Title: Navigating the Gray Areas
Text: I Corinthians 8:1-13
Thesis: We are acting in love when we are considerate of the other person’s conscience.
Introduction:
In the Roman Catholic Church there is a list of the seven deadly sins: Pride, Envy, Gluttony, Greed, Lust, Wrath, and Sloth. In 1995 a film titled Se7en focused on the seven deadly sins, a character that thinks of himself as the Sword of God, chooses victims whom he believes to be egregious examples of people guilty of each of the seven deadly sins and metes out punishment to them.
The seven deadly sins exist in a black and white world. The Ten Commandments exist in a world of black and white. The Catholic Church recently added seven additional sins to the original seven.
The Vatican newspaper cites an additional seven “violations of the basic rights of human nature.” They are:
1. Taking part in polluting the environment
2. Genetic engineering
3. Being obscenely wealthy
4. Taking or selling drugs
5. Having an abortion
6. Engaging in pedophilia
7. Causing social injustice
(“Vatican City: More sins to avoid,” The3 Week (3-21-08), p. 6 and Richard Owen, “Seven Deadly Sins: Are you guilty?” www.timesonline.co.uk (3-10-08), Preaching Today.com)
These additional sins now enter the world of black and white… they are listed among what is clearly perceived as sinful behavior. However, while things like pedophilia and abortion may be clearly in the black column… some of the others are not so. Is idling your car at a stoplight sinful and turning off your car at a stoplight righteous? Or is it a gray area?
I grew up in a black and white world in which there were the obvious sins like breaking the Ten Commandments as well as a number of others that, at the time, seemed to be on a par with breaking the Big Ten. Perhaps you too grew up in a black and white world where it was a sin to drink alcohol, dance, play cards, use tobacco, attend movies or associate with anyone who did any of those things.
Bonnie and I attended a Christian college that was very definitive in the matter of defining what was black and white. In addition to all the understood sins like dancing and going to movies, they added things like skirt lengths, that coupes when seated in the Main Lounge separated at least by the thickness of a hymnbook when sitting together, and when a generous donor gave two new pool tables to the men’s dorm, they were returned for fear that the presence of pool tables on campus would have a negative effect on the financial support of its constituency.
Over my years of pastoral ministry I have been exposed to numerous examples of attempts at defining black and white, including the forbidding of playing bingo or dominoes in the church fellowship hall, raffling quilts, drinking coffee or tea, i.e., caffeinated drinks, showing movies in the sanctuary, listening to Christian rock music, i.e., Christian and rock are oxymoron’s, singing praise music in worship, women holding office in the church or holding pastoral ministry. I’m sure there are other things, but I grew weary even in recalling those that readily came to mind.
And, keep in mind I’ve not even begun to touch on things like political affiliations, vegan or non-vegan, wearing fur, driving SUVs, living in designer homes, shopping at Wal Mart, indebtedness, birth control, abortion, passivism and war, taking fertility drugs, and that is not to question the ethics and morality of transferring 8 embryos to the uterus of a woman who already has 6 children, and so on and on and on….
While it may be convenient to live in a world where we make lists of what is right or white and what is wrong or black… it is not necessarily that simple. In fact, I think there is a great deal of gray. Not everything is black and white and there are legitimate differences between freedoms and convictions among Christians.
My hope is that by examining a rather archaic example recorded in I Corinthians 8, we can gather a scriptural principle that will help us navigate some of those gray areas in our contemporary culture. My intent is not to rewrite of define what is black or white, but to give us what may be thought of as transferable principles that we may apply to any area of question.
The first principle we must always keep in mind when navigating a gray area or a matter of dispute is this:
I. Love is more important than knowledge when it comes to navigating gray areas.
You think that everyone should agree with your perfect knowledge. While knowledge may make us feel important, it is love that really builds up the church. I Corinthians 8:1-3
This is what some of the Corinthian Christians knew… they knew that idols were idols. Idols were not God. They knew that it was common practice for meat offered in sacrifice to an idol might be served at a pagan banquet. They knew that such meat was also sold on the open market for public consumption.
Since reading The Carnivore’s Dilemma and watching Fast Food Nation, which is set in the fictional town of Cody, Colorado, where everyone eats at Mickey’s, which is the burger franchise whose meat packing plant is located there, I have become a more conscientious about what kind of meat I eat.
Picking up a gas station burger on the interstate or biting into a rib-shaped processed pork sandwich gives me some pause with regard to the origins of what I am eating. That was kind of how it was for some Christians in Corinth who were concerned about the origins of the meat they were going to eat.
