What then
The old relation to the law and sin, and the new relation to Christ and life are illustrated by the effect of death upon servitude Romans 6:16-23 and marriage Romans 7:1-6 .
(1) The old servitude was nominally to the law, but, since the law had no delivering power, the real master continued to be sin in the nature. The end was death. The law could not give life, and "sin" (here personified as the old self) is in itself deathful. But death in another form, ie., crucifixion with Christ, has intervened to free the servant from his double bondage to sin ( Romans 6:6 ; Romans 6:7 ), and to the law Romans 7:4 ; Romans 7:6
(2) This effect of death is further illustrated by widowhood. Death dissolves the marriage relation Romans 7:1-3 . As natural death frees a wife from the law of her husband, so crucifixion with Christ sets the believer free from the law.
to bring us Omit "to bring us." unto up to, or until.
law I. The law of Moses, Summary:
(1) The Mosaic Covenant was given to Israel in three parts: the commandments, expressing the righteous will of God Exodus 20:1-26 , the "judgments," governing the social life of Israel Exodus 21:1 to Exodus 24:11 , and the "ordinances," governing the religious life of Israel; Exodus 24:12 ; Exodus 31:18 .
(2) The commandments and ordinances were one complete and inseparable whole. When an Israelite sinned, he was held "blameless" if he brought the required offering Romans 10:3-10 ; Philippians 3:6 .
(3) Law, as a method of the divine dealing with man, characterized the dispensation extending from the giving of the law to the death of Jesus Christ Galatians 3:13 ; Galatians 3:14 ; Galatians 3:23 ; Galatians 3:24 .
(4) The attempt of legalistic teachers (e.g.) Acts 15:1-31 ; Galatians 2:1-5 , to mingle law with grace as the divine method for this present dispensation of grace, brought out the true relation of the law to the Christian, viz.
II. The Christian doctrine of the law:
(1) Law is in contrast with grace. Under the latter God bestows the righteousness which, under law, He demanded Exodus 19:5 ; John 1:17 . (See Scofield " Romans 3:21 ") .; Luke 1:6 ; 1 Corinthians 1:30 .
(2) The law is, in itself, holy, just, good, and spiritual Romans 7:12-14 .
(3) Before the law the whole world is guilty, and the law is therefore of necessity a ministry of condemnation, death, and the divine curse Romans 3:19 ; 2 Corinthians 3:7-9 ; Galatians 3:10 .
For Another Point of View: See Topic 301242
Other Factors to Consider: See Topic 301187
(4) Christ bore the curse of the law, and redeemed the believer both from the curse and from the dominion of the law Galatians 3:13 ; Galatians 4:5-7 .
(5) Law neither justifies a sinner nor sanctifies a believer Galatians 2:16 ; Galatians 3:2 ; Galatians 3:3 ; Galatians 3:11 ; Galatians 3:12 .
(6) The believer is both dead to the law and redeemed from it, so that he is "not under the law, but under grace" Romans 6:14 ; Romans 7:4 ; Galatians 2:19 ; Galatians 4:4-7 ; 1 Timothy 1:8 ; 1 Timothy 1:9 .
(7) Under the new covenant of grace the principle of obedience to the divine will is inwrought Hebrews 10:6 . So far is the life of the believer from the anarchy of self-will that he is "inlawed to Christ" 1 Corinthians 9:21 and the new "law of Christ"; Galatians 6:2 ; 2 John 1:5 is his delight; while, through the indwelling Spirit, the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in him; Romans 8:2-4 ; Galatians 5:16-18 . The commandments are used in the distinctively Christian Scriptures as an instruction in righteousness; 2 Timothy 3:16 ; Romans 13:8-10 ; Ephesians 6:1-3 ; 1 Corinthians 9:8 ; 1 Corinthians 9:9 .
to bring us Omit "to bring us."
unto up to, or until.
