All right, all of I Corinthians
chapter 8. Now, as touching things offered
unto idols, we know that all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs
up, but charity or love edifies. And if any man think that he
knoweth anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know. But if any man love God, the
same is known of him. As concerning, therefore, the
eating of those things that are sacrificed unto idols, we know
that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none
other God but one. For though there be that are
called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, as there be God's
many and Lord's many. But to us there is but one God,
the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him, and one Lord Jesus
Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. 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. But meat commends us not to God,
For neither if we eat are we the better, neither if we eat
not are we the worse. But take heed, lest this liberty
of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak. For if
any man see thee which hath knowledge, seated meet in the idol's temple,
shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to
eat those things which are offered to idols? And through thy knowledge
shall the weak brother perish for whom Christ died? But when
you sow sin against the brethren and wound their weak conscience,
you sin against Christ. if meat make my brother to offend,
I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my
brother to offend." Flipping to chapter 10, verse 25 through
verse 29, "...whatsoever is sold in the shambles that eat, asking
no question for conscience's sake. For the earth is the Lord's,
and the fullness thereof. If any of them that believe not
bids you to a feast, and you be disposed to go, whatsoever
is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience's
sake. But if any man say unto you,
This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake
that shewed it, and for conscience's sake, for the earth is the Lord's,
and the fullness thereof. Conscience, I say, not thine
own, but of another. For why is my liberty judge of
another man's conscience?" And along the way, we'll bring in
some verses and passages from Romans chapter 14. When we used
another text recently, not long ago, from this very same epistle,
1 Corinthians, it gave us the occasion to make the point of
emphasis that most of what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians, most
of it, pertains to two things. Number one, Paul had received
firsthand information or reports of misbehavior in the Corinthian
assembly. and verse 11. Secondly, there
were some in the Corinthian assembly who had written to him asking
for guidance upon some matters about which there must have been
dissension and controversy, and it troubled some of them to the
extent that they actually wrote to Paul asking for his advice. You'll see that in I Corinthians
7 and verse 1. where Paul takes up some of their
concerns. As he said, now concerning the
things whereof you wrote unto me. I Corinthians 7 and verse
1. The first question that he deals
with was the question of marriage. And the question of whether or
not a celibate state is better than a married conjugal state,
whether it is better in regard to being a Christian and to being
a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, another issue comes up in
chapter 8, another issue, different altogether. And that was, in
verse 1, touching things offered unto idols. There were idolaters
among them that lived in that city. In fact, they were surrounded
by idolaters and idolatrous worship and an idol temple. And they
made sacrifices unto their heathen gods that they worshipped and
their false deity. They offered meat and animals
and sacrifices unto their deity. What's more, there was in that
city what Paul refers to in verse 10 of our chapter, the idol's
temple, or maybe it's chapter 10, which means that there was
a pagan priest there, or more than one, who officiated who
offered the sacrifices made unto the heathen gods and made unto
their imagined and invented deity. Now, we have said it before that
Charist was not only a very large, a very industrial, and a very
diverse city, but it was also a very wicked and a very immoral
city, including a lot of prostitution, as we read in history. And some
say that it was here that the goddess Aphrodite was also worshipped. in Corinth, and another said
of the city, that of all the cities of the ancient world,
none was as notorious for licentiousness and wickedness and immorality
as was the city of Corinth. But the issue at hand went deeper
