|
|
| |
The Difference Between
Command and Example
The article below is taken from the book "Growing Old GRACEfully" by Sonny Childs.
To order a copy, go to the publications page of this site or call 1-800-973-2646.
|
|
Part One
Traditions and Examples
For many years restoration Christians have used command, example and necessary inference as their guides to interpreting scripture. Like sincere Pharisees who simply wanted to restore full obedience to the Old Law, we also desire a return to the pure observance of the New Law. This desire is admirable and well worth the investment of all our spiritual energy. But like most great efforts, this pursuit does not come without the temptation to employ human wisdom and human authority along the way. Because God deserves obedience, men often create their own laws to help God reach His goal. In the process, they not only put words in God’s mouth they also attempt to join Him on His throne of authority.
Jesus spent a significant amount of His ministry pointing out and combating Pharisaical legalism. He did not oppose their passion for the law, He opposed the countless number of human traditions they had bound upon others as if they were commands of God. It was this opposition to such presumptuousness that stirred His anger to the point that He called them “whitewashed tombs”. (Matthew 23:27)
Just as the Pharisees created human laws in an attempt to return to the Old Law, we too have often placed words in God’s mouth in order to establish restoration principles. Binding examples upon others as if they are commands is one of the ways we do this. Consider three dangers that this presents to the modern church.
1. Binding examples as if they are commands promotes selective obedience.
II Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” If we are to take this passage to mean that every word in Scripture carries the same level of authority, then consider the following dilemma.
How much of a New Testament example is binding? Consider communion. The first communion was taken on a Thursday evening as part of the Jewish Passover. The grape juice was taken from a single cup while the observers reclined at a table in an upper room. How many of these details must the modern church follow?
In Acts 20:7, the church at Troas met at the first of the week to “break bread”. If these words mean communion, as many scholars suggest, then perhaps we have more examples to be obeyed. The disciples at Troas also met in an upper room (Acts 20:8). The weekly service mentioned in this text included a message that “continued... unto midnight”.(vs. 7). It also included a miraculous healing (vs. 10). Verse 11 indicates that the breaking of bread happened in the evening at or after midnight.
Some would say that taking communion on the first day of every week is a binding example. At the same time they dismiss the examples of using one cup, meeting in an upper room and breaking bread at an evening service. Why is one detail more significant than the others. Who gets to decide which part of an example is binding and which part is not? If “All scripture” (II Timothy 3:16) means that every word is equal in authority then every detail of every example should be fully obeyed.
What about Paul’s example to observe the Old Testament Sabbath and meet regularly with the Jews in their synagogues? (Acts 17:2) It seems that this was also the custom of Aquilla and Priscilla (Acts 18:26) and thousands of other Christians who lived in Jerusalem. (Acts 21:20) Should the modern church bind this well established biblical example as if it were a command? Paul did say, “Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern.” (Philippians 3:17) Should we lift Paul’s words out of their context and make them apply across the board to every example that he left for us. If so, then every modern Christian needs to find a synagogue to attend this Saturday.
What about Paul’s example to engage in Old Testament acts of worship in order to reach out to New Testament Jewish Christians? (Acts 21:17-26) Should we give this example the same emphasis that we give a direct command?
What about assembly locations? Never once in all of the New Testament is there a command or example of the early Christians meeting in a church building. Does that mean the silence of scripture condemns such buildings?
The New Testament does give us six examples of the early church meeting in homes. Perhaps we should use the same argument here that is often used on other topics. The Bible says we can worship in homes, but it does not say we can worship in church buildings. Should we conclude therefore that the silence of scripture condemns worshipping in church buildings? Should we conclude that these six examples command us to worship in homes?
What about located preachers? Again the scripture is silent in both command or example of a preacher staying more than three and a half years with one congregation. Is this an example that should be bound upon others and used to draw a line of fellowship?
Who gets to choose which example is binding and which example is not? When examples are bound upon others as if they are commands, the modern church is either forced into selective obedience or into the legalism of obeying every detail of every example given in every part of every scripture.
2. Binding examples as if they are commands is dangerous because it opens the door to denominationalism.
When the emphasis is removed from God’s direct commands and placed upon human examples, the door to human opinion is left wide open.
The denominational world uses the biblical example of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15) for their authority to call regional church leaders into a meeting to decide church policy. If examples are as authoritative as commands, then it is hard to argue with their position.
Some in the denominational world use the examples of Acts 10:44-48 and Acts 19:5-6 as grounds to require a person to speak in tongues as evidence of their salvation.
Some in the denominational world use Paul’s example of celibacy as grounds to require their church leaders to be celibate.
