1st Corinthians Lesson 8

1st Corinthians 8 Part 2

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Listen to Lesson Audio:

---

Lesson Transcript

Opening and Schedule Change

Please open your Bibles to 1 Corinthians chapter 8. We are not going to finish 1 Corinthians chapter 8 tonight. Unfortunately, we don’t have to. Because Mike’s schedule has changed, so we have some extra time. So we’ll at least go through another week after today. And we’re still on the introduction.

Review of Last Week

Last week, we talked about the problem that is addressed not only in chapter eight, but also in chapters nine and ten, and that is the problem of meat sacrificed to idols. And we talked about the traditional view, particularly of chapter 8. And I say traditional because it’s one that you often see in commentaries.

And that is that Corinth was split between the weak and the strong. That’s the traditional view. And Paul, under this view, was telling the strong: yes, you have the liberty to go into the idol’s temple and eat meat there, but you need to use this liberty wisely because of the weak. And so, under this view, the traditional view, Paul was agreeing with a group there that they had the liberty to go into an idol’s temple and eat the meat that had been sacrificed there.

And we gave some examples last week of the invitations to such banquets, and they, in fact, mentioned the false gods by name, and sometimes were written as if they had come from the false gods.

Problems with the Traditional View (Review)

So, I saw many problems with the traditional view and started going through a number of them last week.

The first problem we looked at was that that view assumes, really, that this was Paul’s first mention of this problem to the Corinthians, that he was just now getting around to telling them how he felt about idols. And we said that can’t possibly be the case. Paul talked about idolatry every time he said anything. And we know he had spent a lot of time with Corinthians, so we know he must have addressed it many times.

The second problem we looked at was that that traditional view assumes that this was really an honest question by the Corinthians. Why can’t we—rather, can we eat meat sacrificed to idols? But we said that’s really not the question at all. Their question is, why can’t we eat meat sacrificed to idols? I think they knew very well what Paul had earlier said on this topic. And they were coming back for another try to get him to change his mind.

And then the third problem that we looked at with that traditional view was that it assumes that Paul agreed with this so-called strong group that they could eat in the idol’s temple. And we know Paul is going to tell them shortly to flee idolatry, just as he has already told them to flee fornication. So that’s a big problem if we assume that Paul agreed anybody could eat the meat sacrificed to an idol while sitting in the false God’s temple.

Fourth Error: No Ongoing Dispute Between Weak and Strong

So that brings us now to the fourth error with the traditional view, and that’s where we left off last time. And the fourth error, I think, is the assumption by that view that there is some type of ongoing dispute in Corinth between a weak group and a strong group. I don’t think so. Let’s talk about that.

First, Paul never refers to anybody as strong in chapters 8, 9, and 10. So, to even say they’re the strong group, I mean, where are they referred to? Where are they talked about? Yes, they thought they were strong. The Corinthians saw themselves as strong, but that doesn’t mean Paul saw them as strong. It certainly doesn’t mean God saw them as strong.

Have we seen any evidence that there’s a strong group anywhere in Corinth? All we’ve seen really so far in the book of 1 Corinthians is weakness and division and problems.

Who’s Calling Them Weak?

So, who are the weak and who are the strong? Well, let’s first ask this question: who’s calling them weak?

Well, some people argue that this letter that Paul is writing here is responding to this strong group. And the strong group had complained to Paul about the more scrupulous, weak group, and that they were complaining about them. They were saying to Paul, come on, Paul, tell these weak Christians to kind of get with it. And teach them more about Christian liberty because they’re being a drag on our Christian liberty, and they need to get with it and understand the things that you’ve taught us.

And so, you know, they may have even argued that, you know, if we go into the idol’s temple and eat the meat there, it’s going to build up these weak Christians. It’s going to strengthen them. I mean, that’s kind of the thought that some commentaries have.

But there’s no evidence here in the text that the strong created this label of weak. I mean, we’ve already said there’s no real evidence of anyone being strong, and I think they thought they were all strong. I don’t think they really saw that there was anybody weak in Corinth.

And there’s also no evidence that any of these so-called weaker Christians had ever objected to anything that the strong group did. In fact, isn’t Paul’s concern just the opposite? Isn’t it the opposite of that? Paul is not concerned that the weak would object. Paul’s concern is that the weak would not object and that they would just be led into the idol’s temple and not think anything was wrong about it. That’s why they’re weak, because they didn’t even see a problem with it. So it’s not that they were over there objecting, it’s the problem that they wouldn’t even know to object.

