Should We Do Missions?

In the April 2012 issue of Themelios journal D.A. Carson, research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois, took up the subject of whether or not we should still be involved in the task of taking the good news of Jesus Christ into cross-cultural settings (what we have traditionally called missions). In this account of his address at the 150^th anniversary of Grace Baptist Mission in the UK, Dr. Carson suggests that many think missions old-fashioned at best and downright dangerous at worst. After all, many argue, missionaries “invade cultures not their own, and by pushing Jesus and the gospel, they announce that they think their religion and culture are superior to the local one-and that, surely, is the very essence of intolerance.” Additionally, as one recent critique worded it, missionary work is “inherently patronizing to the host culture. That's what a mission is-a bunch of strangers showing up somewhere uninvited to inform the locals they are wrong.”

If you have heard objections like these or even thought them your self, you will be well-served by considering this capable scholar’s answer. Carson wrote:

Christians, of course, cannot forget that during his lifetime Jesus himself trained people to go and herald the good news. Christians remember that Jesus was sent by his Father, he insisted, to seek and save those who are lost. So it is not too surprising that he in turn sends his followers. That's what our word "mission" means: it derives from the verb "to send." "As the Father has sent me," Jesus once said, "I am sending you" (John 20:21 NIV). Among his last recorded words are these: "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age" (Matt 28:20 NIV). So Christians, understandably, will entertain a high view of those who actively seek to discharge Jesus' mission.

There are two common objections raised against this Christian view of missionary endeavor. It's worth reflecting on them before we contemplate the most convincing reason why missionary work is essential.

First, Jesus himself insists, "Do not judge, or you too will be judged" (Matt 7:1 NIV). Doesn't this mean that if we follow Jesus' teaching we should refuse to make moral and religious evaluations? Certainly that view is common on the street. "I don't mind Jesus," we hear; "it's Christians I can't stand. Christians run around self-righteously telling people how to live, condemning other religions, sending missionaries off to meddle in other cultures. Why don't they follow the instruction of the Jesus they claim to serve? After all, he said, 'Do not judge, or you too will be judged.'"

When I was a boy I learned a few of the first principles of interpreting texts. I learned, "A text without a context becomes a pretext for a proof-text." So I suppose we better remind ourselves of the context where Jesus says, "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." It's found in the Sermon on the Mount. That sermon contains quite a few teachings of Jesus. Here, for example, Jesus criticizes the man who looks at a woman lustfully, on the ground that such a man has already committed adultery in his heart (Matt 5:28). Here he teaches us not to store up treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy and where thieves break in and steal; rather, we must store up for ourselves treasures in heaven, knowing that where our treasure is, there our hearts will be, too (6:19-21). Here he tells us to watch out for false prophets, which presupposes we must make distinctions between the true and the false (7:15-20). Here he insists that on the last day not everyone who says to him "Lord, Lord" will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of his Father who is in heaven (7:21-23). In all these utterances, Jesus is making moral, religious, and cultural evaluations. He is, in short, making judgments. So after making all these judgments, what does he mean by saying "Do not judge, or you too will be judged"? The context shows that he means something like "Do not be cheaply critical, or you will be subjected to the same criticism." In other words, there is no way on God's green earth that this command prohibits his followers from making moral judgements, when making moral judgements is precisely what the sweep of his teaching demands that they do. But he does insist that when they follow his instruction and make evaluations and judgments they must do so without cheap criticism of others-a notoriously difficult requirement. There must be no condescension, no double standard, no sense of superiority, no patronizing sentimentality. Christians are never more than poor beggars telling other poor beggars where there is bread. This humble tone ought to characterize all Christian witness, all Christian missionary endeavor. But to argue that Jesus wants his followers to make no judgments at all merely betrays biblical illiteracy.

