Sunday, April 23, 2017 am
THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH 2017
Authority 6 – Necessary Inference (2)
As
we consider the New Testament church this year, we are in the midst of a
study of authority that will help us establish how we are to conduct
ourselves as the church of Christ
in matters of organization, worship, and work.
We have been addressing how authority is established – CENI.
Noting these 3 ways, we discussed some things to consider with
approved examples and in our last lesson we began discussing some things
to consider with necessary inference.
a.
Also known as necessary
conclusions, unavoidable conclusions, necessary implication, forced
conclusions, etc. it is defined as “That which, through neither
expressly stated nor specifically exemplified, yet is necessarily
implied by the clear import and meaning of the language used.”
(Walking by Faith, Codgill, 14)
It is an inference or conclusion that is reached by putting together all
that is said on a subject using reason and logic, and thereby you reach
the ONLY reasonable conclusion.
b.
We noted how scripture
calls for us to use reason, meaning we need to think and logically put
together what is said and reach proper conclusions.
It was done by Jesus to establish that marriage is intended to be for
life (what God has joined together, do not let man separate – Matthew
19:9) and to show that there is a resurrection and man lives beyond the
grave (Matthew 22:29-32 where Jesus refers to God speaking to Moses and
says, “I AM the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob).
Peter was forced to conclude that Gentiles were to be fellow heirs by
the events that unfolded in Acts 10.
THEN, in Acts 15 when Jewish brethren wanted to bind circumcision upon
Gentiles, they met in Jerusalem and through the use of Direct statements
and approved examples they unavoidably reached a conclusion that
Gentiles did NOT need to be circumcised.
In Acts 15:28 they even noted their conclusion was from the Holy
Spirit – the revealer of God’s word).
a.
NI was a form of establishing authority from scripture
– see what we have already noted.
Therefore, WE CONLCUDE, we should consider NI as we determine
what and HOW we do something.
b.
A reminder of our need for total honesty.
We need to be objective as we study God’s word with a willingness
to observe all things commanded (Matthew 28:19-20).
c.
NI is based upon what is
already known by precept, command and/or example – it always deals with how a command is carried out, or
a conclusion based upon already revealed facts.
THIS would dismiss one saying today, “God spoke to me…”
d.
Proper application of NI calls for effort!
We need to handle accurately
God’s word (2 Timothy 2:15) and WANT to understand it (cf. Acts 17:11).
Sometimes reaching these
conclusions requires that we do some work and investigation.
We need to learn what the Bible says about a given subject.
e.
NI calls for properly apply rules of interpretation –
for example, what we are appealing to must be in its proper context
including the immediate context and background of that passage.
Examine EVERYTHING related to that subject.
f.
Necessary inference
calls for all propositions (premises) in a syllogism to be true
(factual) to reach that conclusion.
In a syllogism, a conclusion reached based upon two or more
premises, when a conclusion is wrong, it is usually because at least one
proposition (premise) is incorrect.
For example: 2 + 2 = 4. Each
two is a premise reaching the conclusion (answer).
If either premise is changed, the conclusion would be different.
Similarly, in studying God’s word, we need to begin with true premises
as we reach conclusions.
Much false doctrine is based upon faulty premises that result in false
conclusions.
g.
NI will harmonize with what is revealed and confirmed as truth
– not only do we look to what is written, we realize God’s word can be
understood and does not contradict itself (1 Corinthians 14:33).
Often, one passage may help explain another one.
Look for consistency in patterns, etc., where there is more than one
example.
h.
NI is the ONLY logical conclusion that can be inferred when all things are
put together
-
Example: Genesis 1:1 –
in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Necessarily implied is that God existed before creation.
John 3:2 – Nicodemus when he comes to Jesus at night he notes that Jesus
HAD TO have come from God.
Why? Because of the miracles and works He did.
i.