Verse Meaning
Paul"s question here is not a repetition of Romans 6:1. There he asked if we could "continue in sin" or "go on sinning." Here he said, Shall we "sin?" There he was looking at continual sinning. Here he dealt with specific acts of sin. A sinful lifestyle and acts of sin are both inappropriate for a believer who is living under God"s gracious authority. [source][source][source]
"Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit "since we are under grace."" [1][source]
Context Summary
Romans 6:12-23 - "sin Shall Not Have Dominion"
Standing with Christ on the resurrection side of death, we must present our whole being to God for His use. We have left forever behind, nailed to the Cross, the body of sin, Colossians 2:14, and henceforth must see to it that every faculty shall become a weapon in God's great warfare against evil. Let your powers be monopolized by God, so that there shall be no room left for the devil, Ephesians 4:27.
All serve some higher power, but which? Our real owner and master, whatever we may say to the contrary, is indicated by our life. We belong to the one whom, in a crisis, we obey. Service to sin leads to uncleanness, iniquity, and death. Service to God leads to righteousness, and that to sanctification, and that to eternal life. Run your life into the mold of holy precept, as the obedient metal into the sand-cast, Romans 6:17, r.v. We have our reward in the present consciousness of the life which is life indeed. [source]
Chapter Summary: Romans 6
1We may not live in sin; 2for we are dead unto it; 3as appears by our baptism 12Let not sin reign anymore; 18because we have yielded ourselves to the service of righteousness; 23and because death is the wages of sin
Greek Commentary for Romans 6:15
What then? [τι ουν] Another turn in the argument about the excess of grace. [source]
Shall we sin? [αμαρτεσωμεν] First aorist active deliberative subjunctive of αμαρτανω hamartanō “Shall we commit sin” (occasional acts of sin as opposed to the life of sin as raised by επιμενωμεν τηι αμαρτιαι epimenōmen tēi hamartiāi in Romans 6:1)? Because (οτι hoti). The same reason as in Romans 6:1 and taken up from the very words in Romans 6:14. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit “since we are under grace.” [source]
Because [οτι] The same reason as in Romans 6:1 and taken up from the very words in Romans 6:14. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit “since we are under grace.” [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Romans 6:15
John 1:21And they asked him [και ηρωτησαν αυτον] Here the paratactic και kai is like the transitional ουν oun (then). What then? Argumentative ουν oun like Paul‘s τι ουν ti oun in Romans 6:15. Quid ergo? Art thou Elijah? The next inevitable question since Elijah had been understood to be the forerunner of the Messiah from Malachi 4:5. In Mark 9:11. Jesus will identify John with the Elijah of Malachi‘s prophecy. Why then does John here flatly deny it? Because the expectation was that Elijah would return in person. This John denies. Jesus only asserts that John was Elijah in spirit. Elijah in person they had just seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. He saith Vivid dramatic present. I am not Short and blunt denial. Art thou the prophet? “The prophet art thou?” This question followed naturally the previous denials. Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15) had spoken of a prophet like unto himself. Christians interpreted this prophet to be the Messiah (Acts 3:22; Acts 7:37), but the Jews thought him another forerunner of the Messiah (John 7:40). It is not clear in John 6:15 whether the people identified the expected prophet with the Messiah, though apparently so. Even the Baptist later became puzzled in prison whether Jesus himself was the true Messiah or just one of the forerunners (Luke 7:19). People wondered about Jesus himself whether he was the Messiah or just one of the looked for prophets (Mark 8:28; Matthew 16:14). And he answered First aorist passive (deponent passive, sense of voice gone) indicative of αποκρινομαι apokrinomai to give a decision from myself, to reply. No Shortest possible denial. [source]
