Understanding Jesus better through community with others
Joshua at “In Search of the City” has published a great post called “How my journey out of institutional Christianity first began.” It’s a personal piece filled with stories and insights from his own life, but it may be helpful to others who are just beginning (or even wondering about), in the middle of, or beyond this same kind of journey.
While I can relate to many of Joshua’s experiences, one in particular caught my attention. Why? Because he talks about learning about Jesus Christ through community with others. In the same way, as I began to understand “the church” as my brothers and sisters in Christ and not a building or system or organization, I also began to know Jesus more.
At one point, Joshua writes:
[M]y life became closely knit with a small group of brothers and sisters from all parts of the country and all different walks of life. For the better part of three years we ate together, worked together, played together, and studied together. And in the midst of it all, we pursued the Lord. We fellowshipped and we shared the mutual discoveries we each were making along the way. It was in this context that I began to catch a glimpse of the Lord Jesus Christ that was bigger and better than any small view I’d ever had of Him before. In addition, I began to see the church. Not an “it,” but a she. I saw her passionate, loving, drawn from His side. Not a place, but a people! Relentless in their pursuit of Him.
There is something special about sharing life with one another as we share our common life with Christ. As Joshua recounts, he later recognized this same kind of fellowship in the pages of the New Testament – in passages that often seemed foreign to him before.
Paul wrote in Ephesians that believers are God’s treasure and inheritance. I think if we understood how truly valuable we are to God, we would begin to understand how important and valuable we are to one another. In community with one another in Christ we grow and build one another up in maturity and love… knowing Jesus more.
The Body Metaphor in Paul: Familiar and yet unique
Like I’ve mentioned in my last few posts, I’ve been re-reading one of my favorite academic books on the church: Paul’s Idea of Community by Robert Banks (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004). So far, I’ve discussed Banks’ examination of Paul’s idea of salvation as freedom (“For Paul, freedom means independence, dependence, and interdependence“), Paul’s use the term ekklesia to refer to groups of believers who actually gather together (“The ekklesia that actually gathers in a location“), and Paul’s use of the term ekklesia to refer to our heavenly reality of being raised and seated together with God in Christ (“The ekklesia as a heavenly reality“). (By the way, this will be my last post on this book for now. Although, this topic has inspired me to study the “body” metaphor in Paul’s writings. That study will probably result in a series of blog posts, perhaps to be published next week.)
In the next couple of chapters, Banks looks at Paul’s use of family language and his use of the “body” metaphor. For each of those, he found some vague parallels in other religions and philosophical societies. However, in each case, Paul’s use of the language and metaphors was different from what he found in other writings and communities.
For example, consider this summary about Paul’s use of the “body” metaphor in relation to other religions and societies:
How original is Paul’s use of the “body” metaphor? It has no exact parallels in Jewish literature. Although the notion of “corporate personality” is present in the Hebrew Bible, it was the Greek translation of the OT that introduced the term “body” into Jewish thought for the first time (e.g., Lev 14:9; Prov 11:17). Yet neither here nor in the literature of the intertestimental period was the term used in any metaphorical way…
Gnostic thought recognizes the idea of the saved community as the body of the heavenly redeemer but only in writings that are later than the NT. In any case, Paul’s initial use of the metaphor, in which the community is represented by the whole body and the emphasis is upon the interdependence of its members, has no parallel in Gnostic sources.
In Stoic literature prior to the NT, we do find the cosmos (including humanity) depicted as the body of the divine world-soul and society as a body in which each member has a different part to play. But Paul refuses to portray the universe as Christ’s body and rejects any idea of a member’s wider society having priority over the Christian community. Individual and community are equally objects of his concern; neither is given priority over the other…
While none of these usages yields an exact parallel to [Paul’s] ideas, they do indicate the extent to which the metaphor was “in the air” in Hellenistic circles. While the term “body” did not originate with him, Paul was apparently the first to apply it to a community within the larger community of society and to the personal responsibilities of people for one another rather than their civic duties. We see again how a quite “secular” term is used by Paul to illuminate what Christian community is all about. (pp 65-66)
There is a great lesson for us in Banks’ comments. As we read ancient documents (and modern writings for that matter), we often find similar terms, phrases, metaphors, and illustrations. But, the fact that a person or community uses similar language does not mean that it is used in the same way. We must look at each usage in context to determine what the author intends to communicate.
