OET interlinear 1 COR 10:29

10:29a

the other one’s conscience, I mean, not your own: This clause corrects a possible misunderstanding. Paul realized that he had not spoken clearly, so he explained himself. He did not want a believer to offend anyone’s conscience. A believer should be willing to limit his rights and freedom because of the effect this might have on others.

Here are some other ways to translate this phrase:

I am not talking about your heart, but I am concerned about the heart of the person who told you

I am not speaking about what you think is wrong. I am speaking about what the other person thinks is wrong

10:29b-10:30

There is an interpretation issue here. It is not clear whether the questions in these verses are Paul’s own or those of someone else. The two main options are:

1. These are Paul’s own rhetorical questions. He asked his readers to think about whether anyone should condemn him for doing something he was free to do. His questions imply the response, “This is wrong.” For example:

   For why should my liberty be subject to the judgment of someone else’s conscience? If I partake with thankfulness, why should I be denounced because of that for which I give thanks? (NRSV) (BSB, NRSV, NIV, NJB, KJV, NASB, RSV, NET, GW, NLT)

2. Paul quoted an objection by some of the Corinthians. These objectors wanted to guard their rights without thinking properly about their influence. For example:

   “Well, then,” someone says, “why should my freedom to act be limited by another person’s conscience? If I thank God for my food, why should anyone criticize me about food for which I give thanks?” (GNT) (GNT, REB, NCV)

It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). The reason is that if this were an objector, Paul would respond to this objection in the following verses. But he did not do so. Also, the conjunction that the BSB translates as “For” normally introduces the reason for something, not an objection.

These questions should be understood as Paul’s own. They present a problem he wanted the Corinthians to think about. He pointed out that it was not beneficial to eat meat if it caused someone else to judge and condemn him. These questions also function as an explanation as to why the believer should not eat this food.Thiselton, pages 788–793, discusses the different ways these verses have been understood. He refers to the rhetorical questions as part of “deliberative rhetoric.” He says, “The questions answer themselves because…they sum up the thrust of the three chapters [chaps 8–10], namely, that while believers are free, concern for the well-being of the other has priority over everything else.” Fee, page 486, footnote 52, also discusses several possible interpretations of these verse parts, while saying that “none of them is fully satisfactory.”

10:29b

For: The Greek conjunction that the BSB translates as For introduces an explanation. See interpretation (1) above. It introduces Paul’s explanation of why a believer should sometimes refrain from doing something he was free to do. Some English versions such as the NJB do not have a conjunction. Consider how it is natural to introduce this in your language.

why should my freedom be determined by someone else’s conscience?: This is the first of two rhetorical questions. Paul used it to encourage people to think about a problem. It is not good that a believer’s freedom should be judged (and condemned) by somebody else’s conscience. Paul encouraged his readers to consider how to avoid this happening. They could avoid it by refraining from eating meat that people told them was offered to idols.

Here are two ways to translate this statement:

• Use a rhetorical question. For example:

  why is my right being judged by another’s conscience? (NET)

• Use a statement. For example:

  it is not right that another person should condemn me for what I am free to do.

  When I am free to do something, someone else should not condemn me for doing it.

Translate this statement in the way that is most natural in your language.

my freedom: The phrase my freedom refers to the believer’s freedom to eat any of the food that God has created.

Here is a way to translate this using a verb:

I am free to act…

I have the right to eat…

be determined: There are two ways to interpret the Greek verb that the BSB translates as be determined:

1. It means to be judged as wrong, to be condemned and criticized. For example:

   being judged by another’s conscience (NET) (NET, NIV, NASB, GW, NCV, KJV)

2. It means to be limited or restricted. For example:

   be limited by what someone else thinks (NLT) (BSB, NLT, ESV, CEV, GNT, NJB, RSV)

It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). This fits with the context of the following verse, where the person exercising freedom to eat is said to be “denounced.”

The verb “be judged” is passive. The person who is judging is the “another” mentioned in the verse, or the other man’s “conscience.”

Here are two ways to translate this passive verb:

• Use a passive verb. For example:

  be judged (GW)

• Use an active verb. For example:

  someone else condemn me