MEAT SACRIFICED TO IDOLS, TEMPLE WEDDINGS AND THE LIKE

I had no intention of getting involved with the firestorm that surrounds Parkside Church Pastor, Alistair Begg. What on earth did the good man do?  After asking some probing questions and setting some parameters, the pastor told a grandmother that if she so desired she could attend her granddaughter’s same sex ceremony and purchase a gift if she wanted.  I suppose I could expend all my mental sweat doing what so many have done and run Begg off the playing field or enroll him in that good Reformed School of Over Fastidious Exegesis that has a final answer for every ethical issue in our day.  But I shall not engage in such sophistry primarily because it is an in-house debate that should be hashed out in the locker room rather than the playing field of social media.  Even better, it’s a discussion that shouldn’t have been started in the first place. If there are firm arguments why Begg should have or shouldn’t have done what he did, then I have not graduated from that school yet and so I defer to better men.  Nevertheless, believing as I do that good insights can come from rookies or retired old players who don’t follow the sport but perhaps have remembered the spirit of the game, I write.  Of course in casting in my 2 denarii I have no illusions that I will bring any closure to the issue. I will address it with a First Century  story which is more self-serving than anything else. I needed to vent my anxiety somewhere so this entry is the chosen vessel.  Like or not, here it is.  

The point I am making, perhaps wrongly, is that the Begg issue is actually a two thousand years old issue. Like everything else, it has been addressed before only insert different names and places. As far as I know JW’s are really masking as Arius with a slightly different tilt in their gait. There is nothing new under the sun, as someone has said. I believe this applies to the Begg issue.

We go back two thousand years to a metropolitan city nestled on the coast of a famous isthmus that connected the Greek mainland to the Peloponnesus. We know it as the strategic city of Corinth. At the time of our story, the Corinth Bible Church has been in existence for about five years. She’s quite a spectacle indeed. Her members are confused and very much entangled with cultural norms.  The founder of the church, Paul, keeps writing them to correct a variety of errors.  In the longest of his letters Paul deals with one issue in particular that seems least important. It was the issue of ‘meat sacrificed to idols.’ Paul devotes a lot of space to unpack the issue. One wonders why. The background here is important. Many converts in Corinth had come out of the heathen temple worship and had participated in their religious festivals to Zeus, Hera, Apollos and the rest. Sacrifices were offered up and then the temple would sell the leftover meat at a discount to local meat merchants. How members of the church looked upon that meat had become a major point of tension in the church body.  The issue had come to a head as two church members Gaius, and Alexander took completely opposite side of the issue.  Gaius was a brand new believer who had been heavily involved with heathen worship at the local temple of Apollos. He was repulsed by the very thought of this meat as it conjured up images of his old lifestyle.  He believed that it was sin for any Christian to eat it.  Alexander, on the other hand, had been saved out of a completely secular background; he served no gods and believed in no gods, that is until he met the true God. For him the temple meat was no different than any other meat. There was no such thing as a Greek ‘god.’  He did not understand why this was such a big deal. If the sacrificed meat was cheaper, then buy it. The argument between the two men came to a head and was causing great strife in the body.  News of this had reached the Paul, and weeks later a letter arrived that dealt with this issue. One day the men came to running to their pastor, Epaphras, each bearing Paul’s letter in hand.  Each wanted to prove that Paul had supported their perspective. This is how their conversation went.

GAIUS:  “Good day Pastor Epaphras.  Did you read this letter from our father, Paul?  He really nailed that issue of the temple meat, didn’t he?  But I notice that you seem to be waffling in the middle?” He paused with a self-satisfied smile. “Now I’m sure you will see its sinful to eat that tainted meat.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Now wait Mr. Gaius, I...”

Alexander, the other man had now arrived and was very emotional. He shoved the letter in the pastor’s hand,

ALEXANDER: “Let me read parts of this letter to you, pastor, ‘Therefore concerning the things sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no other God but one.’”  He looked up. “You hear that pastor?  Paul says that idols don’t exist so there is no stigma attached to the meat. Just because someone says that I am the emperor doesn’t mean people should bow down to me.”

EPAPHRAS:  “I see Paul’s point,” nodding, “We don’t have to treat that meat any different just because it is attached to a god who doesn’t even exist.”

GAIUS: “Oh but wait.  Read further, pastor.” He pulled out his copy and pointed to a specific sentence, '“‘However there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.’”  He was now very excited, looking for his pastor for approval. “Please tell the congregation not to eat any meat sacrificed in the Greek temples. That’s the safe policy you know.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Safe perhaps, but something tells me that I have no authority to make such a pronouncement. Some in my congregation have absolutely no issue with eating this meat, and, in fact, exult in the fact they are getting a real bargain by buying it.”   

