CHORIZO IN THE BIBLE

I became acquainted with chorizo, a type of sausage that originated in Spain and is now found in the whole Hispanic world, through its appearance at our local Texas market which stocks many Mexican food ingredients. “Mexican chorizo is a fresh type of chorizo that needs to be cooked. It’s traditionally made with finely ground pork, although many other types of meats, like offal and plant-based alternatives, are also used these days. Mexican chorizo features a bit of paprika, but most of the color and flavor come from local chiles, like pasilla. Mexican chorizo also features oregano, vinegar and other spices. Unlike other types of chorizo, Mexican chorizo is often cooked without the casing and finely crumbled.” (The Food Network)

I attempted to cook a new dish using this sausage but it came out mainly inedible, partly due to the “bold” taste of chorizo, which I found to be rather overpowering. I mentioned this to a friend of Mexican heritage and her comment was, “It is an acquired taste.”

So imagine my surprise when I happened to run across “chorizo” by accident while looking at Greek words listed in an analytical concordance to the Bible. I wondered if this was just a coincidence, or whether there was some actual connection. However, several internet sources note that linguists believe that the word chorizo comes from the late Latin word salsicia for “salted” via the Portuguese word sourico. That sounds rather unlikely to me, but I will bow to the linguists on this matter.

That totally irrelevant introduction did have the effect of making me look into the meaning of chorizo in Greek and study all the occurrences of the word in the NT. Basically, it is a verb which simply means “to depart or separate from.” As expected, some of the usages in the Bible have no particular theological meaning attached to them. But if one excludes those from consideration, there are a surprising number of controversial issues brought up by scriptures containing this word or its derivatives.

Matthew 19:6; I Corinthians 7:10-11

The Matthew verse is paralleled in Mark 10:9 and it states regarding marriage: “Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” This key word appears again several times in I Corinthians 7, a chapter which deals, not only with the subject of divorce, but also with the idea of remarriage for the divorced parties. The key passage is I Cor. 7:10-11, which reads, “To the married I give this command – not I but the Lord – that the wife should not separate from her husband, but if she does separate, let her remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband, and that the husband should not divorce his wife.”

Even among evangelical scholars, there is a division regarding today's application of these teachings, as evidence by the two opposing opinions below:

“If two Christians who have separated find they cannot happily live a single life, the only course properly open to them is to be reconciled. Remarriage is excluded while the other spouse is alive (cf. Rom. 7:3).” (Hillyer)

“To those who would preclude the possibility of remarriage on the grounds that marriage is indissoluble the question must be put: By what right do you, who enjoy the security and warmth of a happy marriage, deny the possibility to others who find that their former marriage has broken down irretrievably and that there is nothing that they can now do to restore it? To those who would seek remarriage the question must be put: Do you believe in your hearts that in your new marriage you can love God, each other and those around you more fully than if you were to remain as you are?” (C. Brown)

Luke 9:33

At the Mount of Transfiguration, Peter talks to Jesus just as Moses and Elijah are departing (dichorizo) and suggests that they build tents for Him and the other two. We can forgive Peter for blurting out the first thing that comes to mind, but it appears that his motive was a vain attempt to prolong the spiritual high of the minute rather than descend the mountain and have to face reality again. This is a temptation for us Christians today who may receive a concentrated dose of spirituality on Sunday but then have a great deal of trouble maintaining that “high” the rest of the week as we resume our mundane existence.

Acts 15:39

A derivative of chorizo, apochorizo (“separate off”), is used in this verse to describe the rift that occurred between Paul and Barnabas regarding whether John Mark should accompany them on their next missionary journey. I am sure that some readers side with Paul on this issue while others feel that Barnabas was in the right. But from God's point of view, the end result was that two separate missionary efforts were carried out instead of just one. And F.F. Bruce shows great insight in bringing out another valuable point: “Mark's later development proved that Barnabas had right on his side, but probably Mark would not have developed thus in Paul's company.”

One can also see here an example of an entirely different type of divorce which eventually led to a complete reconciliation between Mark and Paul.