What “Weak” Really Means

And let me interject an aside here since we have a little extra time. To qualify as weak in this chapter, and I think this would also apply in Romans, which we’ll be talking about shortly, that means you have a weak moral compass. And that means you’re more susceptible to being led astray by a bad example because you don’t have the spiritual maturity to understand that it’s a bad example, you’re more likely to be led astray by that bad example.

Why do I mention that? Because very often in the church you’ll find someone who kind of labels themselves the weak brother. And then they use that status as a club to start clubbing people and saying, I’m the weak brother, so you quit doing X or you quit doing Y because I’m the weak brother.

No, not at all. When they say that, what they’re telling you is that they would never follow that example. They know it’s wrong. They’re never going to do X or Y because they already know it’s wrong. That tells me they’re not the weak brother. They may be perfectly right in what they’re condemning. X and Y may be completely wrong, and they may be perfectly right in that, but they are not condemning it as the weak brother. Because they know it’s wrong, and they’re not going to be led astray by that. They sound more like the strong brother.

The truly weak brother would be the last person to stand up and object to this because they don’t even know it’s wrong and they’re likely to be led astray by it.

The Weak Group is Real, Not Hypothetical

Well, now others argue, okay, well, there is no weak group. The weak group is just hypothetical. And Paul’s using it as a hypothetical here. Nah, I don’t think so either. Verse 7 doesn’t sound like a hypothetical group to me. And it would hardly be surprising if we find weak Christians in Corinth. I mean, that’s not like all we’re going to find are weak Christians in Corinth. So I think there was an actual weak group there. I just don’t think the strong group was calling them weak.

Paul’s Assumption About Care

I think Paul’s point, really, here is that, look, you’re all weak. You all don’t know what’s going on here. Paul’s entire approach in this chapter assumes that this so-called strong group would care about the plight of the weak, doesn’t it? Because he’s about to make the argument here that: look, I don’t think you’ve really considered what it’s going to do to a weak brother if you go in and eat in that idol’s temple.

What does that argument presuppose? It presupposes that that so-called strong group is going to care about the weaker brother. Because if they’re not going to care about the weaker brother, then why even make that argument? If they’re going to say, well, I don’t care if they come in there, then that argument is meaningless.

So Paul is assuming that this so-called strong group is going to care about the weaker brother. So if that’s the case, then that tells me that they really hadn’t considered the effect it might have on the weaker brother. And what that means is that there is not some ongoing dispute between the strong and the weak in Corinth, where there’s some group labeled strong and some group labeled weak, and they’re fighting it out. I just don’t see that at all here.

Paul is about to go to them and say, let’s talk about this so-called liberty of yours. Have you considered the effect it would have on this group? And Paul’s point there, I think, is that they hadn’t considered that. And that means there’s not some ongoing dispute.

Fifth Error: Romans 14 is Not a Parallel

A fifth error, I think, here is the assumption that you often see that Romans 14 is a parallel passage to 1 Corinthians 8. That Romans 14 is a parallel passage to 1 Corinthians chapter 8. I think that’s wrong.

Now, Romans 14 certainly has some similarities with 1 Corinthians chapter 8, particularly some similarities of language. You both deal with food. They both deal with the strong and the weak, but there are some important differences between the two chapters.

Different Groups Involved

First, and most importantly, the two interacting groups are very different between Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8. Romans 14 deals with social interactions, just like 1 Corinthians 8, but Romans 14 deals with social interactions between Gentile Christians and Jewish Christians. Christian versus Christian. Gentile Christian versus Jewish Christian.

That was a very important issue in the early church, but it’s not the issue in 1 Corinthians chapter 8. You know, we know Paul scolded Peter and Barnabas in Galatians 2 for their refusal to eat with the Gentile Christians in Antioch. And the danger there was that there was going to be a division, that there was going to end up being a Jewish church and a Gentile church.

And in fact, if anyone ever tells you that God wanted more than one church, you can go back and say, if that’s the case, then we would have had a Gentile church and a Jewish church, and half the New Testament wouldn’t have been needed. Because so much time is spent on that, wanting unity in the body among the Gentiles and the Jews. In fact, that was prophesied all the way back in Isaiah chapter 2. There is one church, and that’s because God wants there to be one church, and that’s a good thing to point to.

But that’s a very different issue than what we see here in 1 Corinthians 8. 1 Corinthians chapter 8 also deals with social interactions. But it deals with social interactions between Gentile Christians and idol worshipers. Gentile Christians and pagan idol worshipers. That’s the social interaction that is of concern in 1 Corinthians 8.