ALEXANDER: "And there is good reason for that, pastor. For Paul’s next statement is ‘Food does not commend us to God: for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse.’  Eating or not eating is not the issue. Food can’t change who we are or our relationship to God. Right? And since God created appetites for good food, we might as well eat.  Why is everyone so uptight about all of this? Just eat and enjoy!”

EPAPHRAS:  “Hold on my friend. The issue is not that simple. Yes, food is just food. But what about thinking of your neighbor?  Maybe he doesn’t see that meat the same way you do.  Not everyone has the understanding that you do…”

ALEXANDER:  “…But,”  waving his hands in a demonstrative way, “maybe he should grow up in the faith rather than always asking us to pander to his so-called convictions.” 

GAIUS: “What!” acting very excited himself, “You’re telling me to eat that meat that I once used to worship false gods?  Get out of here.  Not gonna happen.”

ALEXANDER: “Well you ought to grow up and be like me…”

EPAPHRAS: “Hold on fellas. It doesn’t matter what a man ought to be, but what he is right now.  And as Gaius’ pastor, I must shepherd him where he’s at, not where others want him to be.”

ALEXANDER: “But he should know better…”

GAIUS: “I can’t eat that meat… no, never!”

EPAPHRAS:  “Okay, let’s tone it down and address this like adults. As I read what Paul said, I find that he is more interested in us thinking about others than about exercising our rights, even if we know them to be true.”

ALEXANDER: “Oh, so if someone says they don’t believe Jesus is the Messiah, I should allow them to continue in this delusion? I can’t….”

EPAPHRAS:  “No, Alex. Of course not.  If Jesus is not God then the entire faith is compromised and there is no salvation. We must fight for things like that. The deity of Christ is a primary issue that we must defend at all costs. What we are talking about here, however, is not that kind of issue, at least according to Paul. This is a conscience issue that involves how we look at the truth and apply it to our own lives.”  He paused and reflected further, “And remember fellas, conscience issues do not change or subvert the gospel.”

ALEXANDER:  “I heartily disagree. If Gaius refuses to eat this meat then he is implying that not eating is a condition of his salvation. Isn’t he saying that?” He smiled broadly.  “And remember Paul rebuking Peter, yes, Peter.  He refused to eat with Gentiles when the Jewish spies came down to Antioch. And that is exactly what my friend is saying.  He’s making salvation about eating.”

GAIUS: “No, no! You’re wrong Alexander. Why are you always telling me what I am feeling? I can’t eat that meat because I think it would sinful to do so and I don’t want to sin against God. I know that I am saved with or without eating.”

EPAPHRAS: Turning to Alex, “He’s right Alex.  This is not about him being saved or not, but whether he should knowingly sin in his conscience against God.”

ALEXANDER:  “But it’s not a sin!”

EPAPHRAS: “In one sense you are right and in another you’re very wrong. No it’s not a sin in that it doesn’t violate a clear command of God.  Since Jesus died, we are free to eat whatever we want and dress how we want etc.” He hesitated.  “God taught that to Peter in the Cornelius story.”

ALEXANDER: “See, I told Gaius.”

EPAPHRAS: “No, wait, I’m not done. But sin can also be defined as doing something you think is wrong and doing it anyway.  In other words, it’s a sin to violate one’s conscience.”  He stopped to think a moment with his hand on his chin, “I think I remember James saying once in something like, ‘If you know something is good and you do not do it, it is a sin.  Well, you can turn that around and say if you know something to be bad and you do it anyway, then you are sinning.  These are not sins of explicit law but sins of conviction. But they are sin nonetheless.”

ALEXANDER: “So you mean to tell me that sin goes deeper than just breaking a commandment?”

EPAPHRAS: “That is exactly right. Paul told me on his last visit that a Christian man must act according to His conscience and so let every man ‘be fully persuaded in his own mind.’”

ALEXANDER: “So what is my role in all this? If Gaius does not want to eat temple meat then I’ll leave him alone. As for me I’ll eat away.”

EPAPHRAS:  (shuffling his feet) “Well,  uh… actually there is more to it than that.”

ALEXANDER:  “What do you mean?”

GAIUS: (butting in) “You should never eat that meat because there are some of us who used to worship those gods.  And these folks really take offense to your eating this meat. Pastor, I think we should make a church ban on anyone eating such meat.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Whoa… hold on gentlemen.  You are both wrong.  The Christian life is not that simple.  We cannot universally prohibit an activity that the Bible doesn’t prohibit.  Neither can we simply tell Christians to do whatever they want to do unless it violates a clear command.  Let me help you both out to outline a strategy for living the Christian life.”