than the premise or the practice of idolatry in their city. It was deeper than the fact that
there was there an idol's temple that existed, because you see,
this was the case throughout all of the known world. in that
day. Wherever there were Christians,
wherever there was a church, a congregation of believers,
there was also idolatry all around them. An island of Christianity
in a sea of idolatry was the situation in most places. But he takes it even further
if we look at verse 4 of chapter 8. The issue was not simply the
sacrificing of animals unto heathen deity, but the issue was concerning
the eating of that meat that had been offered as a sacrifice
unto idols. This carried them into another
realm altogether. This defines the issue more particularly,
thus we have again also a two-fold matter. A. Concerning the things
offered unto idols, there in verse 1, there in verse 1 and
in verse 4. And then the eating of things
offered unto idols. No sooner has the apostle introduced
the subject, no sooner has he taken it up, no sooner had he
broached the subject in verse 1, but he makes what I like to
call a short, digressive, parenthetical statement before he comes back
to face the issue again. In verses 1A through verse 3,
I think you'll find that little digression. Then he returns to
the subject again in verse 4, and he makes here sort of an
explanative qualification, if we may call it that. regarding
what ought to be the Christian view of idols and of Jehovah
our God. Now, as we will see, Paul is
moving carefully and Paul is moving deliberately because of
what is at stake here in this matter. and because it involves
the principle of gospel or Christian liberty, but also the effect
of some of the action or the consequences upon those that
Paul calls weak, W-E-A-K, using that word. Thus, in verse 4,
the question is that of eating those things. of eating the meat
that had been sacrificed by heathen deities unto their idol. These were not Jewish sacrifices,
they were heathen sacrifices that had been made. Now here's
the situation so that we understand the context and the historical
context. These sacrifices can be seen
as having a threefold part are issued. Number one, there was
that part of the sacrifice that was burned upon the altar. Sacrifice up unto their heathen
God. Secondly, There was the priest's
share of that sacrifice. The priest got a share of the
sacrifice. Remember, even the Levi priests
had a share of the sacrifices that they offered. I Corinthians
9 and verse 13, they that wait at the altar live of the altar. I Corinthians 10 and 18. And
back in 1 Samuel 2, verses 13-16, the Levites had a share for their
personal use, for their personal table of the sacrificial offering. And then thirdly, there was the
part or the share of the offerer, the one who provided the sacrifice. Now of the last two, the offerer
and the priest, Some of that meat, being more than they could
use, was then sold in the marketplace. And you see that in 1 Corinthians
chapter 10 and verse 25. It could be bought there for
private consumption in the home to entertain company or to throw
a feast or whatever. Thus, there were three ways that
the Corinthian Christians might be partakers or come in contact
with meat that had been sacrificed unto idols. Number one, they
might purchase it in the market place. There it is for sale hanging
up on the hooks. They might purchase it there.
They might take it home, cook it and eat it at their private
meal in their house. Now they might or they might
not know that it had been sacrificed unto idol. Or they may know and
not care and not be troubled by it at all based upon what
we have in verses 4 through verse 6 here of chapter 8. But secondly,
they might then be invited as company to come and dine and
feast and be served meat that originally had been sacrificed
unto a heathen deity. I Corinthians 10, verse 27, we
read it. A feast given by unbelievers,
perhaps friends or business, and Paul said, Whatsoever is
sent before you, that eat, Eat it without raising a question. Eat it without question unless
it is announced to have been sacrificed and be the leaving
of idle sacrifices. Then thirdly, evidently, some
in the Corinthian assembly were so emboldened that they would
even go into the heathen temple itself and there sit and eat
the meat sacrificed on the idol. You have a mention of that in
1 Corinthians chapter 8 verse 9 and verse 10. one see thee eating in the idol's
temple. And they might justify their
behavior by saying we have knowledge and that we have Christian liberty
in the Lord Jesus Christ. We know and we believe and are
firmly persuaded that an idol is nothing in the world but some