Why do I say Gentile Christians, because we know that no Jewish Christian would be found dead in an idol’s temple. So Paul has to be talking here to the Gentile Christians in Corinth. Also, we know from chapter 8, verse 7, that these people were, up until now, accustomed to idols. They were used to this prior to their conversion. Again, that’s not something that could ever be said about a Jew. So Paul’s talking to Gentile Christians here, and the social interaction that’s of interest is their interaction with idol worshipers in an idol’s temple.

Different Standards Apply

Now, the fact that Paul rejected in Romans 14 these narrow Jewish dietary restrictions that separated Jewish Christians from Gentile Christians in the church. He rejected that. Does not mean that Paul is going to reject restrictions that separate Christians from idol worshipers. I mean, you cannot make that leap. We know Paul’s not going to do that. And in fact, in chapter 10, verse 14, he’s going to tell them to flee idolatry, to flee such a situation. So there’s no parallel there.

It’s a mistake to assume that just because Paul agreed with the strong in Romans 14, that he’s also going to agree with some so-called strong group in 1 Corinthians 8 or 9 or 10. In fact, we know he did not agree with them. Not here in chapter 8, and certainly not in chapter 10. In fact, I don’t even think he agreed there were any strong Christians there. I don’t think he thinks there is a strong group. They think they’re strong. I don’t think Paul thinks they’re strong.

Other Differences

Some other differences, the word conscience does not appear in Romans 14, and the word faith does not appear in 1 Corinthians 8 through 10. Although God’s faithfulness is mentioned in verse 13 of chapter 10. A key word in 1 Corinthians 8 through 10 is the Greek word for right or liberty or authority. You don’t find that in Romans 14.

In Romans 14, Paul does side with the strong, agreeing in verse 20 that all foods are clean, and he sees no harm in their eating food apart from its potential effect on the weak. He’s not saying don’t eat the food ever. He’s just saying look at the effect it would have on the weaker Christian.

But here it’s again very different. Paul completely rejects the argument that it’s okay to eat in the idol’s temple. And in fact, in chapter 10, he’s going to brand that a deadly communion with demons, very different from what we see in Romans 14.

In Romans 14, 5, and 6, Paul says that both the one who eats and the one who does not eat can give thanks to God and honor God. Is that true in 1 Corinthians 8? How could it be? Can food offered to an idol and eaten in a false God’s temple be said to honor God? No, the one who is honored is the false God, the false idol.

How Romans 14 May Have Been Misapplied

Now that’s not to say, though, after all that, that Romans 14 is completely unrelated to 1 Corinthians chapter 8. I think Paul very likely taught the Corinthians the same things he taught the Romans in Romans 14, and I think the Corinthians had taken it out of context and applied it to the idol’s temple. I think that’s what’s going on.

You can almost hear them. Paul, you told us that the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking. That’s what he told Romans in Romans 14:17. So the Corinthians say, that’s what you told us too. So, how can, you know, if we eat the idol food, how can it possibly matter where we eat it? You know, you said we can eat anything we want to, so where does it matter where we eat it?

Paul, you said, “happy is he that condemneth not himself in the thing which he alloweth.” Romans 14, 22. And the Corinthians would say, “Well, that’s our position with idol food. We allow it. So, therefore, how can you condemn us? Certainly, you want us to be happy.”

I mean, you can see them twisting that argument in Romans 14, applying it somewhere where it does not apply, and I think you can kind of see how they’ve gotten in this situation.

I think the most likely relation between Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians chapter 8 is that the Corinthians had twisted the teaching of Romans 14 to create the problem that Paul is addressing in 1 Corinthians chapter 8.

Sixth Error: Paul’s Multiple Concerns

A sixth error, I think, is assuming that Paul’s only problem with eating in an idol’s temple is the potential harm it might have on someone with a weak conscience. That’s Paul’s only concern. That’s wrong.

You say, well, Eric, how can that be an error when, in fact, that’s the argument Paul leads off with here? That’s the one he starts with in chapter 8.

Paul’s Strategy: Persuasion Over Coercion

Well, Paul leads off with that argument, I think, because he’s more interested in persuasion here than coercion. And he wants them to understand the problem here. He wants them to flee idols, yes, and he’ll tell them that when we get to chapter 10, but he also wants them to understand why. He wants them to understand the theological implications of their behavior and why love needs to be their motivation.

I think we can infer from all of this that Paul had earlier tried coercion. I think Paul had come to them and they’d had this situation before, and Paul had said, Look, flee idolatry. No, you can’t eat there. Don’t even consider eating there. Don’t eat there. And I think they’d rejected that.

