First Corinthians 13

The Love Chapter. This passage is so familiar, I almost hesitate to state the obvious. But it cannot be said too many times. LOVE IS THE MORE EXCELLENT WAY!!!! Legalism, judgment, religious zeal, planning, vision, mission, evangelism, preaching, teaching--all of it is reduced in effectiveness if love is not present. Imagine if Jesus's life had been recorded in terms of bitterness and anger at having to do what God wanted. Instead, the record shows his patience and willingness to sacrifice. All religious effort is reduced to mechanical monotony without love.

How is love defined? By selflessness--concern for others. Religion becomes mean and hateful when it is about my acconmplishment or my eternal reward. Religion becomes useful when it is defined in terms of another's health and eternal reward. Paul reminds them that their petty squabbles over spiritual supremacy in worship (prophecy vs. tongues) reveals their lack of understanding of the true spiritual nature of their calling. Knowledge, whether worldly or heavenly, is of little value if it cannot be known in love.

When someone cares about me, I care about what they have to say.

And how many times do we struggle to emphasize the eternal over the temporal. Paul states that the knowledge of prophecy and spiritual gifts will fade, but the love we show and the selfless acts we live will last forever. That is a sobering thought when I consider all of the books on my bookshelves in my office. Knowledge is good for a time--then other books will be written. Love is good for eternity.

First Corinthians 8

A couple of things catch my attention here. Acquiring knowledge is not as important as loving. Head knowledge is not as valuable or powerful as heart action. Another humbling moment for a guy with a PhD.

So, what do you think of the question, "Is loving God more important than knowing God?" How would you distinguish the two?

Secondly, I am always intrigued by the stronger v. weaker brother thoughts of Paul. It seems like he is arguing that freedom (a theme we see over and over again in 1 Corinthians) is a primary characteristic of the stronger Christian. Thus, those Christians who are afraid or opposed to new things and freedom in Christ, and who are dependent on tradition and religious dogma, are the weaker brother. \

If this is so, then the following logic could apply. Even though I may say that is takes strength to be a tee-totaler and not drink alcohol at all, I am the weaker brother if I am offended because those who are free to drink (without getting drunk) have a beer or margarita with dinner.

Or is it more accurate to say this: If I am a recovering alcoholic, and a well-meaning Christian has a beer in front of me, causing me to stumble (drink again) because I am the weaker brother, then he has misused his freedom.

Of course, I think Paul's other important point is this: Freedom is of value only if it points others to Christ. We are free to follow him. If we exercise any other type of freedom, then we fail in our Christian calling. Paul is right on target when he says, "If I cause my brother to sin," then I will not exercise my freedom.