1 Cor 8: A misunderstood, hand grenade text

[biscuit1953]

The question is what wine, today, is particularly associated with pagans to be determined joining with demons.

Does the idolatry have to take the exact form ("joining with demons") as it did in Paul's day in order to have application today?  In other words, is alcoholic idolatry only idolatry if the booze is associated with demons?

The question is are we going to allow other Christians the liberty that they have and which the apostle Paul affirmed or are we going to demand that everyone go by our own personal standards.  No one hates what alcohol has done to our society more than I do but if scripture is to be our guide on faith and practice an honest person must conclude that it isn't forbidden to drink wine.  Paul gives guidelines concerning doubtful things in a Christian's life and we accept it or not.

 

[Anchor]

The question is what wine, today, is particularly associated with pagans to be determined joining with demons.

Does the idolatry have to take the exact form ("joining with demons") as it did in Paul's day in order to have application today?  In other words, is alcoholic idolatry only idolatry if the booze is associated with demons?

All idolatry is joining with demons.  Satan is the father of lies, so when a false worship (lying worship) is foisted it is devilish to the core.  That is why it is important to identify the specific idolatry that identifies a culture.  There is not a better idolatry, just ones that seek to infiltrate the Church of God in various manners from culture to culture and generation to generation.  Paul says it well: "What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils."

 

[jimmudcatgrant]

The question is what wine, today, is particularly associated with pagans to be determined joining with demons.

Does the idolatry have to take the exact form ("joining with demons") as it did in Paul's day in order to have application today?  In other words, is alcoholic idolatry only idolatry if the booze is associated with demons?

The question is are we going to allow other Christians the liberty that they have and which the apostle Paul affirmed or are we going to demand that everyone go by our own personal standards.  No one hates what alcohol has done to our society more than I do but if scripture is to be our guide on faith and practice an honest person must conclude that it isn't forbidden to drink wine.  Paul gives guidelines concerning doubtful things in a Christian's life and we accept it or not.

On the contrary, the question is will you demand your Christian liberty and the expense of the weaker brother.  I don't drink, but I have and do attend events that may serve alcohol, and where most people are Christians.  It doesn't offend me. I don't stand up and say you shouldn't be drinking.  But if I knew a weaker brother was there and being tempted to violate his conscience, I would say something.  I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I am just trying to get all the free birds to see the other side of liberty, which is responsibility. I am not condemning them for something that is clearly allowed in scripture.  If my pastor told me in private that he enjoys a drink every once in awhile, or wine with his supper (for you Yankees out there, that is what we call dinner in the south  ;D), it would not cause me to stumble.  But it would others in the congregation. The job of mature Christians is to teach the weaker brother so that he matures past that point. But we know that some Christians are still babes in Christ years after their salvation.  That is where most IFB teetotalers fail, I guess.  In Paul's day, the thing was wine offered to idols.  In our day, since the rise of the automobile and alcoholism, we have different problems.  I am not saying don't drink, just do it responsibly and don't flaunt your freedom where if might cause some to stumble. I guess that is the difference between me and the IFbXers.  I am IFB, but I am not legalisic or dogmatic in areas that are grey, if you will.  I have had people tell me there are no grey areas, but I beg to differ.  Finally, I have good reasons not to drink that have nothing to do with whether it is a sin or not.  I have seen the devestation that occurs, yes, to Christians as well, when drinking gets out of hand.  I have seen where one mistake can change lives forever.  If that is being dramatic, I can't change my life experiences, but I realize most people probably don't share them. Sheesh, I told R2D2 I probably wouldn't comment anymore on this.  I should have added, but I probably will not be able to refrain.  To all those who don't agree with me, you are still my brothers and sisters in Christ, and we can agree to disagree and still be saved and still try and propagate the gospel until the Lord returns.

 

[Izdaari]

If my pastor told me in private that he enjoys a drink every once in awhile, or wine with his supper (for you Yankees out there, that is what we call dinner in the south  ;D), it would not cause me to stumble.  But it would others in the congregation.

If knowing that their pastor drinks moderately and responsibly, and is not an alcoholic, would cause some in the congregation to stumble, that's a church that teaches teetotaling as at least an ideal or tradition if not a hard rule. Otherwise, they wouldn't expect their pastor to abstain completely, and that expectation wouldn't be there for them to stumble over.

