FOCUS ON THE SCRIPTURES
April 6, 2001
Revised: January 08, 2003, May 06, 2003, & October 5, 2003
The Silence Of The Scriptures
"On the part of Truth there cannot be, and on the part of Philanthropy there ought not to be, any truce between Truth and error. They are naturally, necessarily, and, therefore, eternally antagonistic. Satan is the oldest liar in the records of eternity. -But there are the deceiver and the deceived, and these are not to be assimilated, nor in any way confounded, or represented as one and the same. We are all, at times, more or less erratic, being under the influence of erroneous views and principles, without perceiving, designing or intending it. The conviction, and still more the acknowledgment of this fact, should temper our mutual intercourse, and moderate our censures of those whom we regard as less gifted, or more erratic than ourselves" (Millennial Harbinger, February, 1857).
The mental process of deriving a new judgment from certain religious premises or assumptions and then teaching the new judgment as the Word of God or the teaching of Jesus is the fountain of much of the religious error taught and practiced today.
These devil-inspired false doctrines are exceedingly harmful to those who teach them and exceedingly harmful to those who believe the false doctrines. They undermine the explicit and clear teachings of the Word of God and the explicit and clear teachings of Jesus. These false doctrines, taught as truth, are directly responsible for the fact that untold millions of people have not accepted Christ and are not, today, Christians.
Jesus said:
"But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel about on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves" (Matthew 23:15 NASB). And Jesus said: "You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you saying, this people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far away from Me, but in vain do they worship Me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men" (Matthew 15:7-9 NASB).
It has been said that there are many religious doctrines that are solely dependent for their existence and their evidence upon the silence of the Bible. While what the Bible does say can produce only one faith, what the Bible does not say, in other words, The Silence of the Scriptures, can give rise to many different opinions.
Sadly, humanly devised religious principles and/or opinions, based on The Silence of the Scriptures have been and are being taught as the truth. And, they have been and are being taught as the very Word of God, and as doctrines that must be believed by those who would be followers of Jesus, regardless of the fact that Jesus is not the author of the principles or the opinions or the doctrines.
It is astonishing, but true, that the doctrine styled "The Silence of the Scriptures," though not once mentioned in the Sacred Writings, is the basis of almost all of the religious controversy; and "The Silence of the Scriptures" is the origin of many different kinds of churches and divisions within the churches.
What do the Scriptures say about the Silence of the Scriptures? What is the truth? What are the facts?
The New Testament references for the word silence are as follows:
A. The KJV translates the Greek word transliterated hesuchia, a noun, 3 times as silence; and 1 time as quietness. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says that -- hesuchia, the noun means: "1. quietness: descriptive of the life of one who stays at home doing his own work, and does not officiously meddle with the affairs of others: 2 Th. 3:12. 2. silence: Acts 22:2; 1 Tim. 2:11, 12."
B.
The KJV translates the Greek word transliterated hesuchadzo, a verb: 2 times as hold (one’s) peace; 1 time as rest; 1 time as cease; and 1 time as be quiet. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says hesuchadzo, the verb, means: "to keep quiet. a. to rest, to cease from labor: Luke 23:56. b. to lead a quiet life 1 Th. 4:11; c. to be silent, i. e. to say nothing, hold one’s peace: Luke 14:4; Acts 11:18; Acts 21:14."
C.
The KJV translates the Greek word transliterated sige, a noun, 2 times as silence. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says sige, the noun, means: "silence; Acts 21:40; Rev. 8:1."
D. The KJV translates the Greek word transliterated sigao, a verb, 4 times as hold (one’s) peace; 3 times as keep silence; 1 time as keep close; and 1 time as keep secret. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says sigao, the verb, means: "to keep silence, hold one’s peace: Luke 9:36; 18:39; Acts 12:17; Acts 15:12; 1 Cor. 14:28, 30, 34; passive, to be kept in silence, be concealed, Rom. 16:25."
