- Oct 17, 2009
- 38,730
- 12,120
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
Paul talks about this in 1 Corinthians chapter 8 for the whole short chapter. But when I saw it recently, it didn't make any sense to me. Here's why:
In verses 4-6, he makes it clear that idols are nothing. In verse 8, he makes it clear that if we eat that meat or not, it has no real effect. But before that in verse 7 he says that some people have a weak conscience and it is defiled if they go against it. Ok, so what would help a person with a weak conscience? Wouldn't it be to make it strong? Isn't that what God would want for them? Well, let's go to verse 10 where Paul talks about someone who has a strong conscience, along with the knowledge that an idol is nothing, and that eating meat offered to it has no effect. Then the one with the weak conscience comes in and sees that--and he becomes encouraged to eat. Sounds good, right? I mean, the guy with the stronger conscience and knowledge that something is ok to do and demonstrates it encourages the guy with the weaker conscience to do that thing.
To me, this sounds like a person without knowledge being taught by a person who has the knowledge what is permissible to do without doing anything wrong. A good thing, right? But then comes verse 11 that states that the weaker conscience person is DESTROYED. But how? How is he doing anything wrong if eating meat offered to an idol is no different than any other meat? How could he be destroyed by doing something that he's learned isn't even wrong?
Aside from this particular example, there are plenty of examples more relevant for today. Here's one: Person A believes computers are of the devil and the internet is a gateway to sin, and therefore we aren't to use one. Person B believes no such thing. A computer and the net is just a tool to use. So then Person B uses one, and the Person A comes along and sees what many useful resources there are and decides, "Hey! Maybe this isn't the evil thing I thought it was!", and then goes out and buys a computer and uses it, and discovers that it really is just a tool and is very useful.
Did Person A just "destroy" Person B?
In verses 4-6, he makes it clear that idols are nothing. In verse 8, he makes it clear that if we eat that meat or not, it has no real effect. But before that in verse 7 he says that some people have a weak conscience and it is defiled if they go against it. Ok, so what would help a person with a weak conscience? Wouldn't it be to make it strong? Isn't that what God would want for them? Well, let's go to verse 10 where Paul talks about someone who has a strong conscience, along with the knowledge that an idol is nothing, and that eating meat offered to it has no effect. Then the one with the weak conscience comes in and sees that--and he becomes encouraged to eat. Sounds good, right? I mean, the guy with the stronger conscience and knowledge that something is ok to do and demonstrates it encourages the guy with the weaker conscience to do that thing.
To me, this sounds like a person without knowledge being taught by a person who has the knowledge what is permissible to do without doing anything wrong. A good thing, right? But then comes verse 11 that states that the weaker conscience person is DESTROYED. But how? How is he doing anything wrong if eating meat offered to an idol is no different than any other meat? How could he be destroyed by doing something that he's learned isn't even wrong?
Aside from this particular example, there are plenty of examples more relevant for today. Here's one: Person A believes computers are of the devil and the internet is a gateway to sin, and therefore we aren't to use one. Person B believes no such thing. A computer and the net is just a tool to use. So then Person B uses one, and the Person A comes along and sees what many useful resources there are and decides, "Hey! Maybe this isn't the evil thing I thought it was!", and then goes out and buys a computer and uses it, and discovers that it really is just a tool and is very useful.
Did Person A just "destroy" Person B?
Last edited: