Monthly Archives: February 2011

The apostle Paul is like a steak sandwich

Leave a Reply
It’s 1 Corinthians 8-9 that makes this perfectly clear! 

There are (at least) two similarities.

One, both are from God.

In Corinth, Christians had some difficulty with buying or eating meat. It was very likely that the supermarket sold fine cuts that had initially been offered to idols. Could Christians eat this type of BBQ?

Yes! Idols are nothing, these ‘gods’ don’t exist. But the food is tasty and a good thing from God. So enjoy your steak sandwich. (Personally, I recommend sweet chili sauce or a decent relish, rather than the commercial red sugar syrup named ‘tomato sauce.’) See 1 Corinthians 8.

Likewise, apostles – Paul himself – were not bad, or a terrible burden. Paul did a good work, which was a work from God. Therefore he had every right to live by this. In other words, to be financially supported by those blessed by his apostleship. See 1 Corinthians 9:1-11.

Yet, secondly, both can be given up for love.

If a Christian of tender conscience found out that your steak sandwich included meat butchered in an idol’s temple, a strong Christian would naturally not eat it (1 Cor 8:13). The reason: nothing to do with the quality of the steak, everything to do with love for the weaker Christian. It’s never worth hurting the faith of a Christian, never worth leading a Christian to do what he/she thinks is ungodly. Not ever for steak!

Likewise Paul, after strongly insisting that he had the right to be supported as Christ’s apostle, says ‘I never sent you an invoice and never will.’ See 1 Cor 9:12 and following.

Paul refused to take the cash and insisted on working for free. He chose to serve, not insist on rights. He did so to better preach the gospel. The ‘better’ is important. Paul already was preaching the gospel of Jesus, but he strove to do it more clearly, more accurately, with less distraction.

Thus, Paul’s apostleship changed even the way he ate at a BBQ. And was the model Corinthian Christians were also to follow.

So too for us. While we love the good things of this world – knowing them as real gifts of God – we will always hold them very loosely, that we can choose to give them up. This light hold is so we can easily choose the better way to share the gospel, the wonderful news of Jesus as Lord.

School scripture in NSW

Leave a Reply
Or Special Religious Education (SRE), as it is formally called. 

For those interested in the developments in NSW, you will know that the current state opposition announced they would scrap the competition between SRE and the new Ethics course. And within a couple of months announced a policy reversal.

I asked my local MP why. Via the local member, I got this response from the shadow education minister (Andrew Piccolli):

When the govt announced its change of policy to allow ethics classes to be held during SRE time we said we would change that policy and not allow ethics classes after the end of 2011. After we announced that the govt introduced a bill to legislate ethics. We voted against the bill however it passed with support of the greens. Now that ethics classes are the law and we wont (sic) be able to change it because of the LC [Legislative Council, ie NSW upper house] makeup we have said, reluctantly, that we will work with St James Ethics Centre and SRE providers to make sure the ethics classes work and that they dont impact on SRE classes. So more or less we have been boxed in to this position.

If I understand correctly, this says the retraction of the poicy was political in nature: we have been boxed in to this position.

I am not saying this is wrong or right – unlike some, I don’t think ‘politics’ is inherently evil! I am simply passing on what I heard, in case you are interested.

Culture & (Christianity) religion

Leave a Reply

I was reading Mark Durie’s thoughts on the turmoil in Egypt, and the Islamic world more widely, and came across this insight:

Another reason for the folly is deep denial among western analysts concerning the role of religion in shaping the actual agenda of Islamic radical groups. This goes hand in hand with a world view presupposition that all religions are in essence the same, and in any case irrelevant as causes for political actions. According to this view, religion is at best a pretext, but never a true cause. Men may fight over land, money, water or women, but never about religion. The Marxist’s claim that religion is an ‘opiate’ for the masses has been influential: in essence it presupposes that religion is a means of political manipulation, not its cause.

(Emphasis in original.)

I know nothing about the Islamic world. But this comment is all about the western world, where I live (and I don’t mean my physical address). Durie’s words are incisive – the prevalance of this idea that theological commitment is never fundamental because theology is always peripheral frippery.

How far from what Christians are committed to!

Jesus said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me, therefore …”
(Matthew 28:16-20)

Fundamental and basic is theological truth – Jesus’ authority. Activity in the world is secondary, contingent and always in consequence.

I do not think we must therefore aim to change our culture. Rather, I think Christians must knowingly choose the right view of Christ over all, even if our culture does not agree, or even have capacity to comprehend.