While this is true in comparing Paul’s writings (and other NT writings) to nonChristian writings, we also must compare different usages of terms and phrases within Paul’s writings. Why? Because he could use the same terms, phrases, and especially the same metaphors for different reasons.
(By the way, this last statement is the reason that I’m planning to study Paul’s use of the “body” metaphor in each of his usages.)
Learning how to love your neighbors in a new culture
My friends Paul and Laurel moved to the Congo a few months ago. If you’ve heard anything about the Congo in the news lately, they’re in the area of that country that has experienced an ebola outbreak recently.
Recently, they wrote about learning how to love their neighbors in that new culture. They published their thoughts on their blog in a post called “Building relationships in a new culture: Freely go and visit.”
Responding to something they read in a book, they write:
He said that for Westerners, we usually seek to build relationships by inviting people over for a set date and time. We do this a few times and feel like we’re getting to know someone. However, he explains, that in an African culture, that would be out of place for us to do as the visitor. Good to know! Instead, he says it is totally appropriate to drop in, unannounced at someone’s house to spend an undetermined amount of time with a person and their family. If it’s around a mealtime then you would just share in that meal with them. If they had other plans then they would just cancel them! This is how the author encourages Westerners to pursue relationship building in an African cultural context. It’s hard to imagine from my Western point of view because we would usually feel so put out if someone stopped by, especially at a mealtime!
They have made it a personal goal to go against their own inclinations and tendencies and to drop in on their neighbors occasionally.
Now, I realize that most of my readers do not live in Africa. But, do you know your neighbors well enough to know how to show God’s love to them? Have you ever thought that your tendencies may seem rude to your neighbors? And, what they do that seems rude to you may not seem rude to them?
Have you ever gone against your own tendencies or habits in order to show someone that you cared about them?
The ekklesia as a heavenly reality
In my previous post (“The ekklesia that actually gathers in a location“), I explained that I’ve been re-reading one of my favorite academic books on the church: Paul’s Idea of Community by Robert Banks (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004). Banks says that in Paul’s earlier letters (1-2 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1-2 Corinthians, and Romans), he only uses the term ekklesia to refer to groups of believers that actually gather together at some point.
However, when he turns to the letters to the Colossians and Ephesians, Banks finds an extension to Paul’s use of the term ekklesia. While he continues to use the term to refer to believers who actually gather together, he also uses the term to refer to “a heavenly reality.”
Banks says this concept is not new and that it can in fact be found in the earlier letters. However, it is not until the letters to the Colossians and Ephesians that Paul uses the term ekklesia to refer to this “heavenly reality.” But, Banks says it would be incorrect to equate this “heavenly reality” with the concepts of a “universal church” or an “invisible church.”
So in Colossians we are introduced to the idea of a nonlocal church of whom Christ is the head (Col 1:18,24). This notion is generally misinterpreted as a reference to the “universal church” that is scattered throughout the world. It is not an earthly phenomenon that is being talked about here, but a supernatural one. The whole passage in which the expression [ekklesia] occurs focuses on the victorious Christ and his kingdom of light that believers have now entered (1:9-2:7)…
If any hesitation remains about the possibility of understanding ekklesia as a heavenly assembly in Colossians, it is dispelled by the language used in Ephesians. There it is explicitly said that God “made us alive together with Christ… and raised us up with him, and made us sit with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Eph 2:5-6 RSV)… Here again we see church taking place in heaven and Christians participating in it, even as they go about the ordinary tasks of life. Metaphorically speaking they are gathered around Christ, that is, they are enjoying fellowship with him. (pp 40-41)
So, according to Banks, Paul now has used the term ekklesia to refer to two different gatherings: 1) actual physical gatherings at certain times and certain places on earth and 2) heavenly gatherings in which all of God’s children are already raised and seated with God in Christ. The physical ekklesia, then, is a representation of the heavenly reality. And the fact that all believers were already gathered as a heavenly reality (not any kind of organization or structure) is the basis of expanding fellowship and relationships on earth:
These scattered Christian groups [churches] expressed their unity not by fashioning a corporate organization through which they could be federated with one another, but rather in a range of organized personal contacts between people who regarded themselves as members of the same Christian family.