E. The KJV translates the Greek word transliterated phimoo, a verb, 2 times as put to silence; 2 times as hold (one’s) peace; 1 time as muzzle; 1 time as speechless; and 1 time as be still. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says phimoo, the verb, means: "to close the mouth with a muzzle, to muzzle: 1 Tim. 5:18; metaph. to stop the mouth, make speechless, reduce to silence: Matthew 22:34; 1 Peter 2:15; pass. to become speechless, hold one’s peace, Matthew 22:12; Mark 1:25; Mark 4:39; Luke 4:35."
The New Testament references for the word scripture are as follows:
F. The KJV translates the Greek word transliterated gramma, a noun, 9 times as letter; 2 times as bill; 1 time as writing; 1 time as learning; 1 time as scripture and 1 time as written. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says gramma, the noun, means: "that which has been written; 1. a letter, i. e. the character: Luke 23:38; Gal. 6:11. 2. any writing, a document or record; a. a note of hand, bill, bond, account, written acknowledgment of debt: Luke 16:6. b. a letter, an epistle: Acts 28:21. c. the sacred writings (of the O.T.) 2 Tim 3:15; the written law of Moses, Rom. 2:27; John 5:47; Rom. 2:29; Rom. 7:6; 2 Cor. 3:6. 3. letters, i. q. learning: Acts 26:24, of sacred learning John 7:15."
G. The KJV translates the Greek word transliterated graphe, a noun, 51 times as scripture. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says graphe, the noun, means: "a. a writing, thing written: 2 Time 3:16. b. the holy scripture: John 7:38; John 10:35; Acts 8:32; Rom. 4:3; Gal. 3:22; Gal 4:30; Jas. 2:8; 1 Pet. 2:6; 2 Pet. 1:20; also in the plural: Matthew 21:42; Matthew 26:54; Mark 14:49; Luke 24:27; John 5:39; Acts 17:2; Acts 17:11; Acts 18:24; Acts 18:28; 1 Cor. 15:3; 2 Peter 3:16; Rom. 9:17; Gal, 4:30; Matthew 22:29; Mark 12:24; Luke 24:45. c. a certain portion or section of holy scripture: Mark 12:10; Luke 4:21; John 19:37; Acts 1:16." In every instance of its use in the Greek manuscripts the Greek word graphe is translated either scripture, or if plural, scriptures.
It is evident that the English translation "Scriptures" refers to that which is written and not to that which is not written.
And Silence of the Scriptures, as used here, does not mean the absence of noise, but it is used here to refer to the absence of writing and/or writings referred to as Scripture and/or the "Scriptures." In addition to the overwhelming evidence from the original Greek, the English word Scripture is itself from the Latin scriptura, which also means a writing. So the Silence of the Scriptures refers to that which is not written.
The Apostle John said: "Many other signs therefore Jesus also performed in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name" (John 20:30-31 NASB). The things written in this book that the Apostle John refers to are in the domain of the writings, the Scriptures. The things not written in this book that the Apostle John refers to are in the domain of the Silence of the writings, the Silence of the Scriptures.
The words of the Bible contain all the ideas in it, and in order that the ideas may be perceived, the words of the Bible need to be rightly understood." Jesus was therefore saying to those Jews who had believed in Him, "If you abide in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:31,32 NASB).
It should be clear to all that when the words are not present in the Scriptures to express a particular idea or concept than the Scriptures do not teach that particular idea or concept. The Scriptures are very simply the collection of the words that convey the certain ideas and/or concepts in writing as expressed in the words employed.
Silence is not an axiom, or a rule thereof, of interpreting the words of human speech, nor can it be, as such would be totally absurd.
The true object of the words of speech is the impartation of thought. We should understand that the writers of the Scriptures mean what they say and not what they do not say. The opposite of this is also absurd.
Regarding those matters on which the Scriptures are Silent, everyone in Christ, pursuing peace, makes their own decisions in accordance with their own convictions. These conclusions are always their own and are not to be represented as the Word of God, or as "Laws of Silence."
