge&rsquo;. It all sounds as if there was joy at the conversion of the Gentiles, even though there was &ldquo;much disputing&rdquo; about it. And yet it is observable that the whole Acts record doesn&rsquo;t reflect the spirit of controversy and struggle against apostasy which the epistles so insistently reflect. Paul didn&rsquo;t protest being told not to teach Jews by his brethren- but he got on and did so. It was not knowledge of intellectual truth alone which justifies a person- for we know so pitifully little anyway (:2). It is doing what is best for the building up of others, in the spirit of love. Those who so love the idea of 'saving truth' need to remember this; for truth, no matter how pure, will not save of itself. As Fred Pearce remarked many years ago, &quot;It is not an inspired Bible which will save you, but faith in the blood of Christ and God's grace&quot;.</p>