Was the letter sent after the conference on circumcision in Acts 15 binding for its recipients, or did it merely constitute strong advice? The letter ends with an exhortation to "abstain from things sacrificed to idols" among other things (Acts 15:29), yet elsewhere the Scriptures show that eating things sacrificed to idols is not inherently wrong (1 Cor 8:4-6).Clearly there is no conflict for the Corinthians, since they did not receive the letter sent in Acts, but what about those from Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia? Would they have been sinning if they had eaten something sacrificed to an idol after receiving this letter?

Sincerely, Letters in the Law

Dear Letters in the Law,

The letter sent to the Gentile churches in Acts chapter 15 is a binding set of laws. All of the things listed: eating meat sacrificed to idols, eating blood, and fornication (Acts 15:29) should be avoided by Christians. The Bible even says that the Holy Spirit commands that it is necessary to avoid these things (Acts 15:28). The only reason that we get confused about the issue is because later on Paul will say that eating meat sacrificed to idols isn’t always wrong (1 Cor 8:4). However, it was wrong as long as there were Jewish Christians worshipping with Gentile Christians.

In the first Corinthian letter, Paul says that when meat is sacrificed to an idol, nothing happens to the meat because idols are fake gods (1 Cor 8:5-6). The meat is not inherently bad. However, if your eating of the meat offends a brother, then it is a sin to eat it (1 Cor 8:13). When the apostles wrote the letter in Acts chapter 15 to the Gentile churches, every one of those congregations would have Jews in their congregation that would be offended by meat sacrificed to idols. Therefore, it was more than just strong advice… it was absolutely vital that they avoid idol-tainted meat. Eating meat that was knowingly sacrificed to an idol was just as sinful as fornication because it would destroy God’s work to unite Jew and Gentile under Christ (Rom 14:20-21).

Luke 24:1-12 is the story about the women finding the empty tomb of Jesus. The Scripture identifies the women as Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James.

Women were the first ones to discover that Jesus had risen.  I was wondering how this speaks to the value of women in God's eyes and within Christianity. Also, even though the women did discover this first, it didn't seem important until Peter came and discovered that Jesus was gone.

Sincerely, Femininely Focused

Dear Femininely Focused,

Women are given great value within the Scriptures – exactly the same value as men. Indeed, it was women that first found the empty tomb (Lk 24:1-2). Entire books are written about faithful women (Book of Ruth & Book of Esther). Several women are listed in Hebrews chapter 11, the ‘hall of faith’ chapter (Heb 11:11, Heb 11:23, Heb 11:31). The fact that the news of Christ’s empty tomb didn’t begin to spread until His apostles began spreading the word of it, doesn’t make the tender act of the women bringing spices to His grave any less meaningful. His apostles’ report of an empty tomb would have carried more weight than anyone else’s.

The Bible is clear that men and women have different roles within the church. Men are to lead the congregation as elders and deacons (1 Tim 3:2, 1 Tim 3:12). Women are to teach in more private settings and by their godly demeanors (Tit 2:3, 1 Tim 2:9-10). Husbands are to lead their families in sacrificial Christ-like love (Eph 5:25), and wives are to bind together their families by their respect for their husbands and love for their children (Tit 2:4, Eph 5:24). Yet, in all these differences, God makes it clear that neither male nor female is greater than the other (1 Cor 11:11-12). They are equals and joint-heirs of salvation in Christ (1 Pet 3:7).

When taking the communion, should you physically "break the bread"?

Sincerely, Not Enough Crumbs

Dear Not Enough Crumbs,

We must break the bread like Jesus did, by sharing it with others who are also taking the Lord’s Supper. The term ‘break the bread’ can mean two things:

1. Physically separating a loaf of bread (Acts 27:35)
2. To have a meal, share food (Acts 2:46)

When we take the Lord’s Supper, we use Christ’s example as our guide.Christ took the bread first and then the juice (Matt 26:26-27) – so we do it in the same order. Jesus used grape juice, so we use grape juice (Matt 26:29). So if Jesus physically broke the bread as part of the Lord’s Supper, we should to. The example we see is that Jesus gave thanks for the bread and then broke the bread to share it with the disciples (Matt 26:26). So when we take the Lord’s Supper, we are to do the same thing… share the bread with the other christians assembled. Without being too dogmatic on the point, the bread gets broken, by default, every time other christians take some from the loaf. The emphasis isn’t on who breaks the bread - but on us all sharing the meal together (1 Cor 10:16-17).

James 5:14 talks about praying for someone who is sick and "anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord."  I frequently hear of people praying for the sick today, but I've never seen the elders of a church anoint a sick person with oil. Why don't we continue this practice today?

Sincerely, Olives On My Mind

Dear Olives On My Mind,

Anointing with oil was a medicinal practice to remove pain and speed up the healing of a sick person. Olive oil was used in the first century for everything from food to alleviating sunburns. We have to understand the statement in the context of the culture in which it was written. A first century christian would have understood James 5:14 as a call to prayer and a call to make sure the medical needs were taken care of for the ill person.

It is very similar to an earlier statement by James concerning faith and works. In Jas 2:14-17, James addresses the problem of a person that offers kind words without doing what they can to help another. An elder that prayed for a sick christian but didn’t use his authority within the church to get the needy person the necessary medical attention would have been neglecting his duties to shepherd the flock (1 Pet 5:2). Today, we don’t use olive oil to meet people’s medical needs, but the principle of doing what we can to care for them still applies.

How do contributions work if I miss a Sunday?  Say I am visiting another congregation, so I am unable to contribute at my home congregation.  Should I contribute at the congregation I am visiting or should I just double up on my contributions the next week at my home congregation?

Sincerely, Collecting My Thoughts

Dear Collecting My Thoughts,

It is left entirely to your discretion.  The command to take up a collection on the first day of the week is a congregational command (1 Cor 16:1).  The congregation has the responsibility to take up the collection each week from its members.  That is their responsibility.

Your responsibility as an individual is to give cheerfully, purposefully, and voluntarily (2 Cor 9:7).  The intent of 1 Cor 16:2 seems to be that the individual would be preparing to give their contribution to their own ‘home’ congregation, but we would hesitate to be too dogmatic on that point.  It isn’t a sin for an individual to ‘double-up’ a contribution the next week after visiting elsewhere, nor is it a sin to contribute to the work of another faithful congregation.  In matters of freedom, pray for wisdom (Jas 1:5) and do what seems best.  There is no wrong answer.