material made thing, and that there is one God and one Lord
Jesus Christ. And we know that, and that's
the principle upon which we act. Now the question is, How will
Paul mediate this dispute? How is Paul going to navigate
the minefields that are here on both sides in this dispute? Which side will he take? Or will
he take neither side? How will he go through it? Will he lose face with one side
or the other? What's the answer to these questions
that I've been raised? Whether to eat this meat, whether
to eat it in the company of a heathen friend, or whether to enter into
the idol temple. Then there is the further question,
who were they who took the opposite side in this dispute and in this
dissension? So we first of all ask the question,
was this strictly and only a Jew and a Gentile issue? the Jews holding one and the
Gentiles holding another view of the matter? Or were they some
of each one upon each side of the issue? You must remember
that the Jews had very strict dietary laws under the old economy,
but which were done away with in the Lord Jesus Christ and
His death. Now, the main distinction that
Paul makes is between those that on the one hand he calls weak,
and those on the other hand who claim or do have knowledge, are
the strong and the settled ones in their belief. Now, a check
on the meaning of the two-word week in the New Testament, we
want to look at that just for a moment in passing. I think
that the word is astineo, and And then from two words, A seems
to have the meaning to be without strength, or to be unstrengthened,
or to be impotent, or weak, as we might say. And these words
weak are used in the scripture in three different ways, three
ways that I could identify. Number one, it would be the same
word if you were speaking of physical infirmities of the body,
of sickness or of disease. That's the word in Matthew 26
and verse 41, of a weakness, infirmity, or sickness in the
flesh. Number two, That word is used
of the rudiments of the Jewish religion, as in Galatians 4 and
verse 9, the weak and beggarly elements of the world. And in
Hebrews chapter 7 and verse 18, the weakness thereof of those
things under the old economy. Thirdly, It is used of weakness
in knowledge in the spiritual sense. Weakness in the sense
of limited knowledge or limited revelation or limited light. I counted this word in the concordance
at least nine times that Paul uses the word weak in the context
of contrasting the strong and the weak, as discussed here in
1 Corinthians 8 and 10, and also in Romans 14. Now here are some examples of
Paul making reference to those that he identifies as weak, as
weak in the faith or conscience. I Corinthians 8, verse 7, we
read it, he speaks of their conscience being weak. Look in verse 9,
of a stumbling block put before they that are weak. In verse
10, the conscience of him that is weak. In verse 11, he speaks
of the weak brother, a weak brother. He is a brother, but he's weak.
He is weak, but he is a brother. And again in verse 12, he warns
again, wounding their weak conscience. Now over in Romans 14 and verse
1, we'll bring that into the equation. Paul speaks of him
that is weak in the faith, him that is weak in the faith. And then he said, here's the
issue in verse 2, one believes he may eat all things, anything,
another who is weak eats herbs, or I guess is a vegetarian. He
does not say, one who is strong believes that he may eat all
things, while the one that is weak limits his diet to that
of herbs or vegetables or such like. Now, before proceeding
here, let us see if we would agree that this issue is much,
much, much more complicated than we might imagine at first. And that from both sides, that
from the side of those who have knowledge and are strong, that
from the side of those who are weak. At first hearing, it is
a complicated issue. How would you solve it? And especially,
was it complicated in its first issue in this particular historical
setting in which it occurred? By this fact, it is complicated. And I want you to listen carefully
to these two things. Number one. Sometimes, oftentimes,
it is the weak who believe that they are the strong ones. Think about that. It is the weak
who believe that they are the ones that are strong. Why? They have far-reaching scruples
and convictions running out their ear. They find sin in many more
things, and they take offense at many more things done under
and through the name of Christian liberty. They cannot practice
it as they might if they were enlightened, so they tend toward
legalism. And this will be the case a lot
of time within a week. They're hurt. And they are grieved
and they are saddened at others that call themselves strong.