In fact, we’re going to see in the next chapter, they not only rejected the message of Paul, they’d rejected Paul. They’ve rejected his apostolic authority because they didn’t like what he had told them to do. So I think he had already tried that approach.

Paul is now going to plan B and trying a different approach. He’s already talking here to people who know very well his view about idolatry. And he’s trying to persuade them to adopt a view they’ve already rejected.

Different Approach in Different Chapters

He did not start off in chapter 8 by telling them to flee idolatry. Why? Because he’d already tried that approach and it hadn’t worked. Not only were they not fleeing idolatry, they were still eating meat sacrificed to an idol in that false idol’s temple, and they’d rejected Paul.

So Paul is going back and trying a different approach. He’s still going to go back to his first approach in chapter 10, but I think here he’s trying a different approach.

We know Paul is very capable of giving them an absolute prohibition on this. Because he does it in chapter 10. But he does not do it that way in chapter 8. Instead, he first wants them to see for themselves that their actions are wrong and to understand why. Absolute prohibition will come later.

In chapter 10, Paul will forbid them from eating in pagan temples. He will forbid them from eating food that has been openly acknowledged as having been offered to a false God. He will permit them to eat idol food only as long as its history has not been disclosed when they buy that food in the marketplace. And he will permit them to eat idol food with pagan friends, again, only so long as its history has not been disclosed to them.

Seventh Error: This is Not Just an Ancient Problem

A seventh error, and this one’s not just limited to the traditional view, I think is to view this problem as a purely ancient problem with no relevance to our modern world. You say, well, meat sacrificed to idols, I mean, I don’t think we have that much anymore, do we?

Well, we don’t have literal meat sacrificed to idols, but we’ve got idolatry everywhere we look. And we also have situations in our own world, our own society, situations where Christians should absolutely not be, things they should absolutely not do, activities they should absolutely not engage in.

And very often these activities and these places are seen as perfectly normal things to do by the world. Perfectly normal, and they look at you with surprise and shock when you will not do them, and you will not go in those places, and you will not engage in those things, and you may suffer for it. Either through ridicule or you may suffer commercially for that, through your business or in any number of ways you may suffer for that.

You may not get the promotion that someone else gets because they’re willing to go out drinking with the boss after work and you don’t do that. And you don’t get that promotion. You suffer for that. And that situation is what we’re talking about here. That’s the situation we’re talking about.

The Parallel to Ancient Corinth

Because in ancient Corinth, to not go and eat in those idol temples and partake of those celebrations in those idol temples, it was a natural part of Corinthian life. They had grown up doing it their whole lives. And society around them saw absolutely nothing wrong with it. And when they said they were no longer going to do that, they got looked at with complete disbelief and ridicule, and they suffered for it.

That is the problem we’re talking about here in 1 Corinthians chapter 8. And the premise, the thing behind that is that whatever the thing is, it is wrong. We do not have the liberty to do that thing. Whatever it is, meat sacrificed to idols or the things you can think of today in our modern society, it is wrong. There is a prohibition against it because we are Christians and we don’t do those things.

Two Ways to Look at the Problem

Now, there’s two ways to look at those problems. One, the prohibition. We just can’t do that. But then there’s the other way. And that’s the way Paul’s talking about here in 1 Corinthians 8. Even if we had the right to do that, which we don’t, but even if we had the right to do that, we still would not do that. Why? Because our weaker brother might see us.

Assuming we even had the right to go in and party in some bar with the boss and the gang after work. Even if we had such a right, would it even then be a good thing to do? And the answer is no. One of our weaker brothers could see us going into that place. And they could then think, well, you know, I thought as a Christian I shouldn’t be doing that, but you know, there’s Eric going in there and doing that, so I guess it’s okay. And then they would be led into that.

So, you know, apart from the prohibition that we shouldn’t be doing in the first place, there’s another good reason not to do it. And I think Paul is looking at both of those things here.

This Problem Still Exists

And this is so far from being an ancient problem, isn’t it? And we know that anyway, don’t we? How much of the New Testament is devoted to this problem of meat sacrifice to idols? Do you think God, through inspiration, would have given us that much text on a problem that doesn’t exist anymore?

God knew that problem would always exist, and it has always existed, and it exists today. So I think it’s an error for us to think that this is just a purely ancient problem with no relevance in our modern world.

Next Week

Next week, we’re going to continue on our study of 1 Corinthians 8, and we’re actually going to start with verse 1. Beginning of class next week, and I think we should be able to finish up next week.

Thank you so much for your attention.