Romans 6:19Unto sanctification [eis hagiasmon)] This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (Romans 6:15). This late word appears only in lxx, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See note on 1 Thessalonians 4:3; 1 Corinthians 1:30. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (Romans 1:17) of righteousness (both justification, 1:18-5:21 and sanctification, chapters 6-8). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6) and illustrates the obligation by death (Romans 6:1-14), by slavery (Romans 6:15-23), and by marriage (Romans 7:1-6). [source]
Romans 6:19Because of the infirmity of your flesh [δια την αστενειαν της σαρκος υμων] Because of defective spiritual insight largely due to moral defects also. Servants to uncleanness (δουλα τηι ακαταρσιαι doula tēi akatharsiāi). Neuter plural form of δουλος doulos to agree with μελη melē (members). Patently true in sexual sins, in drunkenness, and all fleshly sins, absolutely slaves like narcotic fiends. So now Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb παριστημι paristēmi to present Servants to righteousness (εις αγιασμον doula tēi dikaiosunēi). Repeats the idea of Romans 6:18. Unto sanctification This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (Romans 6:15). This late word appears only in lxx, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See note on Romans 6:15-23; 1 Corinthians 1:30. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (Romans 1:17) of righteousness (both justification, 1:18-5:21 and sanctification, chapters 6-8). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6) and illustrates the obligation by death (Romans 6:1-14), by slavery (1 Thessalonians 4:3), and by marriage (Romans 7:1-6). [source]
Romans 6:19So now [ουτως νυν] Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb παριστημι paristēmi to present Servants to righteousness (εις αγιασμον doula tēi dikaiosunēi). Repeats the idea of Romans 6:18. Unto sanctification This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (Romans 6:15). This late word appears only in lxx, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See note on 1 Thessalonians 4:3; 1 Corinthians 1:30. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (Romans 1:17) of righteousness (both justification, 1:18-5:21 and sanctification, chapters 6-8). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6) and illustrates the obligation by death (Romans 6:1-14), by slavery (Romans 6:15-23), and by marriage (Romans 7:1-6). [source]
1 John 3:9His seed [σπερμα αυτου] God‘s seed, “the divine principle of life” (Vincent). Cf. John 1.And he cannot sin (και ου δυναται αμαρτανειν kai ou dunatai hamartanein). This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means “and he cannot commit sin” as if it were και ου δυναται αμαρτειν kai ou dunatai hamartein or αμαρτησαι hamartēsai (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive αμαρτανειν hamartanein can only mean “and he cannot go on sinning,” as is true of αμαρτανει hamartanei in 1 John 3:8 and αμαρτανων hamartanōn in 1 John 3:6. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see αμαρτητε hamartēte and αμαρτηι hamartēi in 1 John 2:1. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of αμαρτανειν hamartanein here. Paul has precisely John‘s idea in Romans 6:1 επιμενωμεν τηι αμαρτιαι epimenōmen tēi hamartiāi (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with αμαρτησωμεν hamartēsōmen in Romans 6:15 (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive). [source]