And they call the strong libertines and antinomians. So when the
weak think they're strong, this is their reaction. Now secondly,
on the other hand, the so-called strong do consider themselves
to be knowledgeable. They understand. They have the
truth on these matters. And sometimes they run roughshod
over their weaker brethren and they wound their consciences
and they offend them, offend them in the thing that they do
in the name of Christian liberty, and yet complain, as in 1 Corinthians
10 and verse 19, why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience? Now, let's look at 1 Corinthians
8, 1 through 6. In verse 1, Paul concedes we
have knowledge concerning idols. Paul cautions such knowledge
is to be practiced and tempered in and with love, and anyone
who think themselves truly knowledgeable, he said, has yet much to learn. Those who say they're knowledgeable
are yet able to learn many more things. Then he said, love to
God will manifest itself in one's treatment unto their brethren. They will be considerate of their
weaker brethren. Then look at verses 4 through
6, that in eating meat sacrificed unto idols, Paul concedes. We do indeed know that an idol
is nothing in the world. And the meaning of this is very
clear from the following words of that verse, that this is the
case with us. There are many that are called
gods and that are called lords, yet though that be the case with
others, to us there is one, only one God, who created all things,
who's the cause of our existence, and there is one Lord Jesus Christ
who is able to save, the Lord and the Savior of us. Now, notice, and I think you'll
agree, there is an implied contrast that is here, that while some
regard and some believe in many gods and worship them, to us
there is but one true God. To us who believe, to us who
have been called, we acknowledge one and only one God, that though
some may have the name, yet they do not have the nature of God
or the reality of God, hence the folly of those who say, one
God is as good as another. We'll hear that from time to
time in the world even today, even among some who name themselves
to be Christian. Oh, one God is as good as another. One God is as good as another,
just so long as you are sincere. But let me tell you, Jehovah
is God. Only Jehovah is God, not Allah,
not any other. And this was concretely put in
the confession of Israel, the belief in one and only one God. I'm sorry, Deuteronomy chapter
6 and verse 4. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our
God is one God. You see it again in Exodus 20
verses 1 and 2. Now, there's another contrast
here, and look at verse 7 of chapter 8 of 1 Corinthians as
Paul writes, how be it? Now, the word how be it is from
the word Allah and can be rendered but, or you might see it however,
or nevertheless, or yet. There is not in all this knowledge. Not everyone is enlightened upon
this. Not everyone is convinced. Not everyone has a clear and
unaccusing conscience upon this matter. And so, then we ask ourselves
the question, what does Paul refer to? On what is this knowledge
lacking? What is this lack of knowledge. It cannot mean that they were
without the knowledge of the fact that there is but one true
God and one Lord. It would not be reasonable to
count one as a Christian who did not believe in one God and
one Lord Jesus Christ. So the contrast in verse 7, not
in every man is this knowledge. Is this the statement in verse
4? We know that an idol is nothing
in the world and that this is the proper connection is confirmed
by the last part of verse 7. where Paul said, some with conscience
of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing sacrificed unto
an idol and their conscience being weak is defiled. Now one, one side is totally
able to ignore the fact that such meat at one time or at first
was sacrificed under the heathen deity, while some on the other
side were not able to disconnect this meat from the idol to which
it had originally been killed and offered. And the first ate
it without compunction. He ate it at a common meal, while
the second, if I may use the expression, gagged on it as polluted
and defiled for having been offered unto an idle God. The first one therefore ate with
a clean conscience, or a clear conscience, and the second with
a wounded conscience, made defiled by the remembrance that this
meat had once been consecrated on an altar and offered unto
a heathen God. John Murray wrote in connection
with this issue, or with this dissension there in that church,
about eating meat that had been sacrificed unto idols, that there
was the firm conviction, quote, entertained by some that meat
offered unto idols had been so contaminated by this idolatrous
worship that it was not proper for a Christian to partake of
it." And it was directly related to the conscience. It was an
issue of conscience. It was a case of conscience that
caused them to be reticent here and to draw back and to question
it. Paul makes at least nine mentions
of that wonderful faculty called conscience. one of the most intriguing
and one of the most powerful, one of the most important of
all the faculties with which God has endowed His being. The one more than any other by
which God governs the world and restrains sin in the unregenerate. And the word is summed thirty
times throughout the New Testament itself. It is from a compound
word. two words put together, I think