GAIUS: “I would like that.”

ALEXANDER:  “Well, hurry on, I don’t have much time.”

EPAPHRAS:  “The first principle is this: we live not only with our eyes toward God and His commands, but also toward our brothers and their needs.  In other words we are limited by two boundaries, those that God has set up ruled by law and those that are voluntarily imposed on us by the rule of love.  Remember the two great commands?”

ALEXANDER:  “What are you saying?”

EPAPHRAS: “Alex, you should live not to please yourself but to please your brother, who in this case is Gaius.”

ALEXANDER: “So you’re saying that I can’t ever eat that discount meat ever again?  You mean this other man can bully my conscience just because he has this hang-up?”

EPAPHRAS:  “It’s not as simple as that. There is a difference between a brother with a tender conscience and a Pharisee who simply wants to manipulate your behavior.  This is something we all have to deal with.  Jesus did not bow to the Pharisees in his day because they used conscience issues to trap him. We need not bow to such people. But we should cater to our brother in the faith who has honest issues with certain things, things that bruise his spiritual sensitivities and might damage his faith if partaken. In that case it would behoove us to read on in Paul’s instructions.”

GAIUS: “And what would that be,” acting a bit disinterested.

ALEXANDER: “Yes I would like to know as well.”

EPAPHRAS: “Most of this is directed at you, Alexander, because Gaius seems to be the one with the tender conscience and he is legitimately bothered by this temple meat issue. The first thing Paul says is that if eating meat truly makes my brother stumble, then Paul would never eat meat again. I think we all witnessed that principle in his life while he was here.”

ALEXANDER: “So it’s that simple. I just shouldn’t eat!” He seemed irritated.  

EPAPHRAS: “No, nothing is that simple in the Christian life. That’s been my point all along.  And to act like there is one simple answer is to miss the point of this entire subject.  In the letter, Paul does go on to demonstrate that underneath any issue are other issues that are more important. For example the issue of loving one’s brother. We have talked already about that.”

GAIUS: “You mean that we are to think about others before ourselves when deciding what to do?”

EPAPHRAS: “Right.”  He paused to collect his thoughts. “But if you recall, when Paul was here he also spoke about giving up our rights for the larger cause of the gospel.”

ALEXANDER: “Yes, I remember. Something about him not getting married.”

EPAPHRAS: “Yes, that’s right. And the other issue was earning a living off his ministry. If you recall he said he had every right to marry but had decided not to because staying single gave him more opportunity to serve the gospel. Peter and the others were married, and he didn’t condemn them, but for himself singleness was his preferred state. And the decision was made in light of the gospel.”

GAIUS: “And what was this thing about getting paid.”

EPAPHRAS: “That is interesting, for as he pointed out, priests get paid for temple duties and farmers get a portion of their crop. In a similar way ministers of the gospel should receive payment for their spiritual labors.”

ALEXANDER: “Yes I vaguely remember him saying that.”

EPAPHRAS: “And there is good reason he didn’t collect money. Paul was so opposed in our fair city that he figured if he demanded payment his critics would lump him in with all the other charlatans that came selling their spiritual wares and they wouldn’t listen to him.”

GAIUS: “So to play it safe he stitched those tents at night.  I remember that lantern burning all night in his tent as he worked his fingers to the bone. I thought he was some kind of weirdo but now I understand what he was doing.” 

 EPAPHRAS: “Exactly.  People were so shocked that he worked for free, giving up sleep, resources, time and energy, that many of them listened to him.  And guess what?”

GAIUS:  “People like Rufus and Agatha got saved because they saw he was different.”

EPAPHRAS: “And that is what it means to give up one’s rights for the sake of the gospel.”

ALEXANDER: “So how does this apply to me?” He asked demandingly. “I should give up all meat for the rest of my life because of this guy over here?” He pointed at Gaius.

EPAPHRAS: ‘Well, that’s something you need to wrestle with.  I am only saying that we often give up things we have every right to indulge in for the sake of our brother or the gospel or both.  That’s all I’m saying.  But I can’t legislate this because there are no direct commands or prohibitions involved.”

EPAPHRAS: “And now you’ve already been exposed to my second principle of conscience issues. We choose that which is most likely to contribute to gospel advancement.”

ALEXANDER: “Exactly what does that mean again?”

EPAPHRAS:    “It means as Christians we don’t simply live to obey rules but we live for a larger principle of seeing the gospel of Jesus flowing freely to the masses.  Whatever we can do to help that along is a good thing. Wouldn’t you agree?”