Second, people often protest, "Yes, but isn't missionary work, indeed all attempts at trying to win another to your faith, terribly intolerant?" Well, no-not if one operates with older definitions of tolerance. Tolerance used to be understood to be the stance which, while disagreeing with another's views, guarded the right of those views to be heard. The new tolerance insists that disagreeing with another's views, saying they are wrong, is intrinsically intolerant. But frankly, that notion of intolerance is incoherent. The Labour Party doesn't agree with the Conservatives; Marxists don't agree with Capitalists; Muslims don't agree with Christians. Each pair may acknowledge some commonalities, but on many fronts, they differ. Yet each tolerates the other if each insists that the other has equal right to speak and convince others of their position. Intolerance is introduced, not when one says another party is wrong, but only when the views of others are quelled by force or corruption. If missionaries try to impose their views on others by force of any kind, they have lost the richest Christian heritage; where they seek to teach and put their case, all the while loving others sacrificially, they are upholding the highest standards of both intellectual integrity and tolerance.

But the best warrant for Christian mission is Jesus himself. He claims all authority is his, but he speaks not as a cosmic bully but as the crucified Lord. He insists that men and women have rebelled against his heavenly Father, but he joins himself to the human rebels so as to identify with them. He declares they deserve punishment, then bears the punishment himself. He claims to be the Judge they will meet on the last day, and meanwhile entreats them to turn to him, to trust him, and live. If one is going to follow a leader, what better leader than the one who demonstrates his love for his followers by dying on a cross to win them to himself? What political leader does that? What religious leader does that? Only God does that!

And then, in a small piece of mimicry, his followers are challenged to take up their cross and follow him. If one of the results is a worldwide missionary movement, I for one will pray for it to thrive.

Joyfully Following God Through Family Devotions

Those who find their delight and joy in God through His Son, Jesus Christ, and so seek to love Him with all they have and others also as themselves, will want to help as many people as possible trust Christ as Savior and also grow in His grace. This was much of our focus in Sunday’s message out of Colossians 1:24-27.

How does this translate into our family? If a Christian parent has children, somewhere along the line it should dawn on him or her that their children are some of the key disciples God has brought to them. How can we carry out this important ministry? 

Terry Johnson, senior minister at Independent Presbyterian Church in Savannah, Georgia, wrote a book in 2003 titled Family Worship Book. In the most recent issue of Modern Reformation (November-December 2012), an excerpt from this book reminded us just how much impact we have upon sons and daughters in the typical amount of eighteen years they are with us. Consider this as a motivation for taking up the challenge to lead our family in family devotions.

If your children are in your home for 18 years, you have over 5,600 occasions (figuring a 6-day week) for family [devotions]. If you learn a new psalm or hymn each month, they will be exposed to 216 in those 18 years. If you read a chapter a day, you will complete the Bible 4.5 times in 18 years…. Every day they [will] intercede on behalf of others. Think in terms of the long view. What is the cumulative impact of just 15 minutes of this each day, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year, for 18 years? At the rate of 6 days a week (excluding Sunday), one spends an hour and a half a week in family worship (about the length of a home Bible Study), 78 hours a year (about the length of two weekend retreats), and 1,404 hours over the course of 18 years (about the length of eight week-long summer camps). When you establish your priorities, think in terms of the cumulative effect of this upon you, after 40 or 60 or 80 years of daily family worship: All this without having to drive anywhere.

You may not have eighteen years left, but it is never too late to start.

What Is Joy?

In a blog called The Joyful Follower somewhere along the line it is good to explain what biblical joy is. One of the best definitions I have heard comes from Sam Storms in his February 1, 2010 sermon titled “For Your Joy,” preached at the Desiring God Pastor’s Conference.  Storms affirmed, "Joy is a deep durable delight in the splendor of God that ruins you for anything else."

As Sam continued in this powerful message he clarified this is not a passive joy or one that leads to a monastic life. Instead, he explained:

It is a joy that stokes the white-hot passion for the nations of the earth and for the lost...that energizes the will of a man or a woman to persevere in a [bad] marriage and not throw in the towel. This is a deep delight and joy in the all-satisfying beauty of Christ that empowers the human heart to overcome addictive behavior, to sustain the soul in its fight against temptation. This is a deep delight in the all-satisfying beauty of Christ that enables a weak and broken soul to persevere when a job is lost or a child rebels or a dream is shattered. It is a deep delight and joy in the all-satisfying beauty of Christ that encourages the fearful and timid heart to engage a lost world and a corrupt world with the good news of the gospel. It is a deep delight and joy in the all-satisfying beauty of Christ that will sustain a church through the loss of numbers and financial strain and to bind the hearts of its people together in unity and love and affection. It is a deep delight and joy in the all-satisfying beauty of Christ that alone will strengthen the soul of the pastor [against difficult circumstances and disappointments].

