Bible Authority

Lesson Nine: Commands and Examples

In his book The Cultural Church, F. LaGard Smith noted, “Unlike creeds, which formalize particular doctrinal understanding, our hermeneutic (command, example, necessary inference) has always called us back to the written Word itself” (p. 20). “More than simply a hermeneutic (method of interpretation), our formulation..is a rejection of human creeds and a commitment to the authority of God and his divine revelation..It commits us to the authoritative leading of Scripture without stating any doctrinal beliefs” (p. 35).

POINTS TO NOTE: 1. This is the same method that we use for understanding anything. “When push comes to shove, there are only a limited number of ways to interpret anything. In fact, whenever we want to understand someone, we generally look to two things: What a person says and what a person does. What could correspond more to our everyday, automatic, built-in hermeneutic than "commands" (sayings) and "examples" (doings)? When we instinctively look to precept and precedent, we're simply doing what comes naturally” (p. 44). 2. This method enables the reader to approach the Bible without prejudice and preconceived ideas. What is more open-minded and free that saying, “I am simply going to look for specific statements given by God, divinely approved precedents, and then draw the necessary conclusions in trying to find out what God wants me to do”? 3. It keeps us liberated from human traditions and error. Brethren, we aren't smarter than those in the denominations. The only thing besides an honest heart that has enabled us to "abide" in the teaching (1 John 2:24), is this method of interpretation. Without it, we could end up believing anything, for example someone who had abandoned this method stated, “The text of 1 Corinthians 14, which is questionable as an authentic passage...Key question in understanding of issue: Our Approach To Scripture...legal manual, blueprint,..We need the ongoing guidance and direction of God to understand truth” (Behold The Pattern p. 522). Mark this down, when people abandon this method, all of a sudden they need guidance not found in the Bible. All of a sudden, the Bible doesn't give them the answers to a host of questions. 4. When the Bible is ridiculed as a blueprint, constitution, or case law, then people lose their respect for its commands, examples, and necessary conclusions. The writings of the apostles cease to be binding (2 Thess. 3:14; 2:15; John 16:13; 1 Cor. 14:37; Matt. 18:18), and now are viewed as human opinion. Another case in point: “This was one of Paul's arguments. But, in all honesty, we have to admit that one can argue the very opposite with perhaps even better logic..Paul's arguments are not logical. Apparently, he is so upset that,in perfectly normal fashion for such circumstances, he used the most extreme arguments he could think of to bolster his position” (Behold The Pattern p. 521).

No Authority Needed?

People have tried to argue from Romans 5:13 “sin is not imputed when there is no law”, that one cannot sin when one participates in something not specifically forbidden by God. This is just the “we can do it since it doesn't say we can't” argument in different language. Maurice Barnett notes, “All that God says is "law". We have law about worship (Eph. 5:19), including the kind of music we are to use. We have law regarding the church, it's organization and function..It's rather interesting that the very things people want to use this "no law" argument on (instrumental music, women preachers, etc..) are the very things we do have laws on..If people have scriptural authority for what they were trying to do, they wouldn't need this kind of argument” (Understanding Bible Authority p. 29).

Concerning Commands

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN COMMANDS AND EXAMPLES:

The reason I say this is because texts that some have looked to as examples are actually commands. 1 Corinthians 16:1 isn't an example concerning the collection, rather it is a command. “These passages do no comprise an example of Corinth doing anything, but rather they are instructions to them..At this point, Corinth hasn't done anything; he's just now telling them what to do” (Barnett p. 44). The same is true concerning 1 Peter 5:2, which isn't an example of local oversight, but a specific command that limits the oversight of elders to the flock “among them”.

LOOK FOR THE COMMAND BEFORE GOING TO THE EXAMPLES:

The big question concerning Biblical examples is whether an example is simply one "option" of doing something, or the only option. The way we tell the difference is to look at the command or commands behind the example. Is the language of the command generic or specific? The language of the command will tell you whether an example is simply an option of generic authority, or the only option. And it is clear that examples do not limit general statements, for it they did the first example given would “automatically limit the generic for all that follow after, and in effect there would be no such thing as generic authority” (Examples And Generic Authority. Glen R. Burt. Gospel Anchor. March 1994 p. 7).