It is as if venders sold the hamburger meat to McDonalds, Burger King, or Wendy’s. They sold the stew meat to places that serve it in the form of “mystery meat.” They sold the choice cuts to the Texas Roadhouse, Outback Steak House, and The Broker. It was meat and eating it did not make you a better or worse person. This was what they knew. This was knowledge.
But Paul makes three points about knowledge:
A. Knowledge as a good thing, is a given. Knowledge always trumps ignorance.
B. Knowledge has a way of making people get puffed up, proud, or even arrogant.
The idea is that a person puffed up on knowledge appears to be large and influential but in fact is of little real substance. Think wind bag… all gaseous and blustery and ultimately offensive. Ultimately, according to verse 2, the person who claims to have all the answers really doesn’t know much at all.
Someone aptly said, “No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care.”
C. Knowledge is not what makes a church great or strong. It does not build up the church – love does.
“Some of the Corinthians were big on knowledge but short on love… they assumed they had all the answers but were oblivious to the fact that they lacked love.” (Commentary on I Corinthians 8:1-13, Homiletics Magazine, February 2009, p.38)
They were the epitome of those described in I Corinthians 13, who knew all the mysteries of the future and knew everything about everything but did not have love. All the knowledge in the world is nullified when our behavior is lacking in love.
You may be following the ongoing saga of Ted Haggard and his dismissal from the pastorate of New Life Church in Colorado Springs. Ted Haggard may be disgraced but he is getting a lot of face time on HBO and Oprah these days.
The current pastor of New Life, Brady Boyd, in an interview with The Denver Post acknowledged that “Life is crazy at New Life Church every time Ted Haggard does something new.” He said, “There is no perfect way of dealing with a fallen leader,” then he added, “to this day, to a person, everyone wishes him well. We know for a fact that we did everything that could be done for Haggard, including a severance package of over $300,000.” (Electra Draper and JoAnne Ostgrow, “Springs Church’s Tenacity Rises Above Haggard Blitz,” The Denver Post, January 30, 2009)
In this matter of discipline in a clearly black area of behavior, New Life Church has acted out of both knowledge of the scripture and love for the person and his family. Had New Life acted only from knowledge and made no attempt to loving move their pastor toward restoration, the church would not be thriving today… it would be a broken and unloving shambles of a church.
Without love, knowledge is nothing.
When we exercise love and common sense, we understand that in some instances an issue is not cut and dried or easily identified as black or white. Some things in question are blurred or gray and can actually be understood in different ways.
II. When we navigate gray areas, we understand that gray areas consist of things that are neutral in the mind of God, but matters of conscience to some Christians.
It is true that we can’t win God’s approval by what we eat. We don’t miss out on anything if we don’t eat it and we don’t gain anything if we do. But you must be careful with this freedom of yours. Do not cause a brother or a sister with a weaker conscience to stumble. I Corinthians 8:8-9
Just a few minutes ago I talked about the folks who knew that meat was just meat and even eating meat that had been offered to an idol made you no better or worse as a person. But there is more to this story than meets the eye.
Eating meat that had been offered to an idol became a gray area because there were people in their church who had convictions that kept them from eating such meat.
A. Those with convictions against eating such meat were not necessarily legalistic Christians.
Legalistic Christians are Christians who have a long list of things they cannot do and have decided that neither should you.
One example is of a man in a church I served who believed drinking caffeinated drinks was sinful because they were bad for your body and you should not drink anything that violated the health of your body, which is the temple of God. (He drew that conclusion from his understanding of I Corinthians 6 in regard to a man joining his body, which belongs to the Lord, in an immoral relationship with a prostitute.) He further reasoned it was wrong to serve coffee and tea in church, not only because it was bad for you, but to do so would inevitably lead to the serving beer in the church fellowship hall.
Paul is not writing about people who are legalistic and would impose their conscience on everyone else. For one thing, Paul is writing about weaker Christians and a legalistic person does not perceive of himself or herself as a weaker Christian… quite to the contrary, a legalistic person believes he or she is a strong Christian. Failing to fall into line with the convictions of a legalistic person may tick them off and cause them to judge you harshly, but they would not be tempted to violate their conscience. So to use the argument of consideration and deference to the weaker brother or sister in the case of a dogmatic and legalistic person would mean that Christians and churches would be held hostage by legalism.
Paul is talking about:
B. Those with convictions against eating meat offered to idols who were new or young Christians, who had come out of pagan idolatry.
Paul is writing about people who had offered meat to an idol and participated in pagan feasts. For them to eat such meat was to return to a practice from which they had been liberated.