Anglicanism and Lutheranism have never been teetotal churches, and anyone raised in them would think it was completely normal for a pastor to have a glass of wine with dinner.

 

[biscuit1953]

If my pastor told me in private that he enjoys a drink every once in awhile, or wine with his supper (for you Yankees out there, that is what we call dinner in the south  ;D), it would not cause me to stumble.  But it would others in the congregation.

If knowing that their pastor drinks moderately and responsibly, and is not an alcoholic, would cause some in the congregation to stumble, that's a church that teaches teetotaling as at least an ideal or tradition if not a hard rule. Otherwise, they wouldn't expect their pastor to abstain completely, and that expectation wouldn't be there for them to stumble over.

Anglicanism and Lutheranism have never been teetotal churches, and anyone raised in them would think it was completely normal for a pastor to have a glass of wine with dinner.

There may be some truth in what you are saying but there are many families that have been devastated by alcoholism who wish to have nothing to do with it.  My grandfather was a drunk his entire adult life and the last words to come from his lips were "Lord, have mercy."  My aunt was killed by a husband drunk on alcohol and the stories are too numerous to mention of friends in home situations that make them despise intoxicating beverages.  One doesn't even need to be a Christian to opposed to drinking.

I've come to the conclusion that in spite of my own personal convictions I must submit to what the scriptures say and it is plainly shown in scripture that drinking wine is not a sin in itself.

 

[jimmudcatgrant]

If my pastor told me in private that he enjoys a drink every once in awhile, or wine with his supper (for you Yankees out there, that is what we call dinner in the south  ;D), it would not cause me to stumble.  But it would others in the congregation.

If knowing that their pastor drinks moderately and responsibly, and is not an alcoholic, would cause some in the congregation to stumble, that's a church that teaches teetotaling as at least an ideal or tradition if not a hard rule. Otherwise, they wouldn't expect their pastor to abstain completely, and that expectation wouldn't be there for them to stumble over.

Anglicanism and Lutheranism have never been teetotal churches, and anyone raised in them would think it was completely normal for a pastor to have a glass of wine with dinner.

No, I disagree.  I am a member and I don't expect our pastor to abstain.  Not all members grew up in the church, however, and some come from varyious denominations, some totally opposed to alcohol. That, and the previous pastor before I came was a teetotlaer. But, to be honest, it is a hard subject for most pastors to preach as it causes division, so most pastors preach against it, if they preach it at all.  To me, it is better dealt with in small groups, where all sides can be explored.  But that is just me.

 

[FSSL]

The question is what wine, today, is particularly associated with pagans to be determined joining with demons.

Does the idolatry have to take the exact form ("joining with demons") as it did in Paul's day in order to have application today?  In other words, is alcoholic idolatry only idolatry if the booze is associated with demons?

Maybe you could provide your view of how alcohol can actually become idolatry?

A very good question that needs a slight tweak... "Maybe they could provide their view on how alcohol is ALWAYS idolatrous."

Using this passage to establish teetotalism is the IFBr hand grenade. This comes from the wrong assumption that the object is the problem. They have misinformed the conscience of many believers. Once you view the object as the problem, then you misunderstand all of Paul's injunctions. Paul was describing conduct which misused amoral objects.

The next time you go to a IFB conference, look around. You will find plenty of teetotalers who have made meat their idol. Just sayin', because it ain't gettin' preachin'

 

[ALAYMAN]

[quote author=FSSL]A very good question that needs a slight tweak... "Maybe they could provide their view on how alcohol is ALWAYS idolatrous."

Using this passage to establish teetotalism is the IFBr hand grenade. This comes from the wrong assumption that the object is the problem. They have misinformed the conscience of many believers. Once you view the object as the problem, then you misunderstand all of Paul's injunctions. Paul was describing conduct which misused amoral objects.

The next time you go to a IFB conference, look around. You will find plenty of teetotalers who have made meat their idol. Just sayin', because it ain't gettin' preachin'
[/quote]

Nice avoidance of the question, and typical non-sequitur.  Here was the question I asked which directly dealt with your assertion...


