1 corinthians 9:19-23

[steve]

The truth doesn't mind being questioned. It is the glory of God to hide a matter and the glory of man to discover it. The why is always relevant, as you have seen through the example I just gave you through that setup. You saw for yourself how twisted it is to not be allowed to ask why. I encourage you to always be searching and asking why. And don't discourage someone else from asking why and searching out the meaning of God's words. He blesses those efforts. Finding the reason why will often shed light on deceptions within ourselves that we didn't know existed. However, the devil knows they exist, and he puts that fear in us so that we avoid pursuing the answers. The only "why" to discourage is the one asked in bad faith without truly wanting to know the answer.

Asking why and dragging your feet in obeying is how Lot’s wife became a pillar of salt.
Another example of did Yah really say/mean that would be Eve.

Because He said so is good enough for me.

 

[NVIII]

Asking why and dragging your feet in obeying is how Lot’s wife became a pillar of salt.
Another example of did Yah really say/mean that would be Eve.

Because He said so is good enough for me.

Of course. You do as your faith allows. But don't let your lack of faith prevent a brother from searching and studying and discovering. It's how most of us arrived here in the first place. Some of us have faith to continue to uncover. Some must stay where they are at and put up walls because their faith is weak. But, I encourage you to take hold of that faith and don't stop asking why.

 

[The Revolting Man]

The truth doesn't mind being questioned. It is the glory of God to hide a matter and the glory of man to discover it. The why is always relevant, as you have seen through the example I just gave you through that setup. You saw for yourself how twisted it is to not be allowed to ask why. I encourage you to always be searching and asking why. And don't discourage someone else from asking why and searching out the meaning of God's words. He blesses those efforts. Finding the reason why will often shed light on deceptions within ourselves that we didn't know existed. However, the devil knows they exist, and he puts that fear in us so that we avoid pursuing the answers. The only "why" to discourage is the one asked in bad faith without truly wanting to know the answer.

Don’t be condescending. The danger of why, and this is a very real danger, is that we start trying to solve the why with means other than obedience to the command. I’ve heard people say that sex before marriage (which doesn’t exist) isn’t a sin anymore because we have penicillin and paternity tests. Or that we can eat pork now because we can cook it thoroughly. Why is often just an excuse to look for justification for disobedience.

 

[NVIII]

Don’t be condescending. The danger of why, and this is a very real danger, is that we start trying to solve the why with means other than obedience to the command. I’ve heard people say that sex before marriage (which doesn’t exist) isn’t a sin anymore because we have penicillin and paternity tests. Or that we can eat pork now because we can cook it thoroughly. Why is often just an excuse to look for justification for disobedience.

I agree with that. Let's try to not be condescending anymore. And you are right that the questions must be asked in good faith, not in defiance. As an illustration, I tell my children they must first say, "Yes, sir." And THEN if they have questions, they may ask. And really, should ask, because I want to know if they don't understand so that I can give them the knowledge.

What we had above, when you said the "why" didn't matter, was a man who saw the allowance to eat was in contradiction with the directive to not eat. At which point, he can't say "yes, sir" to both. He must stop and ask "why" so that he can understand what the meaning of it all is. And so should you, because you cannot, in honesty, say that the contradiction doesn't exist. If you don't need to ask why because you already know, then come forth with it, because others here are asking in good faith and you should not withhold from them the knowledge that has been revealed to you. And do so humbly, understanding that it is still possible that your understanding is incomplete and your brother may have a legitimate point that pokes holes in what you once thought was solid.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I agree with that. Let's try to not be condescending anymore. And you are right that the questions must be asked in good faith, not in defiance. As an illustration, I tell my children they must first say, "Yes, sir." And THEN if they have questions, they may ask. And really, should ask, because I want to know if they don't understand so that I can give them the knowledge.

What we had above, when you said the "why" didn't matter, was a man who saw the allowance to eat was in contradiction with the directive to not eat. At which point, he can't say "yes, sir" to both. He must stop and ask "why" so that he can understand what the meaning of it all is. And so should you, because you cannot, in honesty, say that the contradiction doesn't exist. If you don't need to ask why because you already know, then come forth with it, because others here are asking in good faith and you should not withhold from them the knowledge that has been revealed to you. And do so humbly, understanding that it is still possible that your understanding is incomplete and your brother may have a legitimate point that pokes holes in what you once thought was solid.

When would there ever be a directive to not eat that was in conflict with allowance to eat? These things are contradictory. Does your Bible contradict itself?

Remember, we were talking about whether you could eat food sacrificed to idols, completely within the context of Paul. Are you implying that Paul contradicts himself on this? At the risk of being condescending, did you lose the thread of the conversation? I know it got a little dense and complex…..

