Does God's Silence Authorize? by Kenneth E. Thomas
(Reprinted from The Gospel Anchor on-line: http://www.gospelanchor.com)
In arguing that Jesus could not be a priest on earth, writing to the Hebrew Christians, the author argues that the silence of the Scriptures restricts rather than giving license to act. He wrote, "For it is evident that out Lord sprang out of Judah: of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood" (Hebrews 7:14). God has spoken or caused to be written His complete will for humanity. Since Christ's will is expressed in His "perfect law of liberty" (James 1:25), then anything not expressed in that law is not a part of His will for man.
Jesus promised to guide the writers of His last Will and Testament into "all truth" (John 16:12-13). He either did what He promised or He failed. I happen to believe that He kept His promise and that agrees with what Peter wrote when he said, "according as His divine power has given us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who has called us by His glory and virtue" (2 Peter 1:3). Perfection, completeness, or spiritual maturity may be achieved by believing and following what has been revealed in the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16-17). What has been revealed is so adequate that should any man or even any angel teach otherwise than what was "taught" and what had been "received" from these inspired men in the first century, Paul said "let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:6-11). The Lord Himself said: "He who rejects Me, and receives not My words, has that which judges him - the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day" (John 12:48). These very words of Jesus were what the Holy Spirit brought to the apostles' remembrance as promised (John 14:26; 15:26). These words became our New Testament.
Paul wrote,
"For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ
for you Gentiles - if indeed you have heard of the dispensation
of the grace of God which was given me for you, how that by revelation
He made known unto me the mystery (as I wrote before in a few
words, buy which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge
in the mystery of Christ), which in other ages was not made known
unto the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit
to his holy apostles and prophets, that the Gentiles should be
fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in
Christ by the gospel, of which I became a minister according to
the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working
of His power" (Ephesians 3:1-7).
This and several other affirmations by these writers show that Christ kept His word and did indeed send the Holy Spirit to guide them into "all truth" just as He promised.
To the church at Corinth the apostle Paul gave credit to the Holy Spirit, taking none for himself for what he had taught them and what had brought about their conversion to Christ (1 Cor. 2:1-13). Verse 13 says, "these things we also speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual." This is a case for verbal inspiration of the original manuscripts, even the very words used to express the will of Christ were chosen by the Holy Spirit.
The So Called "New Hermeneutic" Is Flawed!
We are being treated to a "new hermeneutic" nowadays which claims that silence gives license to act. Meaning simply that if the Scriptures do not forbid a particular belief or practice, such is allowable with God's blessings. Can you even imagine the "Pandora's box" that such a principle opens? Can you even imagine the innovations that may be brought in through this same door? This kind of thinking and teaching leaves men free to "guide themselves," something that Jeremiah said he was incapable of doing (Jeremiah 10:23)!
Some Allowable Innovations Under This Reasoning Are:
1). Mechanical instruments of music in worship. Why? Because one cannot find the passage that forbids their use in worship.
2). Infant baptism. Why? Because there is no passage that says you cannot baptize infants in the New Testament.
3). Sprinkling and or Pouring of water for "baptism." Why? Again, no place in the New Testament does it forbid these practices.
4). Supporting the churches work by tithing, bake sales or assessments of the membership. Why? Again, there is no New Testament passage forbidding such. All we have are the examples of how the early churches received their income to do their work.
5). The United Christian Missionary Society for evangelism. Why? The New Testament doesn't forbid building and maintaining such organizations for evangelism. Some have argued the Lord said to "go" and "teach" but He didn't say "how" and so this is just a "how." Well, He did say "who" and the who is the local church, not some human institution supported by local churches. But you get the point surely. If silence gives license, anything not specifically forbidden becomes an authorized practice.
6). Sponsoring Elderships over brotherhood projects: Why? "Well it doesn't say not to set up such in our efforts to "cooperate" and get the job done, so...." Isn't this what our more "liberal" brethren have done?
7). Family life centers operated by the local church for social and recreational activities for the membership and their friends. Why? Well, why not? If silence gives license these are not forbidden don't you see? Some are attempting to justify such as a "tool in evangelism."
Enough of This Kind of Foolishness!
Those who respect the Bible as the infallible inerrant authoritative
word of God Almighty, likewise recognize the time tested methods
for determining the will of Christ to be:
1). Direct command. This do =This is so simple that it needs no
explanation.
2). An approved apostolic example = Something practiced in the
presence of men guided by the Holy Spirit with their approval.
3). Necessary inference = Language is so constructed and premises
are revealed allowing only one conclusion.
4). Two kinds of authority = General and Specific. General gives
license to expedite. Specific limits to that which is specified.
Any other "method" of interpretation leaves too much leeway for human logic and human error to invade into things which the Lord has not authorized in His will, and we are told that we must "abide in the doctrine of Christ," and that we must only act "by His authority" (2 John 9-11; Colossians 3:17). We must not add to or subtract from the word of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, but are to be obedient to the same (Revelation 14:13; 22:14,18-19).
The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved by David McClister
(david1mc@gte.net)
"There was reclining on Jesus' bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved." (John 13:23)
Most scholars agree that the otherwise anonymous "disciple whom Jesus loved" in John's gospel is John himself. This would explain why an apostle as well known as John is not mentioned in that gospel, i.e., not mentioned as John. He is mentioned by this description instead. Also, Peter and John are often portrayed as associated together in several scenes (cf. Acts 3:1; Matt 17:1; etc.), but in John it is Peter and "the disciple whom Jesus loved." It seems that John himself is this mysterious figure in the fourth gospel.1
Why would John hide his name from the account and instead identify himself simply as "the disciple whom Jesus loved"?
Then again, why not? And wouldn't you? If given the choice to be known by a quite common and ordinary name (like "John"), or to be known as one who was an especially close friend of Jesus, wouldn't you rather be known by the latter? Is that not the very reason we adopt the name of Christ as our own (i.e., we call ourselves "Christians") when we commit ourselves to follow Him? Are we not representatives of our Master to the world, and isn't it appropriate that when the world observes us that see us first as people joined to Christ? Shouldn't our friendship with Jesus be the most important thing in our lives, and should it not be the defining trait about us? If you were to write a story in which you were one of the characters, and you had the option of identifying yourself by your common name or as a person who was endeared to Jesus, wouldn't it be a wonderful thing to be able to present yourself to the world like that instead of as simply "John" or "James" or "Michael" or "Tom"?
When I run across John's description of himself in the fourth gospel I am struck by John's choice, and how significant it is. John could easily have identified himself as John, but that is not how he wanted the rest of the world to know him. "John" just did not say to others what was truly important to know about this man. So instead we read of "the disciple whom Jesus loved," John's own choice for the presentation of himself to his readers. A similar mentality ought to exist in every disciple of Jesus. We are Christians first, and we are David, Fred, Jane, Mary, Joe, and Kate (etc.) second. What we need to show to the world around us is our relationship with Christ. If they can see that first and most clearly, then we should be happy to be known simply as "Christians," people who love the Lord and whom the Lord loves.
MARK YOUR CALENDARS
Our weekly services are held at 1318 Griffin Road, Leesburg, Florida
34748.
Phone: (352) 365-9946 for times of services.
Web site: http://www.geocities.com/~cdillinger/cocbs/cocbshp.htm
Buddy Payne will present three lessons on Creationism vs Evolution
August 9-11, each evening at 7:30 PM.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
BIBLE INSIGHT is published for the members of, and visitors to,
the Church of Christ at Beverly Shores, Leesburg, Florida, USA.
Carey Dillinger is the editor. He can be reached at the church
address or via e-mail: dillinc@yahoo.com