Does the idolatry have to take the exact form ("joining with demons") as it did in Paul's day in order to have application today?  In other words, is alcoholic idolatry only idolatry if the booze is associated with demons

 

[FSSL]

Nice avoidance of the question, and typical non-sequitur.  Here was the question I asked which directly dealt with your assertion...


Does the idolatry have to take the exact form ("joining with demons") as it did in Paul's day in order to have application today?  In other words, is alcoholic idolatry only idolatry if the booze is associated with demons

There is no avoidance at all. Idolatry is idolatry. I have been the one to make it clear that it is not the object, it is the conduct.

Since you are fascinated with the object, YOU tell us what booze is associated with demons. Both you and Anchor have avoided answering.

 

[Anchor]

There is no avoidance at all. Idolatry is idolatry. I have been the one to make it clear that it is not the object, it is the conduct.

Since you are fascinated with the object, YOU tell us what booze is associated with demons. Both you and Anchor have avoided answering.

Let's walk through this again.  I Cor. 6-10 is referencing objects (meat) and actions (eat; sit at meat; etc.).  [Sidebar--for the record Rom. 14 references only objects] Both are wrong, not intrinsically, but by the moral designation imparted to them by the pagan practice.  This is clearly illustrated in the closing verses of the context: "Whatsoever is sold in the shambles...whatsoever is set before you..."  This is plainly referencing an object (meat) and plainly inferring that the object has no inherent morality.  However, that moral neutrality changes immediately when affirmation of its usage is received--"This is offered in sacrifice unto idols...." It now becomes a moral entity, a conscience (right and wrong) matter.  It has received a moral designation, not from Scripture, but from the pagan practice.  But that moral designation is just as real as if it had come from OT law and been designated as unclean.  The Scripture mandate of action towards this object now polluted is clear, first delivered in Acts 15--"abstain"--and re-iterated here--"eat not." To ignore this Scripture mandate is equally as grievous as it was for the Scripture loving OT saint to ignore the moral designations of clean and unclean. 

It is disingenuous to say that it is all a matter of conduct.  There are things that are wrong, just wrong for different reasons than the simplicity of OT designations.

 

[FSSL]

It is disingenuous to say that it is all a matter of conduct.  There are things that are wrong, just wrong for different reasons than the simplicity of OT designations.

Then, again, I ask... if you are going to apply this passage to us today, then
1) Do you believe there is a particular brand of booze, today, that is "sacrificed to idols."
2) Do you believe ALL booze is "sacrificed to idols" today?

 

[Anchor]

It is disingenuous to say that it is all a matter of conduct.  There are things that are wrong, just wrong for different reasons than the simplicity of OT designations.

Then, again, I ask... if you are going to apply this passage to us today, then
1) Do you believe there is a particular brand of booze, today, that is "sacrificed to idols."
2) Do you believe ALL booze is "sacrificed to idols" today?

I do not understand your obsession with alcohol in regards to this passage. But whatever.

It is not my opinion that matters.  It is what is that matters.

The question is "what are the prevalent idolatries of our culture?"

Once we know the idolatries, then we can determine if beverage alcohol is a part of the "worship ritual" of that idolatry.  If so, then it is polluted (playing brand names is a Junior High game), and if not then the problem with alcohol is not that it is a pollution of idols. 

 

[FSSL]

The question is "what are the prevalent idolatries of our culture?"

Once we know the idolatries, then we can determine if beverage alcohol is a part of the "worship ritual" of that idolatry.  If so, then it is polluted (playing brand names is a Junior High game), and if not then the problem with alcohol is not that it is a pollution of idols.

Prevalent or not, ANYTHING can be an idol. Objects become idols when conduct goes awry.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Anchor]It is not my opinion that matters.  It is what is that matters.

The question is "what are the prevalent idolatries of our culture?"

Once we know the idolatries, then we can determine if beverage alcohol is a part of the "worship ritual" of that idolatry.  If so, then it is polluted (playing brand names is a Junior High game), and if not then the problem with alcohol is not that it is a pollution of idols. [/quote]

Funny....I asked you...

what is the dominant idolatry or prevalent idolatries that define American culture today?

...and you completely ignored it to chase rabbits.