Jesus said: "He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day" (John 12:48). Some teach that if we believe this, we might as well discard the rest of the Bible, - because, they say that we are not to be judged by the teachings and commandments of Christ, but rather by Apostolic precedents, necessary inferences, laws of exclusion, and a Theology styled as Pattern Theology. Where, in the Bible, in any version, are these doctrines taught? And, by what authority does anyone teach these doctrines as the word of God? And, where in the Bible, in any version, did Jesus or his Apostles teach these doctrines as the word of God? -There is no biblical authority for these doctrines, in any version, and they are not the doctrines of Christ.
And, it should be evident to all that are in Christ and Christ in them, that The Silence of the Scriptures gives as much liberty to those in Christ who would affirm a humanly devised principle or opinion related to matters religious as it does to those in Christ who would deny the opinion.
There are those who teach doctrines that deny that which is expressly taught in the words of the Scriptures (things written). And, there are those that teach doctrines that are based on that which the Scriptures have nothing to say (things not written). In other words, and in both cases, they are teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men.
How is it that some Christians, reading and studying the same Bible, arrive at opposite conclusions? Consider this article from an early Restoration Publication: "The inferences drawn by the human understanding partake of all the defects of that understanding. Thus we often observe two or more men sincerely exercising their mental powers upon the same words of inspiration, drawing inferences or conclusions, not only diverse, but flatly contradictory. This is the result of a variety of circumstances. The prejudices of education, habits of thinking, modes of reasoning, different degrees of information, the influence of a variety of passions and interests, and, above all, the different degrees of strength of human intellect, all concur in producing this result. The persons themselves are very often unconscious of the operation of all these circumstances, and are, therefore, honestly and sincerely zealous in believing and in maintaining the truth of their respective conclusions. These conclusions, then, are always private property, and can never be placed on a level with the inspired word. Subscription to them, or an acknowledgment of them, can never be rationally required as a bond of union" (The Christian Baptist, March, 1825).
It is a remarkable fact, that men have arisen who are waging an endless war attempting to disprove everything not revealed in the Scriptures as being unholy and contrary to God’s will. Some have devised a so-called inflexible, and authoritative principle regarding that which the Bible has nothing to say, and they have constructed on the foundation of their own devised principle laws that they say must be obeyed by those who would be followers of Jesus. They bind where God has not bound and they condemn those who would violate their laws even though their laws are based entirely on that which the Bible has nothing to say. Astonishingly, they profess, at the same time, to take the Bible alone for their authority.
What role does hermeneutics play in the controversy surrounding the "Law of Silence" or the "Principle of Silence?" We have heard this discussed in the light of a so-called "New Hermeneutic." And, we have heard this discussed in the light of a so-called "Old Hermeneutic (CENI)."
Let us now consider the "Silence of the Bible" and the "Law of Silence" and/or the "Principle of Silence" in the light of not the "New Hermeneutic" or the "Old Hermeneutic," but in the light of the "Bible Hermeneutic?"
Hermeneutics has its origin in the Greek text of the New Testament, and it is, therefore, essential that we consider this subject in the light of what the New Testament writers said in the original language. Our focus is on the following six New Testament Greek words from which the English word Hermeneutics is derived:
1. The Greek verb transliterated hermeneuo that is translated 3 times in the KJV as by interpretation, and one time as being interpreted. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says regarding hermeneuo, the verb: "(fr. Hermes, who was held to be the God of speech, writing, eloquence, learning); 1. to explain in words, expound: 2. to interpret, i.e. to translate what has been spoken or written in a foreign tongue into the vernacular: John 1:38, 42; 9:7; Hebrews 7:2."
2. The Greek noun transliterated hermeneia is translated two times in the KJV as interpretation. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says regarding the Greek word hermeneia, the noun: "interpretation (of what has been spoken more or less obscurely by others): 1 Cor 12:10; 14:26."
3.
