T H E
* N E W
T E S T A M E N T
CO PYRIG HT BY W ILLIAM EVANS
FIRST CORINTHIANS Continued
TN our previous studies of Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians we have taken up the Introduction (i. 1-9) ; Party Fac tions (i. 10-iv. 21) ; Social Purity—Failure to Exercise Discipline in Moral Affairs (chaps, v. and vi) ; Marital Problems (chap, yii). We now proceed to the fourth and fifth main divisions of the book.
1. T he General A spect of th e Case Stated (ch ap , viii). Verses one and two are introductory and aimed at those who boast of a superior spiritual illumination which makes them superior in knowledge over other so-called weaker brethren (viii. 1, 2, 7, 10, 11; cf. iii. 18-20; x. 15; xiii. 8 , 9, 12; 1^Timothy vi. 3, 4). But no knowledge is worthy of being called true knowledge that does not edify and build up, but rather destroys faith. Really speaking, love is knowledge. Mere knowledge puffs up; love builds up. (а ) . It is admitted that to Partake of Meat Offered in Sacrifice to Idols is not in Itself Sinful, Particularly When it is Rec ognized that an Idol is Nothing and that There is but one God (viii. 3 - 7 ). ( б ) But this Knowledge and Conviction with Regard to Idols is not Shared Alike by all, and Therefore it is the Privilege, if not the Duty of the Strong to Give up the Indulgence of their Rights for the Sake of the weak (viii. 8, 9 ). The mere eating of meat which had been offered in sacrifice to idols was not, in itself, either good or bad, and did not affect a man’s standing before God (viii.4-8). This fact, however, was not generally recognized (viii. 7). To some weak Christians it was a sin against God, and was regarded as actually affecting a man’s standing before God (viii. 8 - 10 ). This conscientious scruple
IV. CHRISTIAN LIBERTY (viii. 1 -xi. 1 ).
The question discussed in these chapters is one which had been raised in connection with the eating of meats which, after being offered in sacrifice to. idols, were sold in the market place, or shambles (x. 25), or partaken of at the feasts given to the public in connection with the services in idol temples (cf. Acts xv. 29). Two attitudes toward the question are dealt with: that of the weak brother who, still looking upon an idol as somewhat of a reality, was not able to eat of meat that had been offered in sacrifice to idols with out in some way feeling that he was identi fying himself with the idol and its wor ship; that of the strong brother who knew that an idol was nothing and that there was but one God in the world, and that, therefore, there need be no conscientious scruples with regard to eating meat that had been offered in sacrifice to idols.
Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter