On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:58:56 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Judyt:
What is the reality John? I must be missing something. What is more sure than God's Word? The scriptures you cite here all have to do with eating blood, things strangled, and things sacrificed to idols. I'm aware of Paul's admonition in Romans having to do with abstaining from this out of love so as not to offend a weaker brother causing him to wound his conscience but I don't believe he is advocating making this a practice or dismissing it
John: Of course he is talking about a "practice." Romans 14 is not about holy days and meats -- it is about getting along with the brothers in spite of diversity. Romans 14:4 is always true -- hence the "practice."
Judyt:
Why isn't it true then in 1 Cor 5; the same Paul writes there about groups of people that we shouldn't even eat with and they are all said to be brothers living in diversity also. Why doesn't Paul stick with his own "practice?"
John: Brothers living in sin, Judy and you know this. Sometimes I wonder what you are actually trying to accomplish in these discussions. The brothers in I Co 5 are practicing sin, not the leadership of the Spirit. The person(s) in I Co 8 are are responding to the Spirit and their conscinece -- trying to do the right thing. The drunkare in I Co 5 is try to get drunk. Why do I have to explain this to you?
judyt:Right I do know it but I am trying to make a point. In 1 Cor 8 Paul is not setting up a doctrine of "love vs knowledge" He is dealing with the very real problem of "baby believers" who may still be in mental bondage to the practice of eating meat sacrificed to idols seeing a mature believer doing this in the marketplace which would wound their weak conscience causing them to sin ie: "whatsoever is not of faith is sin" so Paul writes it is walking in love (after the Spirit) for the more mature believer to lead them by example in this. However, it is not written as a formula for "unity" because.... Just two chapters later In 1 Cor 10:23-32 Paul writes in Vs.25 "Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no questions for conscience sake" and "If an unbeliever asks you to a feast and you are disposed to go, eat what is set before you asking no questions for conscience sake" .. So apparently the level of faith a person walks in is the point here.
In the book of Revelation Jesus equates these practices (meat sacrificed to idols, blood etc) with the false prophetess Jezelbel and the doctrine of Balaam which if not repented of will lead to judgment.
John: Depends upon whether you believe there are other gods or not. In Revelations, they did. In I Co 8, the subject of the discussion did. Paul did not . j
Judyt: Of course Paul believed in the existence of the gods of the nations (Ps 96:5) who are idols or demons. He cast them out didn't he? Also isn't he the one who wrote in 1 Cor 2:8 "which none of the princes of this world knew, for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory?" Paul was a realist.
John: Sometimes I think you are convinced that I am a false teacher, so you must oppose everything I say. There are no gods but one. There are rocks, trees, influences, but no real gods in the sense that God is god. Me and Paul agree on this one. I Co 8 -- that is the passage we are discussing -- verses 4-7 make it clear that there are no gods. Paul could eat a piece of meat offered to an idol because he knew that it was an offering to thin air -- to nothing.judyt: It was an offering to demons John and they are not "nothing" especially in the lives of those who are deceived and oppressed by them. Neither are they "thin air" .... They certainly wreak a lot of havoc to be "thin air and nothing"