NOTE: NI doesn’t
necessarily mean you cannot reach another conclusion, BUT to do so is to
act without certainty (Cf. Romans 14:23) and overstep the bounds of
approved examples. I.e. The
Lord’s Supper offered on Saturday or some other day (Acts 20:7) – it is
possible to do that, but can you prove it is acceptable with God’s word?
j.
Lord’s Supper - Every first day. Acts 20:7 notes they came together on the first day
of the week to break bread (a reference to partaking of the Lord’s
Supper). WE know from
scripture the disciples assembled regularly.
1 Corinthians 16:1-2 implies they came together (and the
grammatical structure supports this – see the NASB, ESV, etc.) one the
first day of EVERY week.
1 Corinthians 11 which discusses the abuse of the Lord’s Supper notes
that they did come together regularly (1 Cor. 11:17-20).
Add to this the LOGIC that EVERY week has a first day, we can
necessarily conclude that we ought to partake of the Lord’s Supper EVERY
first day of the week. Any
other frequency (on other days OR less frequent) is without any Biblical
precedent or example.
k.
Lord’s Supper – unleavened bread and fruit of the vine
– scripture tells us that it was during a Passover meal that Jesus
instituted the Lord’s Supper – Matthew 26:17-29, etc.).
According to Passover regulations under the Old Law, certain
foods were used – a lamb, bitter herbs, unleavened bread and fruit of
the vine. Jesus took bread
and the fruit of the vine (grape juice) and used it to institute the
Lord’s Supper.
IF we are to follow the PATTERN of scripture, we must use the same
elements. That is why we
don’t use LOAFS of leavened bread, or cake and water.
Necessary inference tells us to use the elements Jesus used to
the best of our ability.
l.
Matthew 19:9 - The innocent party can remarry.
In a text where Jesus speaks of one divorcing and marrying
another is guilty of adultery, He gives us an exception – except for
fornication. We can
necessarily conclude from this text that one CAN divorce for the cause
of fornication and remarry.
This is the ONLY exception we read of in scripture.
And in the latter part of that verse we see that whoever marries
her who is divorced commits adultery.
This NECESSARLY IMPLIES that the one put away, even for
fornication, CANNOT remarry.
m.
Baptism is immersion and
for believers
– we have mentioned throughout our studies of Authority – baptism.
Stepping beyond the meaning of the word “baptize” meaning to dip
or immerse, you can look at a consistent pattern of examples (Acts 8:38,
etc.) and statements (Romans 6:4, Colossians 2:12) that show we must
IMMERSE one who believes in Jesus.
The commands and examples also NECESSARILY CONLCUDE we cannot
baptize infants and be pleasing to God because infants are incapable of
believing.
n.
Acts 8:35-36
– necessarily infers that preaching Jesus includes preaching baptism.
Some want to say we should “preach the man, and not the plan”.
I contend, you CANNOT preach the Man without His plan, and that
includes what we need to do to be saved.
o.
Acts 10:1-2ff–
necessarily concludes that being a good man, doing good works and even
fearing God and praying is not sufficient to save you.
p.
Hebrews 10:25
– the command to not forsake the assembling together necessitates a
place. A study of saint
assembling shows they assembled in all sorts of different places and
often (as we have noted). We
have authority for a place by necessary inference.
q.
Hebrews 5:14
speaks of those who are of full age who, by reason of use have our
senses exercised to discern
good and evil. For
example:
Issues of morality call for necessary inference – we have
principles in scripture that govern modesty, soberness, proper behavior,
being separate, etc. – studying what the Bible says about such things
will cause us to reach necessary conclusions governing
what we wear (and should not
wear), social drinking, dancing, gambling, etc.
r.
A study of the autonomy and independence of congregations
will help us determine how we can and cannot carry out its work.
As
we consider how we establish authority, in this lesson we have
emphasized the importance of reason and showed how we use it to reach
conclusions we need to apply in what we do to be pleasing to God.
Let us resolve that we will study His word to learn to follow Him
completely, whether by Direct statement, approved example or necessary
conclusion.