O, Lord, we praise you for giving us this kind of joy in Christ, we thank you this joy will be our eternal reward in your presence (Psalm 16:11), and we pray that we might be “fellow workers” for the joy of others (2 Corinthians 1:24)!  We know this is at the heart of being a joyful follower of you!

The Glory Of The Gospel

In Sunday’s sermon we talked about the ongoing impact the gospel has upon a Christian. With that in mind I thought it would be helpful to focus upon the glorious strong rich nature of that good news. This is taken from July 20, 2010 blog by Tullian Tchividjian.

“A while back, a friend of mine sent me this nugget of gospel gold from John Calvin. It comes from a stunning preface to Pierre Robert Olivétan’s French translation of the New Testament (1534).

Calvin wrote:

Without the gospel everything is useless and vain; without the gospel we are not Christians; without the gospel all riches is poverty, all wisdom folly before God; strength is weakness, and all the justice of man is under the condemnation of God.

But by the knowledge of the gospel we are made children of God, brothers of Jesus Christ, fellow townsmen with the saints, citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven, heirs of God with Jesus Christ, by whom the poor are made rich, the weak strong, the fools wise, the sinner justified, the desolate comforted, the doubting sure, and slaves free.

It is the power of God for the salvation of all those who believe.

It follows that every good thing we could think or desire is to be found in this same Jesus Christ alone.

For, he was sold, to buy us back; captive, to deliver us; condemned, to absolve us; he was made a curse for our blessing, [a] sin offering for our righteousness; marred that we may be made fair; he died for our life; so that by him fury is made gentle, wrath appeased, darkness turned into light, fear reassured, despisal despised, debt canceled, labor lightened, sadness made merry, misfortune made fortunate, difficulty easy, disorder ordered, division united, ignominy ennobled, rebellion subjected, intimidation intimidated, ambush uncovered, assaults assailed, force forced back, combat combated, war warred against, vengeance avenged, torment tormented, damnation damned, the abyss sunk into the abyss, hell transfixed, death dead, mortality made immortal.

In short, mercy has swallowed up all misery, and goodness all misfortune. For all these things which were to be the weapons of the devil in his battle against us, and the sting of death to pierce us, are turned for us into exercises which we can turn to our profit.

If we are able to boast with the apostle, saying, O hell, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? it is because by the Spirit of Christ promised to the elect, we live no longer, but Christ lives in us; and we are by the same Spirit seated among those who are in heaven, so that for us the world is no more, even while our conversation is in it; but we are content in all things, whether country, place, condition, clothing, meat, and all such things.

And we are comforted in tribulation, joyful in sorrow, glorying under [persecutions], abounding in poverty, warmed in our nakedness,
patient amongst evils, living in death.

“This is what we should in short seek in the whole of Scripture: truly to know Jesus Christ, and the infinite riches that are comprised in him and are offered to us by him from God the Father.”

Keys To Plugging Into A Church Successfully

The following is taken from Stephen and Alex Kendrick, with Randy Alcorn, The Resolution For Men (Chapter. 14).

“Here are four keys to being successful in how you plug into a church:”

1. Show up and get involved. How can you feel connected, loved, and ministered to if you’re never there?  Attend consistently, not just every once in a while. And don’t sit on the back row on Sunday morning and then jet for your car during the closing song. Get involved in a small group Bible Study. Find a place to serve. Don’t stand at a distance. Dive in with both feet and join the fun.

2. Fix your eyes on Jesus, not on people. Jesus won’t fail you, but people will. So give them permission to be human, and forgive them when they disappoint you. Extend the same mercy that you would hope to receive from others. Be hard to offend and quick to forgive.

3. Be a blessing, not dead weight. Let love be your motivation for what you do, not merely to be known and loved. Instead of expecting everybody else to do everything, you do some of the pedaling too. Don’t just take. Give. Serve. Encourage. Use the gifts and talents God has given you to be an edifying member of the body. It is what each person contributes that keeps them most connected, ‘as each part does its work’ (Ephesians 4:16).