1 John 3:9And he cannot sin [και ου δυναται αμαρτανειν] This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means “and he cannot commit sin” as if it were και ου δυναται αμαρτειν kai ou dunatai hamartein or αμαρτησαι hamartēsai (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive αμαρτανειν hamartanein can only mean “and he cannot go on sinning,” as is true of αμαρτανει hamartanei in 1 John 3:8 and αμαρτανων hamartanōn in 1 John 3:6. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see αμαρτητε hamartēte and αμαρτηι hamartēi in 1 John 2:1. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of αμαρτανειν hamartanein here. Paul has precisely John‘s idea in Romans 6:1 επιμενωμεν τηι αμαρτιαι epimenōmen tēi hamartiāi (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with αμαρτησωμεν hamartēsōmen in Romans 6:15 (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive). [source]
Revelation 2:14Some that hold [κρατουντας] “Men holding” (present active participle of κρατεω krateō).The teaching of Balaam (την διδαχην αλααμ tēn didachēn Balaam). Indeclinable substantive Balaam (Numbers 25:1-9; Numbers 31:15.). The point of likeness of these heretics with Balaam is here explained.Taught Balak Imperfect indicative of διδασκω didaskō Balaam‘s habit, “as the prototype of all corrupt teachers” (Charles). These early Gnostics practised licentiousness as a principle since they were not under law, but under grace (Romans 6:15). The use of the dative with διδασκω didaskō is a colloquialism rather than a Hebraism. Two accusatives often occur with διδασκω didaskō cast a stumbling-block Second aorist active infinitive (accusative case after εδιδασκεν edidasken) of βαλλω ballō regular use with σκανδαλον skandalon (trap) like τιτημι σκανδαλον tithēmi skandalon in Romans 14:13. Balaam, as Josephus and Philo also say, showed Balak how to set a trap for the Israelites by beguiling them into the double sin of idolatry and fornication, which often went together (and do so still).To eat things sacrificed to idols (παγειν ειδωλοτυτα phagein eidōlothuta). Second aorist active infinitive of εστιω esthiō and the verbal adjective (from ειδωλον eidōlon and τυω thuō), quoted here from Numbers 25:1., but in inverse order, repeated in other order in Revelation 2:20. See Acts 15:29; Acts 21:25; 1 Corinthians 8:1. for the controversy over the temptation to Gentile Christians to do what in itself was harmless, but which led to evil if it led to participation in the pagan feasts. Perhaps both ideas are involved here. Balaam taught Balak how to lead the Israelites into sin in both ways. [source]
Revelation 2:14Taught Balak [εδιδασκεν τωι αλακ] Imperfect indicative of διδασκω didaskō Balaam‘s habit, “as the prototype of all corrupt teachers” (Charles). These early Gnostics practised licentiousness as a principle since they were not under law, but under grace (Romans 6:15). The use of the dative with διδασκω didaskō is a colloquialism rather than a Hebraism. Two accusatives often occur with διδασκω didaskō cast a stumbling-block Second aorist active infinitive (accusative case after εδιδασκεν edidasken) of βαλλω ballō regular use with σκανδαλον skandalon (trap) like τιτημι σκανδαλον tithēmi skandalon in Romans 14:13. Balaam, as Josephus and Philo also say, showed Balak how to set a trap for the Israelites by beguiling them into the double sin of idolatry and fornication, which often went together (and do so still).To eat things sacrificed to idols (παγειν ειδωλοτυτα phagein eidōlothuta). Second aorist active infinitive of εστιω esthiō and the verbal adjective (from ειδωλον eidōlon and τυω thuō), quoted here from Numbers 25:1., but in inverse order, repeated in other order in Revelation 2:20. See Acts 15:29; Acts 21:25; 1 Corinthians 8:1. for the controversy over the temptation to Gentile Christians to do what in itself was harmless, but which led to evil if it led to participation in the pagan feasts. Perhaps both ideas are involved here. Balaam taught Balak how to lead the Israelites into sin in both ways. [source]
What do the individual words in Romans 6:15 mean?