The Greek word transliterated dihermeneuo (a compound of dia and hermeneuo), a verb, is translated 4 times in the KJV as interpret, 1 time as by interpretation, and one time as expound. Thayer’s Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament says regarding dihermeneuo, the verb: "to interpret [dia intensifying by marking transition]; 1. to unfold the meaning of what is said, explain, expound: Luke 24:27; absolutely, 1 Cor 12:30; 14:5, 13. 27. 2. to translate into one’s native language: Acts 9:36."
4.
The Greek word transliterated dihermeneutes, a noun, is translated 1 time in the KJV as interpreter. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says regarding dihermeneutes, the noun: "an interpreter: 1 Cor 14:28."
5. The Greek word transliterated dihermeneia, a noun, is translated 1 time in the KJV as interpretation. Thayers’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says regarding dihermeneia, the noun: "interpretation of obscure utterances, 1 Cor 12:10."
6.
The Greek word transliterated methermeneuo (a compond of meth and hermeneuo), a verb, is translated 6 times in the KJV as being interpreted; and 1 time as be by interpretation. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says regarding methermeneuo, the verb: "to translate into the language of one with whom I wish to communicate, to interpret: Matthew 1:23; Mark 5:41; 15:22, 34; John 1: 41; Acts 4:36; 13:8."
The English transliteration Hermeneutic is a Biblical concept in the original Greek language of the New Testament. And, it is clear that the English translation of the Greek is interpret, expound, interpretation and interpreter, and it is, therefore, very important that we rightly understand the meanings of the original Greek words that are translated interpret, expound, interpretation, and interpreter.
Since Hermeneutics, according to the Bible, is the explanation of the ideas as contained in the original words, rightly understood, that were employed by the writers of the Scriptures to convey the ideas that they intended to convey, what role could Hermeneutics possibly have where there are no words, reduced to writing, to be rightly understood? The Silence of the Scriptures is the absence of original words, reduced to writing, containing ideas and/or concepts to be rightly understood. How can it be any plainer than that?
It was on June 28, 1804, that the historical document entitled "The Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery" was published by Barton W. Stone, joined by the other members of the Springfield Presbytery, which ordained along with other provisions the following Items:
"ITEM. We will, that our power of making laws for the government of the church, and executing them by delegated authority, forever cease, that the people may have free course to the Bible, and adopt the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus."
"ITEM
. We will, that candidates for the Gospel ministry henceforth study the Holy Scriptures with fervent prayer, and obtain license from God to preach the simple Gospel, with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven, without any mixture of philosophy, vain deceit, traditions of men, or the rudiments of the world. And let none henceforth take this honor to himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron."
And so it was that in the year 1804 at Springfield, Bourbon County, Kentucky, the seeds of the Restoration movement were planted.
And approximately five years later in the year 1809, at Washington, Pennsylvania, for the sole purpose of promoting evangelical Christianity, the following provision, along with other provisions, was published in a document entitled "Declaration and Address" by Thomas Campbell, the father of Alexander Campbell:
II.
That each member, according to ability, cheerfully and liberally subscribe a certain specified sum, to be paid half yearly, for the purpose of raising a fund to support a pure Gospel ministry, that shall reduce to practice that whole form of doctrine, worship, discipline, and government, expressly revealed and enjoined in the word of God. And, also, for supplying the poor with the Holy Scriptures."
And so it was that in the year 1809 the stage was set for the Restoration Movement to take root in Western Pennsylvania. And this was the beginning of what is commonly referred today in Restoration Circles as the STONE - CAMPBELL MOVEMENT.
