Sunday, May 11, 2014 pm
BACK TO BASICS – 2014
Authority (Supplement)
The New Hermeneutic
In
our lesson this morning we discussed how to establish authority.
We noted there are three logical and objective ways to establish
authority – Command, Approved Example and Necessary Inference (CENI).
We gave examples of each and noted how they were the methods
utilized by Jesus and the apostles.
However today, we are seeing the results, even among brethren, of
what is called “The New Hermeneutic” (NH will be used in this outline
sometimes). It has
actually been around for a few decades now, but we are increasingly
seeing its results. In our
lesson tonight we will define what this teaching is and expose its
error.
a.
The mantra of the day is
“there is no absolute truth”.
Wednesday night, Frank gave an invitation addressing “What is
truth?” It is so important
that we answer that question properly because it is being attacked today
on every front. In our
society we are rapidly reaching a point where we can no longer take a
moral stand based on the Bible – whether dealing with homosexuality,
divorce and remarriage, fornication, feminism or other subjects of
morality. As I have said on
many occasions, we could stop some of this (or at least slow it down) if
all who professed to follow the Bible would stand up and defend our Lord
and His teachings. PART OF
THE PROBLEM is that far too many have watered down the importance of
Biblical authority. One way
that they have done this is by redefining how authority is established.
Enter the new hermeneutic.
b.
Hermeneutics
means, “the science of interpretation.”
It refers to the process of determining what the original meaning
of a text actually is. Our
goal, when we speak of returning to “the old paths” is to determine what
God taught Christians to be in the first century and to accurately apply
that same teaching today.
c.
Defined - The NH is a
new method of interpreting and applying the scriptures.
By calling for a NH, the implication is that the old hermeneutic
is outdated and thus not applicable today.
d.
The old hermeneutic is
defined as establishing authority with CENI and objectivity.
e.
It is argued that the
“old hermeneutic” (CENI) was introduced by Alexander Campbell in the
early 1800s. Whether
Campbell used these terms I do not know – but in our lesson this morning
we showed that it was used a long time before Campbell, by Jesus and the
apostles as recorded in the Bible.
That is our foundation for using it as our pattern.
f.
Some tenets of the NH
are:
i.
Rejecting the New
Testament as a blueprint or pattern that we must follow.
ii.
Rejecting approved
examples and necessary inference as authoritative.
While they acknowledge that which is specifically commanded is
needed (sort of – TT) they reject the need to follow the “how” it is
done.
iii.
Accepting silence as
permissive rather than prohibitive.
iv.
Viewing the New
Testament as a set of “love letters” rather than a “constitution” that
governs our conduct. In
other words, it is suggestions.
It has been said by NH advocates that we need to focus more on
God and Jesus than the “rules”, as if to say that if we demand specific
authority for our actions, we are NOT focusing enough on the giver of
the rules. (That sounds to me like those who say that grace is
incompatible with works).
v.
Using logic and reason
are not necessary for Bible interpretation.
In other words, truth is subjective.
vi.
We should NOT claim that
we know the truth absolutely.
g.
NOTE: As you read the
writings of the advocates of a NH you will not find total agreement as
to what it should be, but just a consensus that the old hermeneutic is
flawed.
a.
The short answer is NO!
For numerous reasons that we have addressed from this pulpit in
times past, we know that it DOES matter what we believe.
b.
The fact is – God HAS
communicated with words His will – Heb. 1:1-2, 1 Cor. 2:12-16, Ephesians
3:1-4, etc. AND He expects us to
understand it and apply it – Eph. 5:17, Matt. 7:21-23, James 1:22, etc.
c.
There is a pattern that we are expected to follow.
2 Tim. 1:13, Paul told Timothy, “Hold fast the pattern of sound words
which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ
Jesus.”
Hebrews 8:5 where the writer speaks of Moses being given instructions
concerning building the tabernacle.
He is told, “who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly
things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the
tabernacle. For He said, “See that you make all things according to the
pattern shown you on the mountain.”” The point of that text and much
of the book of Hebrews is to show how important a pattern is to God.
Virtually everything about the Mosaic priesthood and tabernacle
was patterned the way it was for a reason – it is what God wanted.
d.
Approved example and
necessary inference are approved methods of establishing authority
-
in Phil. 3:17 Paul said, “Brethren, join in following my example, and
note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern.”
1 Timothy 1:16,
“However, for this reason I
obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all
longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on Him for
everlasting life.” (, NKJV)
This morning we also
noted that NI was used by our Lord and the apostles quite often.
When you put the facts together you can reach unavoidable
conclusions.
e.
Is silence a valid form
of authority?
No! 1 Cor. 4:6.
When your actions are based upon what the Bible doesn’t say, 1)
you will not find agreement, 2) you are gambling with your soul, 3) you
are mocking what God did say.