4. Finally, share life with other believers. Invite them into your world. God wants us being part of each other’s lives: Challenging one another; loving one another; serving one another; helping one another; weeping together; rejoicing together; doing life together.

Conclusion: The church needs you, and you need them. God designed it so that as Christians, we multiply one another’s joy and divide one another’s sorrows. The more we intentionally are knit together with other church members, the more we can celebrate when a member gets married, gives birth, has a prayer answered, gets a job offer, breaks an addiction, or is reconciled to an estranged family member. Their joy is our joy because we are one body.

It’s a family sharing in the very joy of God (John 15:11; 17:13), not a country club. It’s God Himself, delighting in the unity and good of His people (Psalm 133:1). So invest your life in a Bible-believing, Christ-exalting local church, and increase the joy of others while giving yourself more opportunities to rejoice!

God will match and exceed your faithfulness to the church with His faithful love.

 

Joyfully United Around Truth, Not Labels

Pastor Lige Reed and I are unashamedly Calvinists. That means that whenever you hear one of your vocational pastor/elders teach, this is the doctrine you are hearing. We are not committed to a system simply because we like it. We are committed to Scripture and we believe this is what Scripture teaches.

Having said this, however, we do not want to divide over labels. We are much like the 18^th-19^th century British pastor, Charles Simeon, who was a Calvinist, but did not want to be first and foremost known by that label. He wanted primarily to be committed to God’s Word and to stand with whoever shares that commitment. Simeon was bold in standing for truth—no matter who disagreed. Yet, he was just as bold to stand with others who were committed to truth, regardless of which “camp” they were a part.

We discover an example of that commitment in a now famous encounter with the elderly John Wesley, a dialogue Simeon had with the founder of Methodism when Charles was but a young man. Here is the account from H.C.G. Moule, Charles Simeon (London: InterVarsity, 1948), 79f.

Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions. Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?

Yes, I do indeed.

And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?

Yes, solely through Christ.

But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?

No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.

Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?

No.

What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother's arms?

Yes, altogether.

And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?

Yes, I have no hope but in Him.

Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election, my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things wherein we agree.

Thoughts On "Stumbling Block" Issues In Romans 14 And 1 Corinthians 8-10

Recently some in our congregation have faced issues of disagreement about which it has been suggested they might be “stumbling blocks”. Essentially, a “stumbling block” issue is one in which an action or activity may not necessarily be sinful in and of itself, yet some think it is sinful. In such times the person who believes he has the freedom to engage in it must refrain from causing the other person to stumble.

A classic example of a stumbling block issue would be drinking alcohol. If a Christian drinks in front of a fellow-believer who thinks alcohol consumption is wrong or if he tries to get the friend to drink, it could cause the person to go against his conscience and sin. In other words, it could cause him to stumble.

Not all issues are so easily decided. How do we determine when we are dealing with a stumbling block issue or not?  Here are a number of observations derived from the two main stumbling block passages that I trust will lead us toward an answer.

1. Not all issues or disagreements among Christians in a congregation can be classified as stumbling block matters. Beginning in Cor. 7:1 Paul writes to the Corinthians of “the matters about which you wrote” (7:1). In other words, these are matters that troubled the Corinthians and they wanted to get Paul’s take on them. Of all the matters Paul addresses in this section (being married or not being married, ch. 7; food related to idol/temple worship, 8-10; head coverings, 11:2-16; the Lord’s Supper, 11:17-34; “spirituals” or “spiritual things” [extraordinary spiritual activities, including spiritual gifts], 12:1-14:40; and the resurrection, 15:1-58), there is only one that constitutes a stumbling block issue. In all the others Paul clearly comes down upon a particular side. For example, in regard to whether or not Christians should marry (ch. 7), Paul is clear that though there is the freedom not to marry (if God has gifted and/or called a person to such a single lifestyle), most should marry because of sexual sin. So, Paul does not say, “Hey, if you have people in your church who don’t think any Christian should marry, don’t allow anyone to marry—after all you don’t want to be a stumbling block.” No, Paul is clear that though some may not want to marry, marriage is good and, in many cases, it is the wisest step for Christians to take. Likewise, he doesn’t leave it up to the Corinthians to decide whether or not they practice “spirituals” or spiritual gifts in a way that trumps love for one another and God’s Word (12-14); nor does he leave it up to them whether or not they believe in the resurrection (15).[1]