Applications

THE PLACE WHERE CHRISTIANS ASSEMBLE:

The reason I am repeatedly bringing up these points is that I hear many in and outside the church making arguments like, “Since we don't meet in an upper room, that means we don't have to precisely follow what the Bible says.” In addition, various individuals claim that command, example and necessary inference are useless, because they lead us to assuming contradictory positions, they are subjective in nature (i.e. we pick and chose which examples we want to follow, while ignoring others), and they fail to answer why we don't have to assemble in an upper room to be scriptural.

In response: (a) The command concerning the "place of worship" is general (John 4:21 “..an hour is coming when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem shall you worship the Father”). During the New Covenant there will exist no exclusive holy site for worship or a specific place like Jerusalem where worship had to be performed. (b) The command to assemble is also generic (Hebrews 10:25). (c) In addition, all the examples of Christians meeting do not take place in upper rooms (Acts 2:46; 5:12). Thus the room mentioned in Acts 20:8 is simply an option of generic authority. The same is true concerning how many times Christians meet on the First Day of the Week. While those in Acts 20:7 met once, the command behind assembling is generic. Meeting once is simply an option.

CONCERNING THE LORD'S SUPPER:

Multiple cups and pieces of bread are permitted. Paul writing from Ephesus, said to those in Corinth, “the cup of blessing which we bless..for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor. 10:16-17). The necessary conclusion from this direct statement: Is that we are still partaking of one cup and one bread, even if we aren't drinking and eating from the same exact cup and loaf. The day on which Christians assembled is found in a direct command (1 Corinthians 16:2 “upon every first day of the week”). On this day Christians partook of communion (11:20,33). Therefore, the first day of the week (Acts 20:7), is NOT simply one option for when we can partake of communion. But rather, the specified day. Since the number of times we assemble is an option of generic authority, the number of times we offer communion is also an option. Seeing that communion is inherently tied to the assembly. In addition, there is a direct command for all Christians to partake (1 Cor. 11:23f), which makes it "profitable" (1 Cor. 6:12) to offer communion at both services for those who cannot assemble at the morning or evening service

THE PLURALITY OF ELDERS:

If all we had was Titus 1:5 “appoint elders in every city”, we wouldn't know whether God required a plurality of elders in each congregation, or if one elder in each congregation in the city would qualify as “elders in every city”. The examples that we have all have a plurality of elders in each congregation (Acts 14:23; Phil. 1:1). In addition, the commands or direct statements behind these examples also specifies a plurality of elders in a congregation--James 5:14 “Let him call for the elders (plural) of the church”; Acts 20:28 “among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers (plural).” We should be impressed that usually we aren't left with only one passage to decide on some teaching of Scripture. Besides the above passages, we could also note (1Thess. 5:12-13; 1 Tim. 5:17; Hebrews 13:17).

BAPTISM:

“Every so often someone insists that when we baptize it can only be in "running water". The reason, they say, is that not only did John the Baptist baptize in the Jordan..but Jesus was baptized in the Jordan..The problem with that reasoning is just what we've been talking about. None of the statements or commands about baptism and water ever specify water in motion, running water. Baptism is specified, water is specified. Whatever qualifies as "water" will do, whether running or not, whether in huge amounts or just enough to baptize, in a natural depression or man-made tank” (Barnett pp. 52-53).

BIBLE CLASSES:

Others have argued that our Bible class arrangement is unscriptural because there are no examples of our modern class arrangement in the Scriptures. Again, people have overlooked the fact that the commands concerning 'teaching' are generic (Matthew 28:20), as to the method of teaching used. If we can use a blackboard, pulpit, handouts, transparencies, etc..then we can also divide up into classes.

BENEVOLENCE:

All the examples we have of church funds being dispersed, are of the church helping other Christians (Acts 2:44-45; 4:32; 6:1-3; 11:29). What we need to realize is that the commands behind congregational benevolence are specific. They specify “saints” (1 Cor. 16:1-2). Commands to the individual Christian give him or her the right to help the unbeliever with their own funds (Galatians 6:10; James 1:27).

COOPERATION AMONG CHURCHES:

Again remember that 1 Cor. 16:1-4, 2 Cor. 8-9, and 1 Peter 5:1-2 are statements, rather than examples. (1) Money was sent to another congregation for benevolence, only when that congregation had more needy members than it could handle. (2) Money was sent with individuals, but it wasn't sent through another congregation. (3) Elders can only oversee the flock among them (that is a direct statement), that is specific authority. Therefore, elders cannot oversee the funds that are being used by another congregation.