1Cor 8:7-10 - Freedom and Tyranny

7-10 However, 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. 8 Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. 9 But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For 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?


In this section, the lack of "knowledge" Paul speaks of is obviously not ignorance of the facts. It means something deeper. Lack of knowledge here refers to a failure to apprehend the spiritual truth of the facts presented. It is possible to understand the facts and even to teach or to preach them without a true grasp of them in the heart. Simply because I understand the workings of the internal combustion engine has no bearing upon whether or not I can actually drive a car. Something has to happen beyond mere apprehension of information. That information must be embraced, believed, used, lived out - or it is unfruitful data in my life.

All saints, for reasons known to God, though they have been delivered from the kingdom of darkness and into His wonderful light - and though they are true children of the King - have, in one area or another, vestigial problems associated with their past sin. Some so-called deliverance ministries make much hay out of this situation and actually enslave people by purporting to cast out demons that aren’t there. They invent a whole range of spooks for every imaginable human flaw or personality trait. They preach twisted and unscriptural doctrines of generational sin, requiring Mormon-like digging into generational history to discover authorities given to demons by ancestors, the power of which can be broken only with the aid of the ministry in question.

It’s all poppycock, of course - and it would be comical if it didn’t actually lead people astray and get them focussed on the wrong thing. I’m sure some people are helped, and I’m equally sure that many people are harmed during the process. The fact that it "works" for some is used as the acid test for its viability and the negative effects for the many are often ignored or minimized. But the real standard for all teaching is scripturality. Not whether some of the words and concepts actually appear somewhere in the Bible (all perversions and heresies contain some truth and most start out with the Bible) - but whether the teaching is actually there, supported by the context, by the historical understanding of the saints, and by good contextual exegesis of the text. Generational sin as it is peddled by many today is simply not there when careful study is done - though the effects of the sins of prior generations obviously do bear upon present lives. Think of the FAS child, or inherited AIDS, and I think you’ll get the picture.

Now, if I happen to have light and deliverance unto a clear conscience regarding certain things that I participated in with a wrong heart in the past, it doesn’t mean everyone has that deliverance from the same thing at the same time. That is the wonder - and indeed, the purpose - of God. He has made each person unique, and He has allowed these differences to have a role in our sanctification and our fellowship.

Unless some had been weak then where could the strength that is in Christ be shown with love? Unless some had been strong, then how could the compassion, patience, forbearance and lovingkindness of God be manifested among the brethren? O the depths and the breadth of the wisdom of God! Though He is all of these things Himself, He nevertheless chooses to manifest them in His saints to His saints so that they will see the wonders of His grace.

The principle at work here is not to be found being the cause of a brother stumbling. If a brother thinks a thing is sin then that thing is sin to him, because he offends his conscience if he does it. But that thing is not sin to me if it is a so-called "thing indifferent" - which is a matter upon which the word of God does not speak, or which it does not specifically forbid - and I understand it correctly in the gospel context of freedom. But I am not free to flaunt my liberty in the face of someone who would sin against conscience by doing the very same thing - or who would wrongly fall into judgementalism against me, basing his thinking upon law and not grace.

The whole point is that I choose to regulate my behaviour on the principle of love for a brother, denying my own "rights" - giving up my freedom - so that my fellow believer, for whom Christ died, does not grieve the Holy Spirit and lose his way through my actions.

Now this can be taken too far and the principle can be misapplied or even misused. There is such a thing as the tyranny of the weak. In such a circumstance it would be an even greater error to allow a person to become a spiritual bigot or a legalistic bully under cover of the flag of Christian love. This passage presupposes that all parties are sincere believers who are anxious to follow the Lord and have no agenda of their own.

Thus, if by taking an alcoholic drink - which I am perfectly at liberty to do in Christ, giving thanks as He gave thanks for the wine - I would offend someone who was recently saved and delivered from alcohol, then I would be happy to refrain from partaking in that person’s presence. If, on the other hand, some supposedly mature Christian tried to introduce a rule in the church that forbade any minister or member from imbibing any alcohol on pain of disfellowshiping - or tried to make it a requirement for ministers to forswear ever taking a drink - I would personally oppose them with every ounce of my strength. Their motive is clearly not love, and their reasoning is patently not biblical. It is a legalistic tyranny designed to distract or to enslave. The sort of love that such persons need is the love that rebukes - not a false love that enables them to control others by dint of their own hang-ups.