|
 
August 15, 2004, Vol.3, No.16. How to Tell What the Lord Requires Keith Sharp Introduction The New Testament is a binding pattern of authority (2 Timothy 1:13). Yet, those who deny this fact are quick to point out that Christians generally do not deem it necessary to follow many New Testament examples. For example, every time the Scriptures record where the Lord's supper was observed, it was in an upper room (cf. Luke 22:7-20; Acts 20:7-8). Yet virtually no one believes it is necessary to meet in an upper room for the purpose of observing the Lord’s Supper. But the same possible confusion we face relative to the authority of approved examples applies to declarations and implications. The apostle Paul commanded Timothy to bring his cloak, books and parchments (2 Timothy 4:13). Must we obey this apostolic command? It is necessarily implied that the apostle Peter was a married man (Matthew 8:14). Must a preacher of the gospel be married (as some brethren seem to think)? It will not do to simply say, We’ve always recognized these passages are not binding, for that is simply following human tradition (Matthew 15:1-9). Nor will it do to throw the baby out with the bath water and simply deny we must follow the New Testament as a binding pattern, for the Scriptures plainly teach we must follow apostolic doctrine and not deviate from it (2 John 9). We must find inspired teaching that will lead us to determine accurately what in a passage is binding and what is not. This leads us to the question this lesson will answer. How can we tell what details of a passage are authoritatively binding and must be followed and which are not? The General Approach The Scriptures demand that we follow declarations, approved examples, and implications (Philippians 4:9). Thus, our approach must be that all New Testament declarations (commands and statements), examples, and implications are binding unless we can prove otherwise. When in doubt, follow the inspired information as authoritative. General Rules There are important, universally recognized rules of Bible study, rules which actually apply to the understanding of all language and which we use to determine the meaning of a passage, which we must also employ to determine what in a passage is authoritatively binding. These rules can be posed in the form of questions the answers to which determine both the meaning and authority of specific details.
We should ask, To whom is the passage addressed? 1 Corinthians 14:27 is a rule for those who exercised the miraculous gift of tongue speaking in the public worship assembly, and, since miraculous spiritual gifts have ceased (1 Corinthians 13:8-13), the specific injunction does not apply today. We should inquire, What is the subject? 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 is often misapplied by brethren to teach we should not harm our physical bodies, whereas the context (verses 5-15) indicates the apostle is forbidding harming the church by following human wisdom. We should ask, Is the language literal or figurative? Brethren who bind the use of just one drinking vessel for the Lord’s Supper should realize we cannot literally divide a drinking vessel (Luke 22:17) and that Jesus, by metonymy, was referring to the contents, the fruit of the vine, not the container. We should also ask, Why is this said (or done, or implied)? In John 13:1-15 Jesus washed His disciples feet and then taught, “I have given you an example that you should do as I have done to you” (verse 15). He was not teaching them a ritual to employ in the worship assembly. He was teaching them to humbly serve each other, and this principle of humble service to one another is the authoritatively binding principle. Three Kinds of Information So
far as authority is concerned there are three kinds of material in New
Testament passages. There is information we must not follow. It is negative, teaching us things it would be sinful to do. The Bible records both false teaching (e.g., 2 Timothy 2:17-18) and sin (e.g., 3 John verse 9-11), and we must not follow either. The Jewish council commanded the apostles not to preach and teach in the name of Jesus (Acts 4:18; 5:27-28,40), and we, as the apostles, must refuse to obey such a command (Acts 4:19-20; 5:29-32,41-42). The apostle Peter denied the Lord three times (Matthew 26:69-75), but it would be a sin to follow his example. It is implied that some Christians in Corinth placed their confidence in human wisdom, but we must not do so (1 Corinthians 2:1-5; 2 Corinthians 10:10). There is information we may follow. It is permissive, expressing liberties (cf. 1 Corinthians 7:6-7,25-28,38-40). When the New Testament records where baptism took place, it was always in an outdoor body of water (e.g., Matthew 3:5-6; Acts 8:36-38). I believe these examples are permissive, a liberty, not binding. Paul commanded the brethren at Corinth, “Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called” (1 