 

[Anchor]

Prevalent or not, ANYTHING can be an idol. Objects become idols when conduct goes awry.

True enough, anything can become an idol on the personal level, but anything does not have societal/cultural impact.  The passage is dealing with idolatry at the societal level that has so permeated the culture as to be a normal part of commerce ("sold in the shambles") and custom ("bid you to a feast and ye be disposed to go").  It is the identification of the church of God and the individual believer with this idolatry through incorporation of these pollutions that is forbidden in Acts 15, applied here in I Cor. 6-10, and further condemned by Christ via the Apostle John in Rev. 2.

With 7 billion people in the world there is likely somebody in a cave somewhere that worships ducks, but there is not a culture where duck worship is prevalent.  OTOH, most societies/cultures of the world are defined by what they worship and how, such as  India, China, Kuwait, Poland, etc.  Corinth was identifies by its worship of Aphrodite, Ephesus by Diana, the USA by something else.  If the culture is not Christian it is either Jewish or idolatrous.  We are not Christian, and we are not Jewish. Therefore, identifying the prevalent idolatries is important.  Syncretization is not a Biblical option.   

 

[FSSL]

True enough, anything can become an idol on the personal level, but anything does not have societal/cultural impact.  The passage is dealing with idolatry at the societal level that has so permeated the culture as to be a normal part of commerce ("sold in the shambles") and custom ("bid you to a feast and ye be disposed to go").  It is the identification of the church of God and the individual believer with this idolatry through incorporation of these pollutions that is forbidden in Acts 15, applied here in I Cor. 6-10, and further condemned by Christ via the Apostle John in Rev. 2.

Okay. Here comes Anchor's hand grenade.

You tell us what society's idolatry is and what is a forbidden syncretization.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=FSSL]Okay. Here comes Anchor's hand grenade.

You tell us what society's idolatry is and what is a forbidden syncretization.
[/quote]

Good luck. I've asked multiple times and he hasn't answered.

 

[FSSL]

[quote author=FSSL]Okay. Here comes Anchor's hand grenade.

You tell us what society's idolatry is and what is a forbidden syncretization.

Good luck. I've asked multiple times and he hasn't answered.
[/quote]

Ahh! So, he is unsure, himself.

 

[ALAYMAN]

I admire your perserverance bro, but seriously, some folks on here just ain't worth the effort.

Prevalent or not, ANYTHING can be an idol. Objects become idols when conduct goes awry.

True enough, anything can become an idol on the personal level, but anything does not have societal/cultural impact.  The passage is dealing with idolatry at the societal level that has so permeated the culture as to be a normal part of commerce ("sold in the shambles") and custom ("bid you to a feast and ye be disposed to go").  It is the identification of the church of God and the individual believer with this idolatry through incorporation of these pollutions that is forbidden in Acts 15, applied here in I Cor. 6-10, and further condemned by Christ via the Apostle John in Rev. 2.

With 7 billion people in the world there is likely somebody in a cave somewhere that worships ducks, but there is not a culture where duck worship is prevalent.  OTOH, most societies/cultures of the world are defined by what they worship and how, such as  India, China, Kuwait, Poland, etc.  Corinth was identifies by its worship of Aphrodite, Ephesus by Diana, the USA by something else.  If the culture is not Christian it is either Jewish or idolatrous.  We are not Christian, and we are not Jewish. Therefore, identifying the prevalent idolatries is important.  Syncretization is not a Biblical option. 

 

[Izdaari]

True enough, anything can become an idol on the personal level, but anything does not have societal/cultural impact.  The passage is dealing with idolatry at the societal level that has so permeated the culture as to be a normal part of commerce ("sold in the shambles") and custom ("bid you to a feast and ye be disposed to go").  It is the identification of the church of God and the individual believer with this idolatry through incorporation of these pollutions that is forbidden in Acts 15, applied here in I Cor. 6-10, and further condemned by Christ via the Apostle John in Rev. 2.

Okay. Here comes Anchor's hand grenade.

You tell us what society's idolatry is and what is a forbidden syncretization.

Does anyone really know what time it is
Does anyone really care
If so I can't imagine why
We've all got time enough to cry

Now, everyone syncretize their watches.