We will address this exclusively in a future lesson.
f.
Is the New Testament just a set of “love letters”?
While all that God has done is based upon His love for us, the
scriptures are more than mere suggestions for how we ought to live.
Hebrews 8:6,
“But now He
has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator
of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.”
AFTER speaking of following the pattern, the New Law is described as a
“better covenant.” Indicating an agreement (or contract) we enter into.
Hebrews 2:1-3, “Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the
things we have heard, lest we drift away. For if the word spoken through
angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience
received a just reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a
salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was
confirmed to us by those who heard Him,”
We are told to HEED the things we have heard – friends this is a
VERY doctrinal letter!
Hebrews 12:24–25, “to Jesus
the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that
speaks better things than that of Abel. See that you do not refuse Him
who speaks. For if they did not escape who refused Him who spoke on
earth, much more shall we not escape if we turn away from Him who speaks
from heaven,”
g.
Speaking of love, how
did Jesus say we love Him? ““If you love Me, keep My commandments.”
(John 14:15)
Also consider 1 John 5:3 says, “For this is the love of God, that we
keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.”
h.
Should we use an
objective standard (logic and reason) to establish authority?
2 Tim. 2:15 tells to be diligent (study) to show ourselves approved unto
God – “rightly dividing the word of truth.”
Romans 16:17 tells us to note those who cause divisions, “contrary to
the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them.”
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you
were taught, whether by word or our epistle.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
“And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that
person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed.” (2
Thessalonians 3:14)
i.
Can we absolutely know the truth? While there are
things that are difficult to understand, we CAN know the truth and we
CAN boldly defend it. Again
consider Ephesians 3:3-4, also 5:17.
a.
It rejects the importance of pattern in scripture.
b.
It tends to subjectivism
- which leads to “anything goes”. It relegates the teachings
of scripture to nothing more than a story or narrative rather than our
standard. The Bible becomes a book of suggestions that can be
manipulated at will.
c.
It questions the all sufficiency of scripture and leads to confusion
- Such attitudes lend to the questioning of the reliability and accuracy
of the Bible. How can we
know what is right?
d.
It will also lead to
immorality being practiced and tolerated in churches – when you soften the standard of scriptural authority you
get all the problems that come with that softening.
For example:
You soften the teachings of the role of women in the church it
will lead to women demanding a greater presence and authority.
It’s already happening in places.
If you soften the Bible’s
teachings on MDR – you are going to have adulterous
relationships in your midst, and very likely an increased percentage of
divorces, etc.
If you soften the Bible’s
teachings on what is acceptable worship – how long before it
deteriorates into entertainment designed to please men more than praise
God (just saying you are praising God does not make it so!)
If you soften the Bible’s
teachings on fellowship, you will welcome into your “fellowship”
those who are not practicing truth (again, it’s happening more and more
even among brethren).
e.
WHERE DO WE STOP??????
When you give up a little bit of truth where will it lead with
the next generation? It took Catholicism about 5 centuries to develop
into the papacy – and it happened 1 step at a time.
NH was introduced about 30 years ago to justify liberal practices among
brethren. Look at where we
are today with churches professing to be churches of Christ – Unity in
diversity, instrumental music in worship, rejecting baptism as essential
to salvation, replacing doctrinal teaching with feel-good and “relevant”
issues, and lest we forget, mocking those who question their practices
as – anti, old fashioned, legalists, Pharisaical, etc.
f.
It undermines the unity scripture calls for.
Rather than unifying it actually divides or leads to a
pseudo-unity. NOT the true
unity we read of in the New Testament.
g.
The purpose of the New Hermeneutic (NH) is to broaden the boundaries of scripture so that they
are not limited in their practices (what they do and how they do it).
IN ESSENCE, my observation is this – Because men could not dismiss the
appeals to logical Biblical patterns that challenged the way they wanted
things to be done – the work
of the church, how to worship God, tests for unity, etc. – they simply
introduced a new method of interpretation that is more permissive.
Conclusion: The New Hermeneutic is not really new at all.
It is simply repackaging the rejection of divine authority for
what and how we do what we do.
In Essence the New Hermeneutic is nothing more than old
modernism.
And, for
what it is worth, when you look at the arguments being presented by
advocates of a NH, you will find that they use logic and reason, they
establish patterns, appeal to examples and inferences in their judgments
and other arguments that are inconsistent with their premise.
Peter said of
false teachers in 2 Peter 2:18-19, “For when they speak great
swelling words of emptiness, they allure through the lusts of the flesh,
through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped from those who live
in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of
corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought
into bondage.”
Let us in
all that we do respect the pattern of scripture and strive to be true to
God and His word.