"Howbeit there is not in all men that knowledge: but some being used until now to the idol, eat as of a thing sacrificed to an idol and their conscience being weak is defiled." (1 Corinthians 8:7) To discover the knowledge to which Paul was referring, we need to consider the context of the verse. In verse 4 he said, "We know that no idol is anything in the world, and that there is no God but one." Paul knew that no idol is anything and that there is no God but one, and so did the mature element in the church at Corinth. However, all the church members did not possess this knowledge-"Howbeit there is not in all men that knowledge."

In their minds, all the church members must have acknowledged the sovereignty and oneness of the true God; yet, past years of association with, and participation in, idol worship tended to prevent their eating for nourishment the meats which had been used in that worship. They "being used until now to the idol, eat as of a thing sacrificed to an idol." It is well to note that so far as the physical act of eating was concerned, their act was not different from that of those who had knowledge. The difference was that one ate to satisfy hunger, while the other was unable to disassociate his eating from worship. He had been "used until now to the idol," that is, accustomed in former life to "eat as of a thing sacrificed to an idol."

The procedure for the strong to follow in this matter is to refrain from exercising a liberty which would contribute to the condemnation of his brother-a brother for whom Christ died. If Christ gave up so much, is it a great thing to ask those "who have knowledge" to give up such a minor thing as instrumental accompaniment during a wedding held in the meetinghouse? Does asking for such a concession brand the one making the request as weak in the faith? If so, then Paul must be so branded, for he demanded that we forego things of this nature in the interest of edification and to prevent the weaker brother from perishing.

The procedure outlined by Paul was not restricted to acting on the basis of knowledge alone, but was further modified by the requirements of love. Certainly, Paul knew that an idol was nothing, but he did not chart his course in the matter by knowledge alone, but rather pointed out that knowledge "puffeth up," but love "buildeth up." Paul had knowledge-he was strong-yet he did not treat the weak with disdain. Could anyone accuse Paul, or rather the Holy Spirit through whom Paul wrote, of failing to distinguish between, on the one hand, eating meat for physical needs and, on the other, eating it "As of a thing sacrificed to an idol"? Certainly not, for he had already acknowledged the distinction and then gone on to plead for consideration of the weaker brother. We know that no material building is the church of the Lord, "howbeit there is not in all men that knowledge."

As long as the condition can exist, "that there is not in all men that knowledge," just that long must the Divine procedure be acknowledged and followed. This condition will continue to prevail as long as denominationalism exists. There will always be those who having "been used until now to the- idol, eat as of a thing sacrificed to an idol." Those who have lately given up their idol--instrumental music--will be unable to make distinctions that more mature Christians may easily see. These in whom there is not that knowledge, like the poor, will always be bound by the law which has been laid down by the Holy Spirit to govern our attitudes and conduct in such matters.

This principle of refraining from exercising a right in the interest of "one for whom Christ died" bars the instrument from the meetinghouse for weddings, entertainment, or anything else.

Certainly we know that the meetinghouse is not the church, but let us not become puffed up in our knowledge and chart our course on the basis of knowledge alone. Rather, let us be built up in love, allowing it to restrain us from exercising rights that will grieve a weaker brother and cause him to perish.

Under the Holy Spirit's guidance, Paul instituted a law forbidding people to exercise their own judgment and to follow their own desires in such matters. Paul was not presumptuous, and he did not sin. Consider these passages:

• "Let no man seek his own, but each his neighbor's good." (1 Corinthians 10:24) Whose good?
• "Now we that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let each one of us please his neighbor for that which is good unto edifying." (Romans 15:1, 2)

Who should we please in such matters? Does Paul's teaching allow each person to please himself? Paul said we are to please our neighbor for that which is good unto edifying. Here, the word please is used to represent the opposite of grieve; see Romans 14:15. The idea is that we are not to grieve but to please.

By knowing the sense in which grieve is used, we can better understand the use of please. I quote from brother Whiteside's Commentary on Romans. "The connection shows clearly that the warning against doing anything whereby a brother is grieved means more than simply a warning against doing anything to hurt his feelings; for the next sentence says, 'Destroy not with thy meat him for whom Christ died,' that is, do not destroy him as a Christian. You do not destroy a Christian by violating his prejudices or notions. 'Is grieved'-- is brought to grief. No one should, by eating meat, bring his brother to grief, that is to destroy him as a brother." Since grieving a brother means destroying him as a brother, then we can see that to please is to save him as a brother. To walk in love is to direct all our efforts to save and avoid anything that would contribute to a brother's condemnation.

Using an instrument in the meetinghouse would not grieve the weaker brother, in the sense of violating his prejudices and notions; in this sense, it would please him. Until now, he had been used to associating the instrument with worship in a meetinghouse. All along, he has said that he liked instrumental music and had been questioning loyal brethren, "Don't you like instrumental music?" No, he would not be grieved in this sense, but he would be grieved in the sense in which Paul used the word. He who has been "used until now" to associating the instrument in the meeting house with worship, would, upon seeing it in the place where "prayer was wont to be made" be emboldened to participate as in worship. When he does, he defiles his conscience. He is brought to grief. We have sinned against Christ when we cause such a thing to happen.

The only safe course to pursue is never to bring an instrument into the meetinghouse for any purpose. How can we know that a weaker brother won't see us, who have knowledge, engaging in that which appears to him to be worship? This is exactly the case to which Paul referred in 1 Corinthians 8:10 "For if a man sees thee who hast knowledge, sitting at meat in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak be emboldened to eat things sacrificed to an idol." The only thing the one here saw was the stronger brother eating meat in a place where it was usually eaten in sacrifice to idols. He would suppose that the stronger brother was "eating as of a thing sacrificed to an idol." The stronger brother would not have a chance to explain that he was not engaging in worship. He may not have known that the weaker brother saw him, and if he had known that a brother saw him, he could not be certain the brother was "weak." Yet, he is required to follow a course of action that takes cognizance of the fact that "there is not in all men that knowledge." One thoughtful brother remarked, "It requires too much explaining to the outsider and weak brother."