So, Paul’s use of ekklesia as a “heavenly reality” should not be misunderstood as some type of umbrella organization. It is similar to the understanding that we are all part of the real family of God in Christ even though we may never meet each other in this physical reality on earth.
So, what do you think of Banks’ description of Paul’s reference to the ekklesia as a “heavenly reality.”?
But if I can’t send my check, how would I show that I care about people?
Chuck at “Being Filled” asks a very interesting question in his post “What if Ministries Stopped Asking for Money?” Now, in his post, Chuck says that he’s not attempting to condemn the practice; he’s asking a question. (By the way, Chuck works for an organization that asks for money… and I do also.)
Instead of condemning the practice of asking for money, Chuck wonders if the groups are missing something by asking for money.
He says:
Jesus said not to worry about provisions. He said simply seek God’s kingdom, and all these things will be added.
Wouldn’t that apply to bigger ministries as well?
If a ministry truly is seeking God’s kingdom and doing his will, would he not provide for its financial needs?
And if a ministry is not seeking God’s kingdom or not doing his will, would it not be better for it to run out of funds?
It’s definitely true that we can keep something running on our own strength and abilities and fundraising acumen… but that’s not necessarily a good thing.
But, there’s another side of this question. What about the people who are sending in the money… faithfully writing their checks or filling out the online credit card forms.
If these organizations stopped soliciting money…. or didn’t exist… how would these people show others that they cared? How would they help people in need? How would they demonstrate the love of Christ? How would people even know about these needs?
The ekklesia that actually gathers in a location
Yesterday, I mentioned that I’ve been re-reading one of my favorite academic books on the church: Paul’s Idea of Community by Robert Banks (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004). As you can imagine, Banks includes an extended discussion of Paul’s use of the Greek term ekklesia (usually translated “church” in English translations). In fact, two chapters focus on how Paul uses that term: “Church As Household Gathering” and “Church as Heavenly Reality.”
In the first chapter (“Church As Household Gathering”), he examines how Paul uses the term ekklesia in his earlier (chronologically) letters: 1-2 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1-2 Corinthians, and Romans. In these letters, Banks concludes that Paul only uses the term ekklesia to refer to groups of believers who actually gather together in a locality.
What is Paul’s early usage of the term ekklesia, church? He first uses the term in his greeting to the Christians in Thessalonica (1 Thess 1:1). Here he is using it in the same way as in Greek and Jewish circles and yet is consciously distinguishing the “assembly” to which he is writing from others in the city. It is clear from the closing remarks of the letter that Paul has in mind either an actual gathering of the Thessalonian Christians or the Thessalonian Christians as a regularly gathering community…
Elsewhere in these letters [1-2 Thessalonians] we have reference to other Christian gatherings only in the plural, viz., to “the churches of God” generally and to “the churches of God” in Judea specifically (2 Thess 1:4; 1 Thess 2:14). This suggests that the term is applied only to an actual gathering of people or to the group that gathers as a regularly constituted meeting and not, as today’s usage, to a number of local assemblies conceived as part of a larger unit. (pp 29-30)
Banks offers other evidence, such as Paul’s reference to the plural “churches in Galatia,” “churches of Asia,” and “the churches of Macedonia.” (Gal 1:2, 1 Cor 16:1, 1 Cor 16:19, 2 Cor 8:1) Similarly, he discusses Paul’s reference to “the whole church” in Corinth – indicating that the believers in Corinth did all gather together at some point, thus they could be referred to as “the church in Corinth,” and also indicating that believers in Corinth gathered together in smaller groups which would also be referred to as “church” (otherwise the term “whole” would be unnecessary).
On the other hand, since Paul does not refer to “the church in Rome,” but instead only refers to individual gatherings in Romans 16, then this indicates that the believers in Rome did not all gather together at one time.
Concerning the various groups in Rome, Banks writes:
This probability is confirmed by Paul’s comments in Romans 16 about various Christian groups in the capital. There is no suggestion that Christians ever met as a whole in one place [in Rome]. (Indeed, as much as a century later, Justin remarks that this is still the case!) Presumably this is due to the size of the city. (pg 32)
So, if I understand what Banks is saying, Paul could refer to “the church in Thessalonica,” “the church in Corinth,” etc. because the believers in those cities actually gathered together at some point. In the same way, he could refer to “the church that meets in [Priscilla and Aquila’s] house” (in Rome – Romans 16:5) because those believers actually gathered together at some point.