It is important to note that these Restoration pioneers committed themselves to the simple Gospel ministry that reduced to practice that which was expressly revealed and enjoined in the Word of God. They renounced the religious systems that relied on the teaching for their doctrines the precepts of men. In other words, and, as was the Apostle Paul, they were set for the defense of the Gospel of Christ. As expressed in the words of Alexander Campbell dated Monday, January 4, 1830, they taught that: the Christian religion is based on facts to be believed. "By facts we always mean something said or done. The works of God and the words of God, or the things done and spoken by God, are those facts which are laid down as exhibited in the Bible as the foundation of all faith, hope, love, piety, and humanity. All true and useful knowledge is an acquaintance with facts. And all true science is acquired from the observation and comparison of facts. - It is known when we have witnessed it ourselves, and it is believed when reported to us by credible persons who have witnessed it. This is the chief difference between faith and knowledge. As existences or beings must precede knowledge, so facts must precede either knowledge or belief. An event must happen before it can be known by man - it must be known by some before it can be reported to others - it must be reported before it can be believed, and the testimony must be confirmed, or made credible, before it can be relied upon."
It should come as no surprise, then, that these early Restoration pioneers rejected the teachings that denied that which was expressly revealed in the very words of the Scriptures. And it should come as no surprise that they rejected those doctrines and precepts as laws to be obeyed that were based on that which the scriptures have nothing to say.
It was August 18, 1889, 80 years after the DECLARATION AND ADDRESS, in a speech delivered at the seventeenth annual meeting held at the grove on Sand Creek in Shelby County, Illinois, that Daniel Sommer, made the following comments that were, sadly, destined to become the basis for many of the existing divisions in the Body of Christ.
"I first read a familiar passage in John 20th chapter. Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of the Disciples which are not written in this book. But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name. I also read Rom. 10:17. So then faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God."
"These scriptures, my hearers, taken together clearly teach that the high and grand confidence called FAITH, which is necessary to salvation from sin, is proclaimed by the testimony of the word of God coming in contact with the mind of men. Whether the eye or the ear be the inlet of the testimony to the mind, yet it is true that the high and grand confidence necessary to salvation called FAITH is produced by the word of God."
"Again, the domain of the divine testimony is the domain of FAITH. All that the word of God declares we can believe; what the word does not declare we cannot believe."
Belief or faith is produced by the testimony of the word of God and not by inference. Inference may serve as a basis for an opinion, a supposition, a view, a notion or an idea, but inference cannot produce faith, nor serve as a foundation for faith. Faith is a high degree of confidence that is produced by testimony. The faith that is necessary to give life through the name of Christ is produced by the testimony that is divine. Therefore, as was said, the domain of testimony determines the domain of faith. This being true, it follows that everything which the divine testimony reveals as the will of God and Christ we can believe to be their will."
"But on the other hand, whatever is not revealed in the divine testimony no one can possibly believe to be the divine will. In other words, whatever the word of God declares with approbation we can believe has been or now is the will of God; but whatever the word of God does not thus declare we not only DO NOT but we CANNOT believe has ever been or now is the will of God. This discrimination between testimony and inference, and thus between faith and opinion has been the peculiar strength, clearness and power of the position occupied by the disciples of Christ, as every disciple present today will doubtless confess."
"Such a conclusion having been reached, let us examine a few scriptures as illustrations of what we can believe and should believe." (At this point he quotes and supplies his commentary on the following scriptures to be believed: Heb. 11:6; Acts 16:31; Luke 24:47; Acts 17:30; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; Matt. 10:32; Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12).
He then continues: "In other words, whatever may be man’s inferences, reasonings, suppositions or preferences, yet no one can believe that to be the will of God which is not mentioned with approbation in the word of God as revealed in the Bible, or rather, revealed to us as the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. So, then, it is evident thus far the difference between disciples of Christ, and their religious neighbors are determined by the difference between TESTIMONY and INFERENCE, and between BELIEF or FAITH and OPINION or SUPPOSITION. In other words, in advocating simply what is revealed on the subjects mentioned we stand on the DIVINE TESTIMONY by which FAITH or BELIEF is produced. All that we advocate on these subjects is a matter of divine testimony and thus is a matter of belief or faith, while all that our religious neighbors advocate in opposition to us on these subjects is not a matter of divine testimony and hence not a matter of belief or faith, but being of human inference certainly belongs to the domain of opinion or supposition or view or preference. NO ONE CAN BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE WILL OF GOD WHICH IS NOT ATTESTED WITH APPROBATION IN THE WORD OF GOD."
