The conflict over gray issues in the ancient church centered in two primary areas: eating meat offered to idols and the celebration of feast days and the sabbath. We find both of these issues addressed in Paul’s Epistle to Rome and Paul’s First Epistle to Corinth as both churches found themselves surrounded by pagan Roman culture. From the modern standpoint, each of the issues may appear frivolous, yet these issues threatened to break apart the newly established churches. For each issue was deeply ingrained in the culture surrounding the church. When we understand the way these threats presented themselves in the ancient church, we can then begin to draw straight lines into issues we face today.
The Roman society was extremely and openly pagan. As Rome conquered the surrounding countries, they would adopt some of those countries’ gods and add them to their own pantheon of gods. Another significant aspect of the Roman religious system consisted of ancestor worship. Each family looked to great members of their family who had died for help in their present life. They believed these ancestors could assist them from beyond the grave.
The central part of Roman worship was a sacrificial system. The members of society would bring the best of their animals to sacrifice to the various gods. After the sacrificial ritual, the city would often celebrate a feast in the temple serving the very meat they just sacrificed. The Romans viewed these feasts as necessary for a healthy society. They viewed any who did not participate in the feasts with suspicion and considered those individuals unpatriotic. Because the entire city gathered at these feasts, they also served as a prime opportunity to conduct business.
When the feasts ended, the pagan temple leaders would then sell any leftover meat. It was the best meat available, and it was the cheapest meat available. However, the ancient church faced an important and divisive question, “If you purchased this meat, would you be supporting idolatry?” In addition, for the newly saved Jewish population, often the meat consisted of those animals declared unclean in the Mosaic Law. Already struggling with the place of the Mosaic Law upon the church, the temple meat provided another area of battle in this issue. As the church faced these questions, they divided into two camps.
One group consisted of those who had no problem eating the meat offered to the idols. While few believed they could participate in the temple feast, a significant group did not struggle purchasing the meat from the temple meat market. They rightly pointed to Christ’s teaching in Mark 7.
And he called the people to him again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand: 15 There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.” 17 And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. 18 And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Mark 7:14-19)
The food restrictions were for a time for Israel under the Mosaic covenant to demonstrate that they were different, that they had a major sin problem. But the death of Christ freed us from the Law. So, Christ declared all things clean. This is why you can enjoy a wonderful ham today without violating Scripture.
This group also recognized that the meat was only meat. It was neither inherently good or sinful. The fact that the meat had been sacrificed to a pagan god did not change the meat itself. As a result, they believed that they could eat this meat without condoning the pagan sacrificial system. They would argue that the meat was good meat and it was cheap meat. To purchase this good meat at a discounted price was a practice of good stewardship of the funds entrusted to them by God. In addressing this issue with the Church at Corinth, Paul acknowledges this viewpoint.
Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.” 5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. 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. (1 Corinthians 8:4-6, 8)
However, another group had a serious problem with Christians eating the meat sacrificed to idols. As some newly converted Jews still viewed the Mosaic Law as binding on the believer, they saw this meat as a violation (Leviticus 11:4-8). They had not yet realized their freedom in Christ from the Mosaic Law to eat this meat. Another section of this group, newly saved out of the pagan idolatry, firmly believed that they would support and participate in the idolatrous practices if they ate the meat offered to idols (1 Corinthians 8:7). The temple leaders used the meat in their pagan sacrificial systems and served it in the pagan feasts. The money used to purchase the meat in the market would go into the pagan temple coffers. This group could not understand how it was possible to purchase and eat meat from the pagan temple without it being considered as participation in idolatry.
In addition to the meat issue, another issue arose which was also closely related to both the Mosaic Law and the idolatrous practices of the day. This issue surrounded the concept of feast days and the Sabbath. For the Jews, the Sabbath was a central part of their upbringing. For the Gentiles, the feast days were central to the society in which they lived. As Rome conquered the world, they would institute celebratory holidays for the citizens to honor. The celebrations centered on the sacrifices to the gods. As we mentioned before, these sacrifices would then be served in a feast in the temple. The Romans viewed these special days as dedications of celebrations to the gods who assisted them in conquering the world. Every good Roman citizen participated. If the citizens did not celebrate the day, they were viewed with suspicion.
Again, the church divided into two groups. The first group consisted of Jews who believed that the church must still honor the Sabath (Exodus 20:8). Further, there was a strong debate surrounding the feast days. In order to be a good member of society and maintain relationships, this group argued that the Christian should celebrate the holidays. They maintained that one could celebrate Rome’s accomplishments without celebrating Rome’s gods. They believed that they should participate in the celebration, perhaps out of a concern for an opportunity to share the gospel or for their own ability to conduct their business.
The second group recognized Christ’s teaching in Mark 2:27-28 that the Sabath was made for man and not man for the Sabath. Their conscience allowed them to honor Sabath rest without the restrictions of the Mosaic Law. Another section of this group believed that if believers participated in the pagan feast days, they were participating in the pagan feasts. Any argument otherwise was simply viewed as pragmatic compromise.
These controversies created a significant impact in the church as the issues of meat and feast days created a significant impact in the ancient church. As the church in that day, and we in this day, look at the conflicts, the natural question arises, “Who was right?” This is an important question. To participate in idolatry is to deny God. Yet, Scripture also indicates that the Christian ought to practice good stewardship, engage with the world around them, and are free from the Mosaic Law. Paul composed Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8 to answer this question. The clearest answer appears in Romans 14:5-6:
5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.
In other words, the answer is that both were right. It is possible for two believers to have polar opposite opinions in these gray areas and both be right.
Next week we will look at how we should respond to other believers who come to different correct conclusions than we do.