you might say it's synodesis, a joint knowledge, a knowing
with. Co-perception is the meaning
of the word knowledge as used by Paul in Romans 2 and verse
15. Their conscience bearing them
witness. That is, their conscience in
its judgments bearing witness with the work of the law written
in their heart. The work of the law inscribed
there, their conscience bearing witness with that work inscribed. I found the short catechism,
I thought, was to the point in Pithy about this matter from
an old-timer named Samuel Rutherford. I don't know much about him,
but I have some of his writings, and I thought this catechism
on the conscience might be helpful. So here we go. Question. What
is the conscience? That's a good question. It needs
an answer. What is the conscience? Rutherford
answers, it is the judging part of the soul under God, approving
good and convicting of evil. Now, there's not a person here
but has had and felt that work within them. Question, what are
the lights that direct or that guide the conscience? What most
influences it? What lets it operate best? the law of nature in man's heart,
and the Word of God, quote, are the two candles that God has
lighted to let it see to walk, unquote. I like that description. Question, what are the proper
works of conscience? What is it to do? What is it
supposed to do, eh? It applies the law to our deeds,
question, answer as a witness and also to our deeds as a judge. Thus the conscience can only
function, can only operate, if you prefer, upon the light or
the revelation or the knowledge which it is given. The conscience
can only act and walk up to the light, the knowledge and the
revelation that it has been given. And that knowledge may be natural
in the unregenerate man or the added light of the Word of God
and the Holy Spirit in the child of God. Thus, when Paul talks
about the weak conscience in some that were numbered among
the believers, he equates their weakness with a deficient knowledge. And because of that lack, they
considered the eating of sacrificed meat to idols to be a sin in
their case and in the case of others. And because of that weak
conscience and lack of knowledge, because they couldn't say an
idol is nothing in the world, They were offended, they were
grieved, they were wounded in their conscience. Should they
eat of it or should they see another doing so? They did not
have the knowledge that an idol is nothing at all in the world. Verses 4 through 6 of our chapter. Now perhaps these were former
idolaters. Perhaps they had once been idolaters
themselves who once revered the idols and gave reference unto
the idols and the false god. They had not yet come to view
them as being unreal gods. They still had conscience of
the idol and what they used to do, that if they should eat of
such meat, it would not be the same as a raised lamb or a home-grown
beef. but it would be our trap for
food, our gotten for food for the table and for the family.
It was to them yet still a thing offered as sacrifice unto idol. Now, I mentioned Romans 14. Let's
turn there because there's some profit on this subject to be
had also in the 14th chapter of Paul's letter unto the Roman. So we turn there and look at
what he has to say. And while turning, remember,
if you will, that the issues here in Romans chapter 14 are
not the exact same issues that were at Corinth. But the principle
is of a like sort, a weak brother, a wounded conscience. When Romans
14 and 1, Paul enjoins them, him that is weak in the faith
Receive ye, but not to doubtful disputation. Him that is weak,
receive, but don't go to judging him immediately. Jump on him
like a duck on a June bug, trying to correct him and force him
into it. And the issue, look at verse 2 of chapter 14 of Romans. For one believes that he may
eat all things, another who is weak eat herbs. Look at verse
5 of that chapter. One man esteems one day above
another, another esteemeth every day alike, that every man be
fully persuaded in his own mind. Thus, the two issues here that
gave offense were diet and days, and down in verse 21, maybe wine. Look now at the scruples of the
week, reading again Romans 14, and let's look at verse 14. Watch that very carefully. Romans
14, 14. and am persuaded by the Lord
Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself. But watch the last
part of the verse. But to him that esteemeth anything
to be unclean, to him it is unclean. What he thinks is wrong is sinful
to him in his mind. And according unto his scruple,
it is wrong and it is sinful. And if you look at verse 20 in
the last part, all things indeed are pure, but evil for that man
who eats with an offence. Verse 23, Romans 14, he that
doubts is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith, for whatsoever
is not of faith is sin. Thus Paul enjoins the strong
and the knowledgeable not to engage in what John Murray called
censurous scrutiny, unquote, against these weaker brethren. Now, their weakness was not a
doctrinal one, not one, a theological one, deep theological matter,
not the Trinity, the person of Christ, or those kind of things.
But they did not, Paul would have them not to use censurous
scrutiny and make judgments on the thoughts or the intent of
those scruples of some who lacked understanding of the issue that
was at hand. Now let me give you some examples
how this works out. It might play out. So you can
understand the mind of some. You can get into their mind.
