Sermon for February 04, 18

Last week we heard about the dilemma in the church at Corinth in regard to the meat that had been sacrificed to idols. Eating meals at the temple meant that the meat had been sacrificed & although the Christians did not indulge in the worship of the idols, what message did eating the meat send.

 While buying the meat from the Corinth markets & eating meat at home, a person did not then know the true source of the meat. It may have been from the temple, but maybe not. So, by eating in their homes they were further removed from the idol temple worship & its surroundings. One unfortunate obstacle about most homes at this time was that they were not large enough to host a gathering, a party a banquet, so they were often held at the local temple, which offered plenty of dining rooms to use for such occasions. But now eating within the temple grounds meant that not only was one certainly consuming idol food, but one was in the boundaries of the temple rituals there you were now under the roof on the grounds of the idol worship site.

So, the Corinth congregation was divided over this. Some argued; well we are not participating in the worship of the idols, we eat the food that has first been offered in honor to the patron deity of the temple, but we worship only the one true and holy God of Israel and there is no other God. For them, the idol worship meant nothing because they were firm in their beliefs that there is only one God and one Lord. This seems to say that they could go through the motions of the rituals without really honoring the idols as gods.  (But why would you?)

But wait, not everybody can do this. Some, however, are witnessing the behavior of these “experienced (knowledgeable) seasoned Christians” and would believe that it is ok to honor the other deities alongside Christ. So now for the more influential people, the message they were receiving is that these idols exist, and to them the rituals have power & so now they are split in their beliefs in their worship & that is not faithful to God. To the one & only Almighty God of Israel. Their devotion is not in their hearts and cannot be there if they are split, confused & torn in their beliefs. They may legitimately question whether involvement in religious ceremonies means that it is acceptable to worship other gods alongside Jesus. They are confused because the boundaries are not clear.

To relate this dilemma to a context that we can more closely identify with. Many of us pray before a meal. To some, that prayer may seem hasty, superficial a mere ritual. I just want to eat; the food is getting cold! To others at the same meal, that prayer may be deeply meaningful. It is a pause in the day to remember God’s presence and too be reminded of how blessed we are to have this meal. It is that pause of gratefulness of quiet & worship that may reset the moment in a whole new direction. The words of the prayer-grace give thanks to God. Does partaking in the prayer automatically mean that one is acknowledging that there is a god who is worthy of thanksgiving? Can one partake in religious rites out of respect without believing the words that are being spoken?

Maybe that is some of us here today?

We all need boundaries. We need boundaries to work with in to establish ourselves to know who we are and what are our beliefs and our thoughts, and our values are. We need boundaries to establish ourselves and what we are about.

And when those boundaries are being swayed, we are hopefully able to sense that, to react to respond to that. As Paul emphasizes there is freedom in Christ, 1 Corinthians 7:21-24 (NRSV)

²¹ Were you a slave when called? Do not be concerned about it. Even if you can gain your freedom, make use of your present condition now more than ever. ²² For whoever was called in the Lord as a slave is a freed person belonging to the Lord, just as whoever was free when called is a slave of Christ. ²³ You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of human masters. ²⁴ In whatever condition you were called, brothers and sisters, there remain with God.

Freedom in Christ gives us the boundaries in which to exercise our faith beliefs.

Now consider the Corinthians’ context, what about those who used to believe in other gods and have returned to their former religious practices based on the examples of church members? So, they have swung back to their former ways, because they didn’t see the distinction, the line, the separation the boundary between the worship of idols and the worship of the one true holy God of grace and mercy and peace. They didn’t have the witness or the beliefs of Christianity in their minds and hearts to know their boundaries. That is what Paul is getting at here. How does participation in the rights of the local temple affect one’s witness to the God of Israel, who is a jealous God? This is what is at the heart of the debate in First Church Corinth.

Paul is asking those with influence to abandon their behaviour when it would cause others to go astray.

That sounds easy enough to do, but what is it is your economic and social network. How many times can you decline an invitation to dinner at the temple, before you are not asked again? For instance, how many times can one decline a dinner invitation when the host is a business partner? Hosting and attending these banquets was important economically and socially. If a person’s presence at that banquet, however, is destroying a brother or sister, is the status gained by the meal really worth it? Social privileges come at a cost.

The divide is not just over “knowledge”. The divide is between the better off and the not as well off in the community. There are lots of people in the community who have never been asked to a banquet; many who have never even been considered because of their lower status and besides that, due to their socio-economic level they could not reciprocate such an invitation. So, the ware not asked.

Paul encourages those who have power and influence to abandon their privileges when their behavior would lead others astray or leave others behind.

So, eating at the local temple -- even if one does not believe in idols -- is encouraging others to return to former religious practices. Paul’s words to sum up this situation are jarring: “And so by your knowledge this weak one is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. Thus, sinning against your brother and sister and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ” (1 Corinthians 8:11-12).

To quote John Gills on his exposition of this passage he writes

shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
every word almost carries in it an exaggeration of this matter; it is not some slight injury that is done to the person, but even causing him to "perish"; and this is not said of any person, but a "brother", to whom the strongest affection, and strictest regard, should be shown; and a "weak" brother, of whom the greater care should be taken; and therefore it is an instance of cruelty to do damage to such an one, and that not ignorantly, which cannot be pretended, but "through thy knowledge"; not through the true use, but abuse of it: those that have knowledge should know better, and improve it to the edification, and not the destruction of fellow Christians;. John Gills exposition of the Bible

Paul wants the Corinthians, particularly the “know-it-alls” who have social status, to consider their brothers and sisters in Christ and to be willing to abandon their rights, status, and privileges when necessary. It may be permissible for them to attend the banquet, but it is not beneficial to the whole to the good of the community.

Paul gets more personal now and speaks about his own ministry and practice. As an apostle Paul refuses to take payment from the church in order to bring the gospel free of charge. He would rather take up labor, which the Corinthians considered humiliating to do, than to take their money. For to accept the money of those of social status would make it very, very difficult if not impossible for him to correct their behavior. He cannot be indebted to them. HE speaks of his debt to the gospel & how he owes his life and existence to God.

This consciousness of obligation and gratitude -indebtedness leads him to be a servant to the nations. Paul connects his argument in the language that the know-it-alls are using: “To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak.” No one in the Roman world strives to appear weak. Weakness is not a virtue. Paul is asking the powerful to come alongside the “weaker” and consider the circumstances through another perspective. After all Christ died for the weak and for all.

The fact that Jesus intentionally identified with all people. There were no levels or classes or race, identifications or weak & strong, all people were equal in Jesus eyes and in his acknowledgment and love for them. Jesus did not overlook or favour one before another. Galatians 3:28  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

 His is the model the example that shapes Paul’s instruction (1 Corinthians 11:1; see Philippians 2:6-11). Seeking the advantage of another rather than one’s own advantage (1 Corinthians 10:33), a tough, tough message to deliver in First Church Corinth. How well-received of a message is it today in the Centreville-Memorial United Church in the Newburgh United Church? Paul is convinced that the gospel turns this world of privilege upside down. In this season of Epiphany, what might those of us with privilege need to relinquish so that others can see the love of God through us?

Working Preacher Commnetary

Sources: Carla Works -  Associate Professor in New Testament
Wesley Theological Seminary
Washington, D.C