|
Bro. Turner:
 Where
do we get the authority to say when a New Testament example is
binding and when it is not? P.T.
Reply:
We
have no authority to bind commands or examples — God does
that. We just try to understand and follow the teachings of God’s
word, accepting or rejecting on the basis of our understanding.
We desperately need more faith in God’s way of teaching
truth.
The
apostle Paul taught by example (Phil. 4:9, 1 Cor. 11:1). When
some first century church did something on the basis of Paul’s
example, we have apostolic authority for the same action. Either
this is true, or there is no point in considering binding anything
that the apostles taught.
First
century churches did some things that were disapproved by
inspired men (Corinth’s neglect to discipline, 1 Cor. 5:).
This teaches, by the force of a negative, that we can not have
divine approval in such an attitude and act today. But other
things were done with apostolic approval (church support of
Paul, Phil. 4:15; 2 Cor. 11:8), and by this approval we believe
such support is authorized today. Either this is so, or the vast
majority of the N.T. books are next to worthless as respects
authority. If such approved examples are not binding, how
does one argue that commands (given to churches in the first
century) are bound on us? The rejection of divinely
approved examples is an initial step in the rejection of any
specific will of God, and of inspiration in the Bible sense.
| |
But
the querist indicates that some argue: if human judgment
determines which examples are approved, then the example (as:
Lord’s supper on First day) becomes but a matter of personal
choosing. Interpretation, of examples and
commands, involves human judgment; i.e., we must apply human
intellect to that which is revealed and draw conclusions as to
what the word symbols mean. Human reasoning is involved in the
application of Acts 2:38 to someone not a Jew, and who had no
part in the crucifixion. Find “the authority” to study
commands and draw conclusions, and I will offer it to you for
authority to interpret (or properly determine meaning) of all
that is written by inspiration. When Paul said the “things
written aforetime were written for our learning” (Rom. 15:4),
was he referring only to commands? Consider 1 Cor. 10:11.
The
N.T. is not a church manual, with a list of things to be
believed, things to do, regulations for organization, etc. It is
first century literature — history, biography, public and
private letters, doctrinal discourse, and encouragements for
early saints. But indications are plentiful that a wider use was
intended. (Note 1 Cor. 1:2b; 2 Pet. 1:13-15; Jn. 20:31). The nature
of the writings (if we are fully convinced that the Holy
Spirit did the teaching — 1 Cor. 2:13; Eph. 3:3-5), is enough
to cause us to cherish and follow approved examples. No divine
rules are set up for interpretation of examples or commands. But
Paul declares that what he wrote can be understood (Eph. 3:4;
5:17), and he certainly wrote something more than specific
commands.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