Corinthians 7:20). Is it sinful to change occupations? (cf. verse 26) It is implied that the apostles other than Paul refrained from manual labor to fully devote their time to the Lord’s work (l Corinthians 9:l-6). Is it wrong for a preacher to have a secular job? But there is information we must follow. It is authoritatively binding. The Lord commanded us to eat the Lord’s Supper in remembrance of Him (1 Corinthians 11:23-25), and we must obey this command. The disciples ate the Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7), and we must follow their example. It is implied they did this each first day of the week (Acts 20:7; cf. Exodus 20:8), and we must do so. It is no problem to recognize negative passages, for the inspired writers identify the example, command, or implication as sinful. But how do we tell the difference between permissive passages and those that are binding? How do we differentiate between a liberty and that which we are required to do? Five rules of interpretation, all taught by the Scriptures themselves, enable us to do this. First is the Principle of Unity. This means that the binding of a passage as that which must be followed must not contradict other New Testament teaching. This principle is true because the Bible is truth (John 17:17), and truth is always consistent with itself. Thus, we know that the observance of the Lord’s Supper in an upper room is not binding, for Jesus taught that where we worship is irrelevant (John 4:19-24) Similar to this is the Principle of Uniformity. For a binding pattern to exist, there must not be variation in essential details. This is for the same reason as the first rule. The Scriptures are truth (John 17:17), and truth does not contradict itself. There are many illustrations of this rule. Although the church in Jerusalem met for worship daily (Acts 2:46), we cannot bind this approved example, for it is implied the church in Troas met only on the first day of the week (Acts 20:6-7). Nor can we bind the undivided assembly (I Corinthians 14:23) as the only arrangement for the church to teach, for the New Testament records other approved arrangements (e.g., Acts 20:17; Galatians 2:2). Third is the Principle of Universal Application. Unless the teaching is applicable to the whole world until the end of time, it is not binding, because the gospel is for all people everywhere for all time (Mark 16:15). The apostle Paul taught the women at Corinth to wear an artificial head covering as a symbol of their submission to their husbands (1 Corinthians 11:2-16). Feminine subjection to male leadership in the family and in the local church is a universal principle (1 Corinthians 11:3). But the apostle specifically identified the woman’s head covering as a “custom” in verse 16 (cf. John 18:39). The woman’s head covering as a symbol of submission, rather than being universal, was confined to a certain group at a certain time. Next is the Principle of Legitimate Extension. The teaching of a passage must only be applied in situations parallel to its context in essential details. This is true because we must not go beyond the doctrine of Christ (2 John 9). Although the disciples in Jerusalem sold all they had to give to the poor saints (Acts 2:44-45; 4:32,34-35), we need not do this unless we face similar circumstances, where this is required in order to relieve our own needy (cf. Acts 5:1-4, which shows our right to own and control our own property). Finally, we must apply the Principle of Spiritual Significance. It is the spiritual principle of a passage that is binding; thus, if the outward act is only a cultural or incidental expression of that principle, the outward act is a liberty, not a requirement. This is true because the kingdom of heaven pertains to the spiritual rather then the carnal (John 18:36; Romans 14:17; Ephesians 1:3; Colossians 2:20-23). Although the Lord commanded His disciples to wash one another’s feet (John 13:14), this specific act is not bound on us. In a society in which people usually walked where they were going, roads were usually of dirt, and the people wore sandals, washing one another's feet was a welcome expression of service and hospitality (cf. Luke 7:44; 1 Timothy 5:9-10). In an urban society in which people drive cars on paved streets and wear shoes, foot washing is simply a meaningless ritual. The Master was teaching us to humbly serve each other, even as He came as a Servant to all. The kiss was a friendly greeting in first century society (Romans 16:16). We should greet other Christians in a sincere, pure, and friendly manner, but we don't have to kiss each other to accomplish that goal. Conclusion The application of these principles will help us to be mature Christians, able to distinguish good and evil (Hebrews 5:12-14). We should study for the knowledge we need to discern between liberties and requirements (2 Timothy 2:15) and pray for the wisdom to make the proper applications (James 1:5).
|