However, Paul would not have referred to the believers in Rome or Galatia or Judea as “the church” in those locations because the believers in those locations did not all gather together at some point.
In my post tomorrow, I’m going to introduce another way that Paul used the term ekklesia in his later letters (according to Banks).
But, for now, what do you think of Banks suggestion that Paul would only use the term ekklesia when referring to believers who actually gather together? (Remember, Banks is only examining Paul’s use of that term in 1-2 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1-2 Corinthians, and Romans at this point.)
Blog with One Another: A Chain Blog Update
At the beginning of last week, I started a “chain blog” on the topic of “one another.” A chain blog is an event – or process actually – in which several bloggers write about the same topic, one after that other. In this case, we’re writing about the topic of “one another” and various aspects of that topic.
So far, seven eight nine A BUNCH OF bloggers have taken part in the chain blog writing 8 9 10 A BUNCH OF posts (since Greg’s was in 2 parts). I think – if I remember correctly – this is the fastest moving chain blog so far.
Here are the posts in the chain blog so far (with a little tease):
1. “Chain Blog: One Another” by Alan
What does this mean for those of us who are following Jesus Christ? Well, it helps us to understanding the importance of our mutual relationships with one another in Jesus Christ when we read statements in Scripture like “love one another,” “teach one another,” “be kind to one another,” “edify one another,” “forgive one another,” “admonish one another,” etc.
2. “Linking One Another” by Swanny
“Us”conditional love must be avoided at all costs because it sends the message to people that they have no value (or are not right with God) unless they are complying with the demands, the rules, or the “what we believe” statements the local church rulers pulled out of their behinds.
3. “What Does It Mean to Love One Another? by Chuck
For almost every action we take, we have a choice. We can walk by the flesh, or we can walk by the Spirit. If we walk by the flesh, we will act selfishly—seeking our own good. If we walk by the Spirit, we will act in love—seeking the good of others.
4. “The treasure of “One Another” by Jim
To live “in” Christ is to be free from our natural way of dividing, or establishing borders. This indeed makes us vulnerable, yet at the same time secure. We are vulnerable to those that choose to take advantage of our freedom, and lack of borders. Yet our defense is not our defense, but of, and “in” Christ.
5. “This is how the world shall recognise you…” by Kathleen
The world we live in is desperate for true community. Social media is allowing people to be more connected than ever before – but they still need something more. The world needs to see God’s people loving one another – deeply connected, living life together, engaging in the messiness of each other’s lives.
6. “Accepting one another in love by Chris
If I demonstrate love and others copy my example, great benefit and joy and peace will result! If I demonstrate judgement and others copy my example, great misery and shame and angst will result. Why do we find it so hard to go first in love? And why do we find it so easy to go first in judgement?
7. “One Another-ing: A meta-narrative for the church” – Part One and Part Two by Greg
Our one another-ing on earth are really mirror reflections of God’s one another-ing toward us from heaven and this short journey in time we have with one another is the first draft in the unedited script of life together forever.
8. “Individualism and ‘one another’” by Pieter
In living out the “one another” directives of the Lord we need to focus on “putting others before yourselves in honour” in the (Christian) community. The most effective way to do that is to have a servant attitude.
9. “All Alone with One Another” by Jeremy
I always find it interesting when pastors and teachers tell us that we can fulfill the “one anothers” in Scripture by joining a church, faithfully attending on Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night, and by getting involved in a church ministry. In my experience–and I don’t think I am “alone” in this–such activities do little to quell the sense of being all alone with one another in church. The solution to feeling alone in church is not to attend more church services and Bible studies.
10. “When it’s OK for Christians to compete” by Joshua
It’s hard for me to imagine God as being competitive. Nor do I find my own competitive urges to be very much in line with the call to love and serve other people. Quite to the contrary, competition lends itself more toward pride and ambition than it does humility and sacrifice. Yet there is one clear instance in scripture where disciples of Christ are encouraged to be competitive.