ALEXANDER:  “I suppose so.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Which means we live much of our lives according to the principle of ‘wisdom.’  In the Proverbs, for example, we have an abundance of principles that are not specific commands. They speak of everyday crossroads of life where we have to make decisions where there is no clear, one-size-fits-all, answer. In such cases we look at each situation, pray about it, and do what we feel will most glorify God and provide the biggest chance for gospel witness. This seems to be Paul’s point. Let me say it this way, sometimes we react different ways at different times over the same issue.”  

ALEXANDER:  (ever the skeptic). “I’ve never heard such a thing.  Do you have an example?”

EPAPHRAS:  “As a matter of fact, I do. There is a proverb that says, ‘Answer a fool according to his folly lest he be wise in his own eyes.’”

ALEXANDER:  “You see!” acting like he won the argument.  “There is a clear command here how do deal with a proud and manipulative person.” He looked straight at Gaius. “We are to challenge him, and not let him rest on his foolishness otherwise he will become more and more arrogant. So…”

EPAPHRAS:  “Hold on Alex, you didn’t let me finish. Read the verse just before that one. It says, ‘Do  not answer a fool according to his folly let you also be like him.’ Sounds like the opposite, doesn’t it?”  He smiled.  

GAIUS:  “You see Alex,” feeling a little proud himself, “you don’t answer a fool because you will go down to his level and become a fool yourself, which you have the habit of doing, I might add.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Actually men, both answers are wrong and both are right, depending on the situation. You need to know who you’re dealing with, the issue at stake, etc.  Sometimes it is wise to answer a man who is foolish to shut him up and  sometimes you keep your mouth shut and let him drone on because you don’t want to get dragged down to his level. The overriding principle is what action will bring the greatest glory to God. This is not always easy to discern which is why the Christian life is not a walk in the park.”

ALEXANDER: “Okay, Mr. Holy, I got one for you. I have a cousin who is a temple priest in Delphi.  He hates Christianity, and he constantly berates Jesus of Nazareth as being a phony. Well, he’s getting married next month – in the temple!! – and he wants me to come.  What should I do my dear all-wise pastor?” saying it rather sarcastically.  

EPAPHRAS: “First I must say that I cannot give you a final answer on this. Certainly if we were living in the Old Testament I could say you can’t go into Dagon’s temple at all for it was unclean. But no such prohibition is found since Jesus died and ascended. The apostles confirm this.”

ALEXANDER: “Okay then I should go.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Hold on, I didn’t say that.” He put his hands up as preachers often do. “You remember in dealing with conscience, liberty and wisdom issues, we must put on our thinking caps and weigh out all the options. I can’t do that for you.  You must decide by asking yourself what brings greater honor to God, and what most likely serves the cause of the gospel.”

GAIUS:  “Wait a minute. You mean going into a heathen temple for a wedding service might be okay?  Shouldn’t we run as far away from that as we can?”

EPAPHRAS:  “Maybe you should… and then again.” He paused…

ALEXANDER:  Finishing the thought, “and maybe by going I can show my cousin something of the love of Jesus in the middle of a very dark place.”   

GAIUS: “No I can’t buy that.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Then you are guilty of making a universal command that the Bible does not make. Now if Alex said he was going to worship in that heathen temple than I would say categorically he shouldn’t do that as it violates the second commandment. But that is not what is going on here.  This decision lies more in the gray area than in the black or the white.”

GAIUS:  “I don’t buy that.  I would never go into that place.”

EPAPHRAS:  “But you’re not Alex and it’s not your family. Perhaps the way you can love your brother in this is to allow him the leeway to decide for himself before his God.”

GAIUS: “The Bible is clear that it would be a sin.”

EPAPHRAS: “Oh is it? What about Naaman?”

GAIUS: “Who?’

EPAPHRAS: ‘Naaman the Syrian got saved out of a heathen background.  He knew that when he went back home and he would no doubt have to enter the heathen temple of Rimmon with his king. And so he shared his concerns with the prophet of God, Elisha.”

GAIUS: “Yes.. go on,” feeling anxious.

EPAPHRAS: He opened up a scroll off a nearby table. “Let me read it to you out of the old book. ‘Yet in this thing may the Lord pardon  your servant: when my master goes into the temple of Rimmon to worship there and he leans on my hand and I bow down in the temple of RImmon,-- when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the Lord please pardon your servant in this thing.’”

ALEXANDER: “And what does the prophet say?” leaning forward.