WhatthenShall we sinbecausenotwe areunderlawbutgraceNevermay it be
Greek Commentary for Romans 6:15
Another turn in the argument about the excess of grace. [source]
First aorist active deliberative subjunctive of αμαρτανω hamartanō “Shall we commit sin” (occasional acts of sin as opposed to the life of sin as raised by επιμενωμεν τηι αμαρτιαι epimenōmen tēi hamartiāi in Romans 6:1)? Because (οτι hoti). The same reason as in Romans 6:1 and taken up from the very words in Romans 6:14. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit “since we are under grace.” [source]
The same reason as in Romans 6:1 and taken up from the very words in Romans 6:14. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit “since we are under grace.” [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Romans 6:15
Here the paratactic και kai is like the transitional ουν oun (then). What then? Argumentative ουν oun like Paul‘s τι ουν ti oun in Romans 6:15. Quid ergo? Art thou Elijah? The next inevitable question since Elijah had been understood to be the forerunner of the Messiah from Malachi 4:5. In Mark 9:11. Jesus will identify John with the Elijah of Malachi‘s prophecy. Why then does John here flatly deny it? Because the expectation was that Elijah would return in person. This John denies. Jesus only asserts that John was Elijah in spirit. Elijah in person they had just seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. He saith Vivid dramatic present. I am not Short and blunt denial. Art thou the prophet? “The prophet art thou?” This question followed naturally the previous denials. Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15) had spoken of a prophet like unto himself. Christians interpreted this prophet to be the Messiah (Acts 3:22; Acts 7:37), but the Jews thought him another forerunner of the Messiah (John 7:40). It is not clear in John 6:15 whether the people identified the expected prophet with the Messiah, though apparently so. Even the Baptist later became puzzled in prison whether Jesus himself was the true Messiah or just one of the forerunners (Luke 7:19). People wondered about Jesus himself whether he was the Messiah or just one of the looked for prophets (Mark 8:28; Matthew 16:14). And he answered First aorist passive (deponent passive, sense of voice gone) indicative of αποκρινομαι apokrinomai to give a decision from myself, to reply. No Shortest possible denial. [source]
This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (Romans 6:15). This late word appears only in lxx, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See note on 1 Thessalonians 4:3; 1 Corinthians 1:30. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (Romans 1:17) of righteousness (both justification, 1:18-5:21 and sanctification, chapters 6-8). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6) and illustrates the obligation by death (Romans 6:1-14), by slavery (Romans 6:15-23), and by marriage (Romans 7:1-6). [source]
Because of defective spiritual insight largely due to moral defects also. Servants to uncleanness (δουλα τηι ακαταρσιαι doula tēi akatharsiāi). Neuter plural form of δουλος doulos to agree with μελη melē (members). Patently true in sexual sins, in drunkenness, and all fleshly sins, absolutely slaves like narcotic fiends. So now Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb παριστημι paristēmi to present Servants to righteousness (εις αγιασμον doula tēi dikaiosunēi). Repeats the idea of Romans 6:18. Unto sanctification This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (Romans 6:15). This late word appears only in lxx, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See note on Romans 6:15-23; 1 Corinthians 1:30. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (Romans 1:17) of righteousness (both justification, 1:18-5:21 and sanctification, chapters 6-8). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6) and illustrates the obligation by death (Romans 6:1-14), by slavery (1 Thessalonians 4:3), and by marriage (Romans 7:1-6). [source]
Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb παριστημι paristēmi to present Servants to righteousness (εις αγιασμον doula tēi dikaiosunēi). Repeats the idea of Romans 6:18. Unto sanctification This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (Romans 6:15). This late word appears only in lxx, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See note on 1 Thessalonians 4:3; 1 Corinthians 1:30. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (Romans 1:17) of righteousness (both justification, 1:18-5:21 and sanctification, chapters 6-8). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6) and illustrates the obligation by death (Romans 6:1-14), by slavery (Romans 6:15-23), and by marriage (Romans 7:1-6). [source]