 

[NVIII]

When would there ever be a directive to not eat that was in conflict with allowance to eat? These things are contradictory. Does your Bible contradict itself?

Remember, we were talking about whether you could eat food sacrificed to idols, completely within the context of Paul. Are you implying that Paul contradicts himself on this? At the risk of being condescending, did you lose the thread of the conversation? I know it got a little dense and complex…..

Condescension is your middle name. I would expect no less from a fellow asshole. I know I am a fool for speaking to you, but fools of a feather flock together. Here is one more good-faith answer to your effortless scoffing.

Here is the post, which asks about the apparent contradiction of 1 Cor 10 to the proceeding arguments, about which you said the "why" doesn't matter, about which I answered you and showed you that it is error to deny the search for "why", about which you said is dangerous (fair point, btw), about which I said was not the case for this particular question because it was asked in good faith and not defiance, and now we come full circle:

If you read the whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 10, it is evident that he is speaking of partaking in the worship of demons Intentionally. If one is just eating the food as food then it’s origin is irrelevant. It only matters in regard to the conscience of others, not your own conscience.

But you are right: it did get a little dense and complex. Almost as dense as my fuddled head. It's entirely possible that I've missed the points that everyone presented. Never rule that out.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Condescension is your middle name. I would expect no less from a fellow asshole. I know I am a fool for speaking to you, but fools of a feather flock together. Here is one more good-faith answer to your effortless scoffing.

Here is the post, which asks about the apparent contradiction of 1 Cor 10 to the proceeding arguments, about which you said the "why" doesn't matter, about which I answered you and showed you that it is error to deny the search for "why", about which you said is dangerous (fair point, btw), about which I said was not the case for this particular question because it was asked in good faith and not defiance, and now we come full circle:


But you are right: it did get a little dense and complex. Almost as dense as my fuddled head. It's entirely possible that I've missed the points that everyone presented. Never rule that out.

So are you and @Asforme&myhouse saying it’s perfectly fine to eat food sacrificed to idols as long as you don’t participate in the sacrifice?

 

[NVIII]

So are you and @Asforme&myhouse saying it’s perfectly fine to eat food sacrificed to idols as long as you don’t participate in the sacrifice?

Have you read it, man? That chapter, I mean. In particular the last seven verses. I can't speak for @Asforme&myhouse, but I'm pretty sure he's not asserting anything specifically about meat, but rather about the underlying principle that Paul was using meat to illustrate, and saying that something is shaky about the ground that some here have built their houses on.

To that effect, "why", "what does it all mean", and, humbly, "what are the broader implications"?

 

[The Revolting Man]

Have you read it, man? That chapter, I mean. In particular the last seven verses. I can't speak for @Asforme&myhouse, but I'm pretty sure he's not asserting anything specifically about meat, but rather about the underlying principle that Paul was using meat to illustrate, and saying that something is shaky about the ground that some here have built their houses on.

To that effect, "why", "what does it all mean", and, humbly, "what are the broader implications"?

I have read it. I’m just trying to figure out what you’re advocating . Is the prohibition against eating the meat or against idol worship?

 

[NVIII]

I have read it. I’m just trying to figure out what you’re advocating . Is the prohibition against eating the meat or against idol worship?

My objection was to the whole "don't ask why" bit. That is what I was advocating for. I've said my piece on that and brought it back around, I think. I don't want to layer on that and cause you to lose sight of that. That was the only purpose of my interjection. The conversation can go on now, but it's not mine unless @Asforme&myhouse is finished with his point.

 

[Mark C]

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." Some, it goes on to note, "reject knowledge."

Watching the "ignorant and proud of it" argue about "meat" and then "meat sacrificed to" something they can't define either, is a bit hearing Biden appointees argue about how men should "chest feed" after they give birth.

This is a good question:

I’m just trying to figure out what you’re advocating . Is the prohibition against eating the meat or against idol worship?

"Meat" is another of those conflated words the the "ignorant and untaught twist unto their own destruction." Some "meat" is FOOD, some is not. People have "meat" on their bones. So do mice and pigs.

Would your argue about whether you should go to a cannibal's house and eat the stew without asking what's in it? Or just ask whether they agree on what "food" is and is NOT, first?

"eat anything that is set before you without asking questions." Good grief. Talk about a lousy rendering.

Or is it better just to know what the words actually mean before splitting hairs?

(Note: Likewise, people miss the whole POINT of Peter's dream in Acts 10, because it never occurs to them that the disciples didn't celebrate the resurrection with an Easter ham.)

Hey, maybe that's why they agreed on those four "minimum necessary conditions" in Acts 15 FIRST. No point in going to the sun-god-day pot luck and getting the blood pudding.