In this context, suddenly freedom to eat mean offered to idols is blurred by the legitimate convictions of a new Christian or weaker brother or sister in Christ. And to blow off the convictions of a weaker Christian is an abuse of knowledge and freedom in Christ.
So at the church potluck dinner, when a new believer from a pagan tradition asked, “Has this meat been offered to an idol?” the mature, knowledgeable Christians did not launch into a tirade about how foolish and immature they were being. The stronger Christian would have deferred saying, “Yes, this meat was offered to idols. But… the meat on this platter has not been offered to idols. Perhaps you would prefer this platter?” The stronger Christian might further inquire, “Would my eating the meat offered to idols be offensive to you or cause you to eat something that would cause you guilt?” And if the answer was, “Yes,” the thoughtful person would not eat the meat offered to idols out of deference and love for the other person.
Bonnie and I attended a church several Saturday evenings to hear Phillip Yancey give a series of talks on the Book of Romans. That church has a tradition of offering The Lord’s Supper at the conclusion of every service. They were careful to make it clear that as we came forward, the servers had two chalices… one chalice contained grape juice and the other wine. And they made it clear that the option was there out of loving concern for those for whom wine was neither a preference nor an option.
A third principle regarding our navigating a gray area is this:
III. In navigating a gray area, exercising a personal freedom in such a way as to violate another’s conscience, is a sin.
You are against Christ when you sin against other Christians by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong. I Corinthians 8:12
Failure to act out of consideration of the weaker Christian is wrong on three levels.
A. Exercising legitimate personal freedom in a matter of conscience to a weaker Christian is not helpful to that person.
You say, “I am allowed to do anything” but not everything is helpful… not everything is beneficial. I Corinthians 10:23
B. Exercising legitimate personal freedom or failing to act out of consideration in a matter of conscience to a weaker Christian is selfish.
Don’t think only of your own good. Think of other Christians and what is best for them. I Corinthians 10:24
C. Exercising legitimate personal freedom in a matter of conscience to a weaker Christian, does not glorify God.
The Apostle Paul reasoned, why should my freedom be limited by what someone else thinks? If I can thank God for the food and enjoy it, why should I be condemned for eating it? Whatever you eat or drink or whatever you do, you must do all for the glory of God. I try to please everyone in everything I do. I don’t just do what I like or what is best for me, but what is best for them so they may be saved. I Corinthians 10:32-33
Just because we are not compelled by law to do something does not mean it isn’t better to practice personal restraint for our own sake and the sake of others.
This evening Ben Roethlisberger and the Pittsburg Steelers will meet Kurt Warner and the Phoenix Cardinals to play in the Super Bowl in Tampa Bay. In 2005 Ben Roethlisberger led the Pittsburg Steelers in a Super Bowl victory over the Seattle Seahawks. He was only 23 at the time and apparently unaware of his mortality. In July of that year in an interview with ESPN reporter, Andrea Kremer, Big Ben told her that he did not wear a helmet when riding his motorcycle because he did not have to… helmets were not required by law in Pennsylvania at that time. In another interview with Kellen Winslow he said, “You are just more free out there without a helmet.” Despite being lectured regarding wearing a helmet by Head Coach Bill Cowhr and former Steeler quarterback Terry Bradshaw, Roethlisberger refused to wear a helmet.
Then in June of 2006 he had a collision with a Chrysler Town and Country. He was thrown forward over the handlebars and into the windshield of the minivan. He suffered severe facial and head injuries that required seven hours of surgery.
After being released from the hospital Big Ben apologized to the Steeler fans, his family, and his team for risking his life unnecessarily. He later confessed in an interview that he was no longer focused on taking advantage of his individual freedom.
Ben Roethlisberger learned the hard way that personal freedom is not more important than consideration for others. He had the right to ride without a helmet but to do so was not helpful or beneficial to his family, his team, his fans, or himself. (ESPN.com, Preaching Today.com, Wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_roethlisberger)
In addition to that, as brothers and sisters in Christ, failure to act out of consideration for the weaker Christian is sinful and does not glorify God…. Whereas, the loving and consideration response is always right and honors God.
Conclusion:
I heard a story about a ninety year old grandfather who was complaining to his grandson about getting old. He said, “The worst part is the diapers.” He continued, “I don’t mind wearin’ them, it’s just the name I hate. Depends! If I have to wear a diaper, I don’t want there to be any ‘depends’ about it. I want for sure!”
It would be good if everything was “for sure,” but it’s not.
When it comes to some things, it depends.
It depends!
And in matters of exercising personal freedom in Christ and the sensitivities of a weaker Christian, our actions depend on whether we are loving, considerate, willing to forego our own interests for the sake of the other’s, and if our ultimate desire is to honor God.