Romans 8:35-39

Then we come to this famous and almost poetic pronouncement of Paul regarding the impossibility of anything or anyone coming between the believer and God in order to separate them from one another. M.J. Harris says, “So convinced was Paul of the constancy of divine love that he could actually list – and then dismiss as impotent – all potential obstacles to the continued flow of God's love in Christ...Neither adverse circumstances (vv. 35-36) nor created form or phase of being (vv. 38-39) could sever that love.”

There is only one question remaining, and that is one which has caused theological divisions between Christians. It seems abundantly clear from this passage that (a) God will never turn away from the believer and (b) there is no third party which can come between us to sever that connection. However, there is still disagreement as to whether Romans 35-39 says anything at all regarding the possibility of a believer becoming apostate and totally denying the faith.

One school of thought totally denies that possibility while an equally devout group of Christians feels that passages in Hebrews, for example, clearly teach that apostasy is possible. And, of course, there is the mediating position which states that in God's eyes such apostates were never truly saved to begin with.

Hebrews 7:26

The NRSV renders this verse: “For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, blameless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.” There are two ways of taking the “separate” phrase, as explained by Harris: “If the phrase 'separated from sinful men' in Heb. 7:26 is construed with what precedes ('holy, blameless, unstained'), it refers to Christ's sinlessness. If it is taken with what follows ('exalted above the heavens'), it refers to his withdrawal from the world of evil. Perhaps the author intends us to understand Christ's separation as both moral and spatial.”

Ellingworth appears to agree with Harris in that he feels that both the physical separation from a sinful world and Christ's sinlessness are in view here: “The description which follows is of the exalted Christ, yet there is no contradiction with his sinless life on earth.”

Buchanan is a little vague regarding his own stand on this issue, but he appears to be leaning toward the first viewpoint when he says, “For a priest this would describe the moral condition necessary for atonement.”

Stibbs represents one commentator who takes the second interpretation, when he says, “As regards His sphere of operation, He is lifted out from among sinful men by His removal to heaven, and there He is exalted to a position of the highest dignity, at the right hand of God.”

Revelation 6:14

The final occurrence of the root chorizo is found in this passage describing the heavens vanishing (apochorizo) like a scroll being rolled up. Since practically every verse in Revelation can bring out a variety of meanings depending on one's eschatological perspective, you will not be surprised to run into the same thing here. One thing seems sure, however, and that is the fact that John is alluding to the same selection of passages Jesus cites in Mark 13:24-25, namely Isaiah 13:10; 34:4; Ezekiel 32:7-8; Joel 2:10,31; 3:15. But then, commentators are divided as to what particular event these OT passages are predicting. Thus, we encounter the following diverse statements that connect this passage with either the Last Judgment, the Battle of Armaggedon, or the Tribulation:

    “There is a reference to the final judgment in chapter 6:15-17.” (Hoekema)

    “The tribulation concerns Israel and the Gentiles, not the church, and the church is promised deliverance from the time of tribulation.” (Walvoord)

    “In vivid and forceful language John is describing the complete break-up of the cosmic system. Yet he can scarcely mean this to be taken literally, for if so men would not be in a position to hide themselves, as in the next verse...It is the day of reckoning for all evildoers.” (Morris)

    “The falling of stars upon the earth could mean but one thing to the ancient – the end had come...we need not expect that these cataclysmic event will take place in a completely literal sense, although whatever they depict is sufficient to drive men in terror to the mountains where they plead for death rather than face the wrath of the Lamb.” (Mounce)

    “In Rev. 6:12-15 seven phenomena are listed...The number seven indicates completeness. Therefore the author's meaning is that no enemy of God, no matter what his position in society will escape the terrors...That the wrath of the Lord and the Lamb will be unendurable is typical of predictions about the great and terrible day of Yahweh.” (Ford)

    “The time has now come for the fighting of that final war of the age, the name of which has become a byword among men since John first wrote it down – Armageddon!...John tells us how these armies are deployed...They are drawn there [Armageddon] for various reasons – to stamp out by united action the last living Jew on earth and the last known believer in God...” (Phillips)