From other references we understand that two qualifications needed to be met in order to be an apostle. First of all, he had to have seen the Lord. From Acts 1 we see that an apostle was to be a witness of the Lord during the days of His ministry from the time of the baptism of John until His death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven. The second qualification is that an apostle needed to be chosen specifically by Christ Himself. And in the case of Matthias, who replaced Judas, he was numbered among the apostles through the casting of lots, which was used to discern the Lord’s will in the selection.
From other references we understand that two qualifications needed to be met in order to be an apostle. First of all, he had to have seen the Lord. From Acts 1 we see that an apostle was to be a witness of the Lord during the days of His ministry from the time of the baptism of John until His death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven. The second qualification is that an apostle needed to be chosen specifically by Christ Himself. And in the case of Matthias, who replaced Judas, he was numbered among the apostles through the casting of lots, which was used to discern the Lord’s will in the selection.
Paul, however, makes a distinction between the rights and the exercising of them. This is where the emphasis of Mabel Williamson’s book comes in. It is a question of laying these aside, of waiving our rights for the sake of something which we believe by the instruction of God is of far greater importance. Here is the way Paul develops it in this chapter. First of all, he talks about himself as an apostle because that is what he has to establish. He wants to show that because of his calling, he has been given certain rights to which he is entitled.
There is a connection between this subject in chapter 9 and what he was talking about in chapter 8. In that chapter he was answering their question about whether or not to eat meat that had been sacrificed to an idol. He said that because an idol is nothing, eating or not eating such meat is really a matter of indifference as far as your Christian life is concerned. But where other people are involved, it may well be that for them, it is not a matter of indifference because of the meat’s association with a pagan temple.
What we do affects others, and part of being a Christian is knowing how your brothers and sisters in the Lord are going to take your activity. Now that does not mean that nobody can ever eat any meat that has ever been offered to any idol. Those with weaker consciences cannot use their weakness as a club over those who regard this as a matter of freedom in the Lord. On the other hand, Paul also has some directions for those who feel free to eat. In verse 9 he says, “Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak.” He is not saying that you can never exercise your freedom, but be careful that your freedom is not used in such a way so as to offend Christians with weaker consciences.
Once again he lays down some principles. The first one is that an idol is nothing. It is just a piece of wood or stone or some other material. But in terms of anything spiritual, it is nothing at all. Paul gets this idea, of course, not from the so-called knowledge of the pagan academies, but from the Old Testament. In Isaiah 44 the prophet Isaiah is quoting God, who is challenging the idols of the heathen. The observation is made of a man who cuts down a tree. He uses half of it to build a fire and cook his food, while the other half he dries out and carves out an idol, which he proceeds to fall down and worship. This is utter foolishness! This god cannot do anything.
When we talk about knowing God’s will in doubtful situations, that involves a couple of key ideas. It involves, first, the idea of knowledge. What does it really mean to know something? Is it simply a matter of intellectual awareness, or does true knowing involve more? Second, knowing God’s will involves the idea of the situation. What is really going on? What is the background to the issue, and what are the factors involved?
The issue for the Corinthian Christians was whether or not a Christian could lawfully before God eat meat that had been sacrificed to one of the heathen idols. There was a system by which the priests and priestesses were supported. Sacrifices were always part of the worship system in the ancient world. When a worshiper would come with one of these sacrifices and offer it, the basic formula is that the sacrifice would be divided into three parts: one part would go to the priest; another part would be sacrificed and burnt on the altar; and the third part would be sold in the market place, which would also support the priesthood by producing currency they could use for other things. That portion sold in the marketplace would get bought by all kinds of people, just as what happens when anyone can go to a supermarket and buy meat.
Canadian Committee of The Bible Study Hour
PO Box 24087, RPO Josephine
North Bay, ON, P1B 0C7