I can get into their mind because I used to be that ignorant of
some thing. And most of us or some of us
could say that as well. But to the converted To a man
who used to bow down and offer meat unto idols and call that
his God, eating meat sacrificed to idols was not something that
he could easily ignore. On the other hand, to the complete
and absolute teetotaler, a glass of wine or beer is a very, very
ugly thing and offensive and sinful in the eyes and mind of
some. Another example, to the strict
Sabbatarian, to miss church on Sunday or to eat out or to watch
a sporting event in the evening is a violation to them in their
mind of the Sabbath day. And so they do not do it and
are wounded at others. And the converted, some of them,
Jew in the apostolic era, had trouble ignoring the special
days of old Judaism. There were some who came to Christ
or were called into churches who still had trouble ignoring
and dismissing the special days of old Judaism. We see in Romans
14, 5 and 6, look at the example that he gives. One regards all
days alike. One elevates one day above another. And Romans 14, 5, and 6, what
one called regarding the holy days, the ceremonial economy,
as quote, having abiding sanctity, unquote. To some of those Jews,
that was the case. Those days had abiding sanctity. And of course, such would urge
their convictions upon others. Since the observance of such
days were for centuries not only instituted by God, but were required
by God. While others could ignore the
special day, they could let them come and go, they were just like
all other days, ignoring them completely as having come to
an end in and by the death of Christ upon the cross. Dead with
a ceremonial law, nailed to the cross of Christ our Lord. What made the difference in all
of these issues? What made the difference? Knowledge,
life, truth, revelation, knowing the truth of God. The only way
to strengthen a weak conscience is with truth and with knowledge,
not by force and not by coercion. I have long believed that the
first teachings that we received when we entered into Christendom.
Let's just look back. At what door we entered. Various
they might have been. But I've long believed that the
first teachings, the first teachings that we met with in Christendom
and that we sat under, the first forming of our Christian conviction. If they're weak, if they are
deficient, or even if they are in error, they are very hard
to shake off. or to give up. They cleave unto
us. We cleave unto them. We resist
letting them go in the face even of the truth. This could involve
such issues, and may be different with different people, but issues
of liquor, drinking. It could involve divorce and
remarriage. In the case of some, the Sabbath,
holidays, working on Sunday, family, having a TV, women wearing
pants. I mean, there are all kinds of
issues back then when we were weak. And they're not easily
resolved by the weak conscience. They're not easily resolved.
They see these things as convictions. And what does Paul say in Romans
14? What they do, they do it unto the Lord. They keep that
day unto the Lord. They act this way as unto the
Lord. These are their convictions.
And if they're wrong or weak, they are hard to shake off. That's why it takes so long to
get our minionism out of our system when we were full-blooded.
I read where John Murray said this, and I was glad to read
it because I've thought this a long time. Various types of
weaknesses proceed from different backgrounds and influences."
Now we have to admire the wisdom and the skill with which Paul
navigates these issues between the strong and between the weak,
that no principle of the gospel or of salvation is sacrificed
in Paul's handling of this matter. He concedes an idol is nothing. There is but one true God. Meat
does not commend us to God. Eating does not make us better
or make us worse. Nothing is unclean of itself,
Romans 14 and 14. All things indeed are pure, Romans
14 and verse 20. These were the persuasions of
the strong, and Paul quotes them or grants them their knowledge
in these things as being right. However, Since no principle of
the gospel of salvation was at stake, Paul calls upon the strong
and the knowledgeable to exercise charity toward their weaker brethren
and not to make their liberty an occasion of stumbling unto
the weak. not to wound them by our liberty,
not to embolden the weak to violate their conscience and do something
that is against their scruple, but to enlighten, to teach, to
lay the truth. And the truth sets the conscience
free. The truth is the light by which
it walks and which it can operate, and only the truth. The conscience
acts off of what it knows or what it believes. and therefore
can be corrected only with truth.