EPAPHRAS: He read further. “Then he said to him, ‘Go in peace.’ Even the prophet Elisha could not tell Naaman not to go into the heathen temple. Elisha knew that when Naaman bowed his head he was not worshipping a false god. He knew that Naaman trusted Yahweh, and that his heart would not be worshipping Rimmon. So he basically left it up to Naaman whether to go or not.”

ALEXANDER: “That’s really, really interesting. So the Bible does seem to support what you are saying.  That in situations that come up daily where there is not a black and white commandment or prohibition, we are to live in the realm of wisdom, seeking the Lord’s will and evaluating the context, etc.”

EPAPHRAS:  “You got it my friend. How about you, Gaius, do you see this principle?”

GAIUS: “I’m not sure I agree. I need to think about this. It just sounds wrong.”

EPAPHRAS:  “That’s okay my friend. If YOU think it’s wrong, then you cannot do it. The issue has already been decided for you.  You cannot violate your conscience, ever. But with Alex, he might have to wrestle with the issue a bit more.”

ALEXANDER: “So then you’re not telling me to go or not to go.”

EPAPHRAS:  “No I can’t. Now if you ask for my advice, and I feel I have a grasp of the situation, I might give you some godly counsel, but it would be in no way binding.”

GAIUS: “I would tell him flatly not to go,” he said with a firm look and glaring eyes.

EPAPHRAS: “And if he asks for your opinion, share it with him. But you cannot tell him to do something the Bible does not command nor prohibit him from doing what the Bible does not prohibit.  I know it’s hard.  I know it forces us to think things through.  I know all of this feels too mushy, too vague.” He paused a moment. “Welcome gentlemen to living by faith!”

ALEXANDER:  “Are there any other principles that might help me in this decision?”

EPAPHRAS: “Faith is important. I once heard Paul say while he was here that all things must be done in faith for ‘whatsoever is not of faith is sin.’  In other words, if you are believing God through it all and trusting Him to lead you every step of the way and you are doing something not for self but as you trust in Jesus Christ, there is a good chance you are operating by faith and in the will of God.”

ALEXANDER:  “That is helpful. Now I have to go home and pray if I should go or not.”

EPAPHRAS:  “Do your diligence. Talk to your cousin. See if understands your dilemma and see if there might be any openness on his part to believing in your God.  Ask if there will be any worship activities in the ceremony. Tell him if you go you can’t pray to his god.  Tell him that you don’t believe his god even exists. Tell him that you are going to support him because you love him as a cousin and friend. That’s all the advice I can give.”

ALEXANDER: “That sounds like a plan.”

GAIUS: “Well, I’m still flat against it, but not as much as I was before.  I certainly won’t judge my brother if he goes.”

EPAPHRAS:  “That’s progress,” he thought for a moment, “and neither should he look down on you if you feel you can’t eat meat or go into pagan temples. The great principle here is love to God by loving your brother. It’s complicated, I admit. It can be nerve wracking.  And you will have many criticize you along the way.”

ALEXANDER:  “And it seems that this is the way Jesus lived.”

EPAPHRAS: “How so?”

ALEXANDER:  “Well he ate with tax collectors and sinners, touched dead bodies, spoke with infidel women, plucked grain on the Sabbath, and even let a prostitute wash his feet.” 

EPAPHRAS:  “Yes I believe you’re right. All of these things were on the fringe of propriety. But Jesus was all about the kingdom and doing that which honored God and promoted the gospel. In the end, he did nothing for Himself but for His sheep.”

ALEXANDER: “That seems to be the overriding principle, does it not?  Love for God and others?”

GAIUS: “I think I agree with that.”

EPAPHRAS: “Well I have meeting with the Jove Booster Club that is trying to raise awareness for civic justice in our city. I must go.”

GAIUS:  “Do you think you should go? They worship Jupiter.”

ALEXANDER: “I say yes, go.”

GAIUS:  “I say no.”

EPAPHRAS: “You see how we encounter many difficult decisions throughout our lives? We need to be ready to address each issue individually. I pray God gives me clarity as I walk along that long cobblestone street to the agora. Good day gentlemen.” 

Epaphras departs hurriedly.

ALEXANDER: “Well my good man Gaius, we learned a lot today.”

GAIUS: “Yep, a lot to chew on.”

ALEXANDER: “You know, dear brother, I realize how deeply the temple meat bothers you.  So I’ve decided to honor your wishes and become Vegan.” 

GAIUS:  “Vegan? What’s that, another foreign god?”

ALEXANDER:  “Well, it certainly could be.  No, you’ll have to wait two thousand years to find out. I love you little brother and I hope today has spawned a friendship that shall remain all our days.”

The two hug and walk separate ways home.

THE END