2. Even in stumbling block issues there tends to be a stronger (more defensible) and weaker (less defensible) position, which appears to be why Paul uses “weak” to refer to the person prohibiting the activity (e.g. 1 Cor. 8:11). The issue in Romans 14 appears to be that of Jewish food and Sabbath laws, and whether or not Christians (Jewish or Gentile) must keep them.[2]  The issue in 1 Corinthians 8-10 appears to revolve around the eating of meat related to pagan temples and idol worship. The pagan temples in many first century, A.D., Greco-Roman cities also served as the local butcher. Once meat was sacrificed to pagan gods it would be sold for food. Because of this, many guilds and groups of people would have feasts and get-togethers at pagan temples. Additionally, this meat would also be sold so it could be eaten off-site. In 1 Cor. 8 Paul appears to be addressing the issue of eating at the temples (8:10) and in 1 Cor. 10 eating meat sold at the temple, but eaten off-site (10:25, 28). In both situations, Paul makes it clear that bottom-line there is nothing unethical in and of itself about eating the food some were prohibiting in Rome (Rom. 14:14a) or the meat related to the pagan temples and idols in Corinth (1 Cor. 8:4-6).[3]

3. Because of #2, it appears that Paul felt the freedom to state that in the given issue there was a stronger and weaker position, which implies that discussions could take place among the Christians that may lead to a weaker brother leaving behind his conviction that a particular activity was unethical. So, even in situations in which Christian leaders must be adamant that stronger brothers give up freedoms for weaker brothers, at one and the same time, they can teach weaker brothers with the goal of helping them see that the particular activity is not wrong. This teaching must be done with great care, however. It must be careful to allow God’s Spirit to convince without forcing a person to engage in something against their conscience.

4.  Though #3 seems to follow from #2, nevertheless, the accent in both passages is that as long as an activity is thought wrong to a particular Christian or group of Christians, then the stronger brother must give up his freedom for the sake of the weaker brother’s conscience—as a matter of love and glorifying God (e.g. Rom. 14:7-8; 15:1-2; 1 Cor. 10:23-33). This is true as long as there are no stronger theological issues that would trump the opposition by the weaker brother. For example, in Corinth a potential weaker brother might claim, “I am bothered by Christians marrying since my experience with sexual relations among Corinthians-at-large has been so negative and so filled with sin. I think all true Christians should abstain from all sex, including marriage.” (This, by the way, appears to be the situation behind chapter 7) To this, Paul would not say, “Well, o.k. Corinthians, don’t marry because you don’t want to offend the weaker brother.” No, there is a stronger biblical principle in play—namely the potential of dishonoring God through sexual sin if most Christians are not marrying. Likewise, he would not allow the practice of spiritual sensational gifts (such as ecstatic speech) to trump the preservation of love and the priority of God’s Word (1 Cor. 12-14). In other words, he would not allow a Christian to say, “I am offended by those who put the brakes or restraints upon my use of ecstatic speech or utterances, since they are part of my worship of God.” No, in Paul’s mind, there are stronger issues at play.

5. It appears that stumbling blocks can exist merely by one’s presence at a place associated with an offensive activity (1 Cor. 8:10). Also, a stumbling blocks can exist at the level of engaging in an action when a particular person is present for whom the activity is a problem (1 Cor. 10:25, 28). As an example in the first case, when a person is part of a congregation that largely believes any alcohol consumption is wrong, the wisest approach for a Christian who affirms moderate alcohol consumption is not to go to the town liquor store. Such in and of itself can be a stumbling block, especially if the Christian going to the store is in a position of authority.

As an example in the latter case, if a person is part of a congregation that does not have a corporate position on drinking one way or the other, yet they invite over to their house a brother or sister who believes abstinence is the only ethical position, it would be wrong to drink in front of them or to offer them alcohol when the host knows they have this stance.[4]

6. In both of the key biblical texts (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8-10), it appears that a stumbling block is present when Christians are legitimately concerned that an activity may involve or lead to sin. In each case the most likely concern on the part of the weaker Christian was that those who held on to the freedom would be involved in idolatry. Paul’s contention in both cases was that this would not necessarily arise, but the stronger believer must take into consideration the conscience of the weaker brother who feared the possible sin.