11. “Jesus Christ, the Corner Stone for One Another” by Peter
This costly, chief Corner Stone is the basis on which, we relate to one another. This Corner Stone unites us. The old creation is full of every division imaginable. But, there is no division in the new creation. In Christ, we are altogether together One.
12. “Be Superficial with One Another” by Jon
Maybe it is best that we all just act superficially with one another. We can smile and be friendly and make small talk about sports, weather, or recent shared experiences. But it is probably best to stick to safe topics.
13. “The Unmentionable One Anothers” by Alan
Love one another. Be kind to one another. Forgive one another. We love these nice “one anothers,” but there are other “one another” instructions that we don’t like to talk about.
14. “Loving More Fully and Widely” by Chris
We’re going to see how much we can draw from a single occurrence of the phrase ‘one another’. I think Romans 13:8 is the particular example I should take.
15. “The One Another Weapon” by Dan
See, the biggest thing to remember is that these passages should not be interpreted through the perspective of how I should act toward others, but how others should act toward me. When you shift your focus from others to yourself you can really start tapping into the power of the “one another” passages!
16. “Corporate One-Anothering” (Part 1 and Part 2) by David
We all know that the “one another” verses in the New Testament are written to individuals and are to be put into practice among the members of the Body of Christ as the fabric of their life together in Christ. Something we also see modeled in the New Testament, however, is various churches or groups of believers putting some of these same “one another” exhortations into practice on a corporate level.
17. “The Last Revival” by Tobie
And so a long and intimate conversation began between the two fingers. They were amazed at how similar they were. They could relate with one another’s frustrations, hurts and dreams. They found it astonishing that they both preferred to touch rather than be touched, and they had many other traits in common. They soon became best friends, and began spending almost all of their free time together, speaking about the things that fingers most like to speak about.
18. “Love: A one another comic” by Dan
The modern church method of loving one another?
19. “I Can Only Love You If…” by Rob
Let’s face it, whenever we are not regarding each and everyone with their unique background, personality and gifting, whether in the body of Christ or not, MORE highly than ourselves, then we are in the FLESH and SIN.
20. “It Was Lost in Translation” by Nelson
This scripture tells us that teaching and admonishing are two way exercises. I don’t know for sure, but it seems to me that ‘teaching and admonishing’ is one thing with two parts. It also seems to me that it takes place as a natural part of being in the same body.
So, who will write the eighth ninth tenth NEXT link post in the chain blog? If you want to take part, jump over to the last post in the chain and leave a comment that you’ll write the next post.
—————————————————
Chain blog rules:
1) If you would like to write the next blog post (link) in this chain, leave a comment stating that you would like to do so. If someone else has already requested to write the next link, then please wait for that blog post and leave a comment there requesting to write the following link.
2) Feel free to leave comments here and discuss items in this blog post without taking part in the actual “chain.” Your comments and discussion are very important in this chain blog (both this post and the other link posts in the chain).
3) When you write a link in this chain, please reply in the comments of the previous post to let everyone know that your link is ready. Also, please try to keep an updated list of links in the chain at the bottom of your post, and please include these rules at the bottom of your post.
For Paul, freedom means independence, dependence, and interdependence
Lately, I’ve been re-reading one of my favorite academic books on the church: Paul’s Idea of Community by Robert Banks (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004). Like almost any book, there are both positive and negatives aspects – strengths and weaknesses. But, this book has a special place in my own heart.
Why is this a special book for me? This is one of the first books that I read in which I was encouraged that my understanding of the church could be presented in both popular and academic formats. There have been several other books since then, but this was one of the first.
Chapter names like these would persuade most of my blog readers that I would like this book (and they would be right): “Church as Household Gathering,” “The Community as a Loving Family,” “The Community as a Functional Body,” “Physical Expressions of Fellowship,” “Gifts and Ministry,” “Charisma and Order,” and “Unity in Diversity among the Members.”
But, this time, as I read through the book again, I was intrigued by Banks’ description of salvation as freedom (in Paul’s writings). I especially enjoyed this summary:
To summarize, freedom for Paul consists of three main components:
Independence
- from certain things, e.g., sin, the Law, death, and alien powers
- for certain things, e.g., righteousness, conformity to Jesus, suffering
- resulting in a personal and life-giving experience of liberty.
Dependence
- upon Christ, who terminated humanity’s enslavement through his death and resurrection
- upon the Spirit, who communicates Christ’s life and purpose as a received divine gift rather than innate possibility.