God‘s seed, “the divine principle of life” (Vincent). Cf. John 1.And he cannot sin (και ου δυναται αμαρτανειν kai ou dunatai hamartanein). This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means “and he cannot commit sin” as if it were και ου δυναται αμαρτειν kai ou dunatai hamartein or αμαρτησαι hamartēsai (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive αμαρτανειν hamartanein can only mean “and he cannot go on sinning,” as is true of αμαρτανει hamartanei in 1 John 3:8 and αμαρτανων hamartanōn in 1 John 3:6. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see αμαρτητε hamartēte and αμαρτηι hamartēi in 1 John 2:1. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of αμαρτανειν hamartanein here. Paul has precisely John‘s idea in Romans 6:1 επιμενωμεν τηι αμαρτιαι epimenōmen tēi hamartiāi (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with αμαρτησωμεν hamartēsōmen in Romans 6:15 (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive). [source]
This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means “and he cannot commit sin” as if it were και ου δυναται αμαρτειν kai ou dunatai hamartein or αμαρτησαι hamartēsai (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive αμαρτανειν hamartanein can only mean “and he cannot go on sinning,” as is true of αμαρτανει hamartanei in 1 John 3:8 and αμαρτανων hamartanōn in 1 John 3:6. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see αμαρτητε hamartēte and αμαρτηι hamartēi in 1 John 2:1. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of αμαρτανειν hamartanein here. Paul has precisely John‘s idea in Romans 6:1 επιμενωμεν τηι αμαρτιαι epimenōmen tēi hamartiāi (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with αμαρτησωμεν hamartēsōmen in Romans 6:15 (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive). [source]
“Men holding” (present active participle of κρατεω krateō).The teaching of Balaam (την διδαχην αλααμ tēn didachēn Balaam). Indeclinable substantive Balaam (Numbers 25:1-9; Numbers 31:15.). The point of likeness of these heretics with Balaam is here explained.Taught Balak Imperfect indicative of διδασκω didaskō Balaam‘s habit, “as the prototype of all corrupt teachers” (Charles). These early Gnostics practised licentiousness as a principle since they were not under law, but under grace (Romans 6:15). The use of the dative with διδασκω didaskō is a colloquialism rather than a Hebraism. Two accusatives often occur with διδασκω didaskō cast a stumbling-block Second aorist active infinitive (accusative case after εδιδασκεν edidasken) of βαλλω ballō regular use with σκανδαλον skandalon (trap) like τιτημι σκανδαλον tithēmi skandalon in Romans 14:13. Balaam, as Josephus and Philo also say, showed Balak how to set a trap for the Israelites by beguiling them into the double sin of idolatry and fornication, which often went together (and do so still).To eat things sacrificed to idols (παγειν ειδωλοτυτα phagein eidōlothuta). Second aorist active infinitive of εστιω esthiō and the verbal adjective (from ειδωλον eidōlon and τυω thuō), quoted here from Numbers 25:1., but in inverse order, repeated in other order in Revelation 2:20. See Acts 15:29; Acts 21:25; 1 Corinthians 8:1. for the controversy over the temptation to Gentile Christians to do what in itself was harmless, but which led to evil if it led to participation in the pagan feasts. Perhaps both ideas are involved here. Balaam taught Balak how to lead the Israelites into sin in both ways. [source]
Imperfect indicative of διδασκω didaskō Balaam‘s habit, “as the prototype of all corrupt teachers” (Charles). These early Gnostics practised licentiousness as a principle since they were not under law, but under grace (Romans 6:15). The use of the dative with διδασκω didaskō is a colloquialism rather than a Hebraism. Two accusatives often occur with διδασκω didaskō cast a stumbling-block Second aorist active infinitive (accusative case after εδιδασκεν edidasken) of βαλλω ballō regular use with σκανδαλον skandalon (trap) like τιτημι σκανδαλον tithēmi skandalon in Romans 14:13. Balaam, as Josephus and Philo also say, showed Balak how to set a trap for the Israelites by beguiling them into the double sin of idolatry and fornication, which often went together (and do so still).To eat things sacrificed to idols (παγειν ειδωλοτυτα phagein eidōlothuta). Second aorist active infinitive of εστιω esthiō and the verbal adjective (from ειδωλον eidōlon and τυω thuō), quoted here from Numbers 25:1., but in inverse order, repeated in other order in Revelation 2:20. See Acts 15:29; Acts 21:25; 1 Corinthians 8:1. for the controversy over the temptation to Gentile Christians to do what in itself was harmless, but which led to evil if it led to participation in the pagan feasts. Perhaps both ideas are involved here. Balaam taught Balak how to lead the Israelites into sin in both ways. [source]