1 Corinthians 10:25
Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
Original Language Analysis
τὸ
G3588
τὸ
Strong's:
G3588
Word #:
2 of 11
the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in english idiom)
μακέλλῳ
the shambles
G3111
μακέλλῳ
the shambles
Strong's:
G3111
Word #:
4 of 11
a butcher's stall, meat market or provision-shop
ἐσθίετε
that eat
G2068
ἐσθίετε
that eat
Strong's:
G2068
Word #:
6 of 11
used only in certain tenses, the rest being supplied by g5315; to eat (usually literal)
ἀνακρίνοντες
asking
G350
ἀνακρίνοντες
asking
Strong's:
G350
Word #:
8 of 11
properly, to scrutinize, i.e., (by implication) investigate, interrogate, determine
διὰ
for
G1223
διὰ
for
Strong's:
G1223
Word #:
9 of 11
through (in very wide applications, local, causal, or occasional)
Cross References
1 Corinthians 8:7Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.1 Timothy 4:4For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:Titus 1:15Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
Historical Context
Most meat in Greco-Roman cities came from temple sacrifices—animals were sacrificed to gods, ceremonial portions burned or consumed by priests, and remaining meat sold in markets. Avoiding all such meat would require vegetarianism or severely limited diet. Paul's permission to buy market meat without investigation allowed normal life while maintaining boundaries against explicit idol-worship contexts like temple banquets.
Questions for Reflection
- How can you distinguish between appropriate boundaries and excessive scrupulosity in moral decision-making?
- What modern parallels exist to the meat-market question—ethically complex situations where investigation would create impossible burdens?
- How does Paul's balance of principle (flee idolatry) and practicality (don't interrogate market meat) guide Christian freedom today?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake—Having prohibited temple participation (vv. 14-22), Paul now addresses a related question: what about meat sold in the public market that was previously offered to idols? His answer: eat without investigation. The shambles (makellos, μακέλλῳ, from Latin macellum) was the meat market where temple-sacrificed animals were often sold after ceremonial portions were offered.
Asking no question for conscience sake (mēden anakrinontes dia tēn syneidēsin, μηδὲν ἀνακρίνοντες διὰ τὴν συνείδησιν) means don't investigate meat's origin. If you don't know it was idol-offered, your conscience isn't violated by eating it. This demonstrates Paul's nuance: the issue isn't the meat itself (which is morally neutral, as noted in v. 19) but the context and associations of eating it. Meat at a temple banquet involves fellowship with demons (v. 20-21); meat at the market is just food.
This pastoral wisdom balances principle with practicality. Paul doesn't require Christians to conduct forensic investigations of food origins, creating impossible scrupulosity. Where no explicit idol-association exists, eat freely with thanksgiving. This preserves both conscience (by avoiding known idol-contexts) and sanity (by not demanding absolute certainty about every meal's backstory).