4Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that "an idol has no real existence," and that "there is no God but one." 5For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth--as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"-- 6yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
7However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. 9But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol's temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? 11And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. 12Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.
Back in Paul's time, it was standard practice for butchers in Corinth and other Roman areas to dedicate an animal to one of their gods before dispatching it. That made most meat bought at the market suspect, since the probability of it coming from a pagan butcher was rather high. Paul's take was that, since those "gods" had no power, the butcher's incantation had no effect on the meat, and that meat was safe.
However, there were folks who wanted to fully seperate from pagan practices and couldn't stomach having their food being part of a pagan ritual, even if it wasn't FDA (False Deities Association) inspected. Paul passed on eating meat around folks who followed that first-century form of second-degree seperation, so as to avoid offending them.
For years, this passage seemed to not have any direct application to modern times, only applying as an analogy for other things, like playing cards, which aren't damaging to the soul in and of themselves, but are on many folks' taboo list. However, we're starting to see where generic meat might be offensive.
Genetically modified foods bother a lot of people, as does the use of various drugs on animals, like growth hormones or the routine use of antibiotics. We can add cloned animals to the mix; the FDA signed off on the safety of meat and dairy products from cloned cattle, pigs and goats and their offspring. It's safe, but it still gives certian folks the willies, just as the first-century Corinthian meat bothered some of Paul's readers.
Should that mean switching to organic burgers at your 2010 Memorial Day cookout, once Norm 2.0's offspring reach your grocery's coolers? If you got a friend who's stomach gets an Attack of the Clones thinking about eating regular meat, maybe.
We're supposed to go the extra mile to be nice to our more constrained friends, not lord our superior wisdom and freedom over them.
Recent Comments