Some in the denominational world use the examples of Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 5:32 as their authority to bind communal living upon their followers.
If examples and commands are to receive the same level of authority, then it is very hard to argue with these denominational positions. What right have you and I to say that their favorite example is any less binding than ours? In fact, if we are going to obey all examples as if they are commands, then we have no choice but to embrace many of these denominational views.
3. Perhaps the most dangerous part of lifting an example to the level of a command is what it does to the authority of God’s silence.
In Romans 4:15 the Holy Spirit gives this important insight, “And where there is no law there is no transgression.” In other words, you cannot break a law that does not exist. God’s holy silence demands that we too be silent. If God did not command or condemn something, then we have no right to make up a law for Him. We must not command anything of others that God has not commanded and we must not condemn anything in others that God has not condemned. We simply must be silent. (Study Romans 14.)
Part Two
Letting God Speak for Himself
In the previous section we noticed three of the dangers that come from binding examples as if they are commands. 1. It promotes selective obedience. 2. It opens the door to denominationalism. 3. It usurps the authority of God’s silence. On the other hand, allowing God to speak for Himself (commands) provides the modern church with three great advantages.
1. It places the burden of authority upon God and not upon us.
Have you ever heard someone say, “You have no right to judge me?” In one way they are right. Since all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory, one sinner has no right to judge another. But when the burden of authority is placed upon God’s shoulders, no longer are sinners judging each other, we are simply passing along the judgement of the Judge.
When God’s commands are bound upon others as law, the source of the authority is unquestionable. When we limit ourselves to binding only what God commands, it leaves no room for selective obedience, denominational opinions or violating the authority of God’s silence. If God commands it that settles it.
2. It fulfills the great commission.
In His very last set of directives before leaving this world Jesus said, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." (Matthew 28:19-20)
Do you not find it interesting that, among Christ’s final words and in the final summation of His teachings, Jesus emphasized His commands? Perhaps we should do the same.
3. Letting God speak for Himself (commands) removes all the question marks.
There is little doubt that Christ knew and was concerned about the controversies that would divide His followers after His ascension. See John 17:9-19. By reminding the disciples of His commands (Matthew 28:19-20), He was reminding them of His authority. It was only by Christ’s authority that the disciples were commissioned to teach and record His commands for all future generations.
But one should not conclude that every action taken by every disciple was out of obedience to a direct command of Christ. If that were true, then tent-making, travel by chariot and using lamps for light would all be binding upon us today. Instead one should conclude that the commands passed on by the disciples are binding.
When you and I really get to the heart of the matter, we find that many of the pet doctrines that divide Christiandom today are not based upon the apostles’ doctrine (Christ’s teachings) but upon church tradition or examples. Imagine the number of divisions that could be resolved if Christ-seekers would unite upon the direct commands of Christ and stop picking and choosing the biblical examples they wish to bind upon others. Denominationalism would have no future.
The Value of Examples
But just because an example does not carry the same weight as a command, that does not mean it is without significance or even authority. Consider the following areas.
1. Examples can provide authority for yourself. I take communion every week because I need the accountability. I need a weekly reminder to reprioritize my life. (I Corinthians 11:27-32) I need the encouragement of seeing other Christians honoring the greatest gift ever given to humanity. I bind the communion example upon myself because God gives me the liberty to do so. (Romans 14:5-12)
2. God has also given me the liberty to use my own personal authority to set certain standards within my home or business. The Bible was not intended to be an exhaustive guide to parenting or small business ownership. Therefore, as a leader, I must give specifics to the general principles that God did provide. To do this, biblical examples are often bound upon those within my care. But the specifics are not bound by the authority of God, they are bound by the authority of Sonny.
3. Paul said, “...whatever things were written before were written for our learning...” (Romans 15:4) Although Old Testament examples should not be bound upon others as if they were commands, they certainly can be used to judge the wisdom of a direction in life. The greatest fool is the person who refuses to learn from those who have gone before him.
Conclusion
Binding examples as if they are commands presents the modern church with many dangers. It encourages Christians to either be selectively obedient to the part of the example they feel should be binding or it causes them to engage in a legalism similar to that “which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear.” (Acts 15:10) Binding examples as if they were law promotes denominationalism and it violates the authority of God’s holy silence. If God wanted something to be commanded all He had to do was command it. To say it is a command without God giving it as such, is paramount to a lie. Personal application of biblical examples is part of the liberty with which Christ has blessed every Christian. They should be looked to for wisdom and can be bound upon ourselves out of liberty. (Romans 14) But unless God has bound them as a law, we should not be so presumptuous as to bind them as a law upon others.
|
|
|