Interdependence
- with others, since liberty leads to service and can only be practically defined in relation to their needs
- with the world, since the universe itself will experience the liberty of transformation along with those who are Christ’s
- giving liberty a social and cosmic, as well as a personal and theocentric, dimension.
(page 25)
Our relationship with one another as the family of God (the church) is definitely based on the person and character of God himself. In the same way, however, our relationship with one another is also based on the salvation (and resulting freedom) that we have in God through Jesus Christ enacted by the Holy Spirit. Thus our salvation and our freedom are personal, but not only personal; it is also mutual and communal, in the sense that our connection with God is also interconnection with one another.
When we are set free from (independent of) our sin, we also become dependent on Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and interdependent with one another.
Most of us (and I included myself in this) focus on one aspect of salvation (freedom, as Banks describes it above). We focus on being set free from sin. Or we focus on our dependence on God. Or we focus on our interdependence with one another. But, a more complete understanding of salvation (freedom) would include all three aspects of independence, dependence, and interdependence as listed above.
Which of the three aspects of freedom/salvation listed above (independence, dependence, interdependence) do you think you primarily focus on? Do you see any benefit in including all three in our understanding of salvation/freedom?
Examining our comforts and traditions among the church
My friend Eric at “A Pilgrim’s Progress” has been blogging about the connections between comforts and traditions among the church and what we consider to be “right.” For example, check out his posts called “Living in the Tradition Belt” and “What We’re Born Into Is What Seems Normal.”
Eric is working through an issue that is extremely important and, at the same time, often extremely difficult to recognize from the inside. What issue is that? Whatever we’re used to is what we think is right, and anything different from what we’re used to automatically seems wrong.
He concludes his last post with this:
Questioning will not lead to the same conclusions for all of us. However, we will at least be seeking the truth. It is a dangerous thing to simply accept what we were born into. Better to seek the truth and apply it.
That’s so true. If we “grew up” gathering with other believers in a special building, then we will think that is both normal and right. If we “grew up” gathering with other believers in a home, then we will think that is both normal and right. And, in each situation, we will probably think the other is “wrong,” or at least look askance at anyone not doing it our way.
Of course, this applies to other practices besides choosing where to meet. And, it applies to those who may not have “grown up” in a particular situation but who have spent a considerable amount of time in that situation.
When we become comfortable or familiar with a certain practice, we typically assume that practice is right and other practices are wrong.
What are some ways that we can move away from these tendencies?
Is a theological disagreement a stumbling block?
In 1 Corinthians 8 and Romans 14, Paul asks his readers to care more about their brothers and sisters in Christ than in claiming their own freedoms in Christ. In those passages, Paul was talking about theological disagreements. By claiming their rights in these areas of theological disagreement, they could make themselves into stumbling blocks for their brothers and sisters in Christ.
But, does that mean that any theological disagreement is a stumbling block? No.
Now, don’t misunderstand me. Any theological disagreement (any disagreement actually – even a disagreement that we might think is minor or trivial) MIGHT be a cause of stumbling. But, disagreements are not causes of stumbling in and of themselves.
It’s entirely possible – and it happens all the time – that two Christians can disagree without one causing the other to stumble. It’s possible – and it happens all the time – that one follower of Jesus can offend another without either one causing the other to stumble.
When Paul writes about one person causing another to stumble in 1 Corinthians 8 and Romans 14, he’s talking about something particular. Look at these passages from those chapters:
For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. (Romans 14:15-16 ESV)
Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin. (Romans 14:20-23 ESV)
However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. (1 Corinthians 8:7 ESV)
But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. (1 Corinthians 8:9-11 ESV)
In each case above, disagreement is not the problem. Offense is not the problem. The problem is that the actions of one Christian is causing (or encouraging) another Christian to do something that he or she considers to be sin. We become a stumbling block when living out our freedom in Christ gives others justification to disobey Christ (in their own understanding).
Obviously, these are serious issues. We do not want to encourage our brothers and sisters to do anything that they would consider to be disobedience or sin. At the same time, we should recognize that all disagreements are not stumbling blocks.
Instead, we have to know our brothers and sisters in Christ and know what would be a real encouragement for them and what would be a discouragement to them.