Very different from this would be a group of Christians who were concerned that the surrounding town was offended by non-sinful activities of fellow Christians. If such concern led to the first group of Christians being offended by the actions of the second group, this would not constitute a stumbling block issue. For example, let’s say a church had a number of college-age students who like to go onto the local campus to preach on the sidewalks. A second Christian group believes such preaching is more harmful than helpful—based upon the reactions of their co-workers in town. In such a situation no potential stumbling block is present—at least as defined by Rom. 14 and 1 Cor. 8-10.

7. Based upon experience in the Church, it seems clear that though many potential stumbling block issues can be decided based upon the above principles, there will remain disagreement on a minority of issues among Christians. In other words, there will be some issues that some say are stumbling block issues and some will say there are greater biblical issues at play and cannot be constituted as stumbling block issues.  In such issues all involved must do their best to preserve love among each other to the glory of God, even when they must agree to disagree. In such cases, biblical guidelines for working through differences must be followed (e.g. Mt. 5:23-24; 18:15ff.) and those involved must do their best by the grace of God to give each other the benefit of the doubt (see 1 Cor. 13:7).  The wisest approach may even be for church leaders and/or the congregation to draw up a statement upon the congregation’s position—one which would formulate the key biblical boundaries to be followed and then leave room for freedom of conscience in the details (e.g. Acts 15:1-35).

---

[1] To give parallels from other areas of congregational life, whether or not pastors teach on God’s sovereign grace is not a stumbling block issue. In other words, a pastor should not refrain from such teaching simply because some might not like it or be offended. There are larger issues (doctrinal fidelity) at play than one’s offense. Additionally, it cannot be deemed a stumbling block issue whether or not a person follows biblical guidelines of conflict resolution and whether or not they release resentment against others. The Bible is clear on these issues. Though the biblical steps might be uncomfortable for some Christians, they are absolutely necessary.

Another Pauline example of a disagreement that could not be classified a stumbling block issue was his account of the time he confronted Peter who capitulated to Judaizers from Jerusalem and ceased having table fellowship with Gentiles. Paul confronted his fellow Apostle in the presence of others because what he was doing was not in step with truth that flowed out of the gospel. See Galatians 2:11-14. Though the Judaizers might be offended by Jew/Gentile table fellowship, it could not be classified a stumbling block issue. Clear and greater theological principles were in play.

 

[2] It appears that some in Rome had taken Jewish food laws and extended them to a point of demanding vegetarianism, perhaps b/c so much meat might be considered unclean or connected into idol worship (cf. 1 Cor. 8-10). This is the case even though the Old Testament never demanded vegetarianism (although it was present in Daniel 1).

 

[3] Because Revelation 2:14 mentions eating food sacrificed to idols in a negative light, some Bible readers might ask, “What is going on there? Does this contradict Paul who seems to say that eating such food is not wrong in and of itself unless it causes another to stumble?” Upon closer inspection of Revelation 2:14 the reader will notice that John is not writing that those in Pergamum are eating such food. This eating of such food was engaged in by the Israelites in the wilderness at the instigation of Balaam. If the reader goes back to that incident, he will find out that the Israelites were actually engaging in idol worship (Nu. 25:2). So, in the case of Rev. 2:14, the eating of food sacrificed to idols stands for actual idolatry. The point is that the false teaching present in Pergamum was leading people both to idolatry and sexual sin, as did the false teaching of Balaam with Israel in the wilderness. So, there is no contradiction with what Paul writes.

Most likely the “food sacrificed to idols” in the subsequent context (Rev. 2:20) is meant to carry the same meaning as 2:14, namely there was actual idolatry taking place among the believers of Thyatira whenever they participate in such meals. It was not merely eating the food or being at the place that was under consideration. So, again, there is no contradiction with what Paul writes.

[4] In either case it seems most likely to me that there is a known problem among the group or the individual against the activity. For example, a generation or two ago many Christians opposed going to movies b/c a Christian from anywhere might drive by and see a Christian attending a theater and be offended. That is a misapplication or over-application of this teaching. It would only apply if a person was part of a congregation who wrestled with this issue or if a Christian tried to “drag” along with him to a theater a Christian brother who was bothered by going to such a place.