(At this point, in his address, he continues with the following scriptural quotations together with his comments: Acts 11:26; Acts 26:28; 1 Pet. 4:10; Eph 3:14,15; Rom. 16:16; 1 Tim. 3:15.16).
"Now, my hearers, we come to another chapter of this great subject. Thus far we have been considering the differences between disciples and their religious neighbors as it respects the great subject of faith, and thus far I have set forth what every disciple understands and admits. The discrimination between faith and opinion, and between testimony and inference is generally well understood by disciples of Christ everywhere when we speak of the strength of our position and the weakness of the position of our religious neighbors. But now I propose to consider this same discrimination in its bearings upon the differences which exist among disciples. In other words, I propose to show that the very discrimination, which made us a great, a mighty and a prosperous people have been abandoned by a certain class of disciples who have been guilty of introducing humanisms into the work and worship of the church, whereby strife, alienation and division have been produced. By way of beginning in this direction I read first from Acts 20:28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to feed the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood. This language of Paul to the elders of Ephesus is an illustration or sample of the scriptures which enable us to believe that the flock or church of God at Ephesus was presided over by a plurality of bishops or overseers. The church is spoken of--not churches--and yet overseers are spoken of, showing that there were more than one. In the light of such a declaration we CAN believe and we SHOULD believe that a plurality of bishops or overseers were intended to be the feeders of the primitive flock and the watchers over the flock. Not that a little assembly of a dozen or even twice or thrice that number needed to have a plurality of bishops for the end in view or the work to be performed determined the number needed. But the Church at Ephesus, which was well established and was of size and strength, had a plurality of overseers whose business it was to feed the flock and watch over the flock and care for the flock. As all the other testimony of the New Testament is in harmony with this which has just been considered, I again say that we CAN believe and SHOULD believe that a plurality of bishops, at least for every church needing that many, was the original, divine order. Then , on the other hand, no one can possibly believe that it is the will of God that this order should be even partially ignored and the modern, imported, one-man, preacher-pastor established over the church or flock of God as the feeder and watcher thereof. WHY? The answer is because, --BECAUSE there is no testimony in the New Testament to that effect. The denominations generally have adopted the one man pastorate, but only upon INFERENCE--certainly not upon TESTIMONY. Therefore it is not upon FAITH but upon OPINION or SUPPOSITION that it is based.
"In the entire Book of God there is not one fragment of TESTIMONY in favor of the imported, one-man, preacher-pastor as the feeder and watcher over the flock after it had been gathered and established. Therefore, there is no one on earth who BELIEVES that such an arrangement is according to the divine will. That arrangement originated with apostate Rome, and from Rome was borrowed by the Protestant denominations and from them has been borrowed by a certain class of disciples who are determined to be like other folks and be in fashion. Concerning the preacher the testimony is, that his business is to gather a flock, establish it and then move onward, or visit a church, proclaim the truth for a season, forewarn the brethren against all manner of evil and false teachers and move onward. Paul and Barnabas, I have sometimes thought, were a little inclined to pastorate at Antioch. The Church there was well established and no doubt a pleasant place to remain--good company and good eating. Not much danger there of missing a meal in traveling. As Acts 11:26 informs us, that they assembled a whole year with the church in that place. But the Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. Then the brethren unto whom such revelation was made fasted, prayed, laid hands on them and SENT THEM AWAY. This shows what every church should do with every man who can preach. Send them away--let him go forth and proclaim the unsearchable riches in the regions beyond. Of course it is more pleasant to remain at home if he has a good wife, and if she be a good cook and a good housekeeper, yet as certainly as that he is worthy of being called a preacher he should be sent AWAY with the benediction, blessing and support of the church. That this is the divine will we CAN believe and SHOULD believe without doubt, because we have the divine testimony to that effect. But to believe that the preacher should settle down upon an established congregation and locate himself and do the work of feeding intended to be done by the overseers--to believe this is UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE, because there is not one fragment of testimony to that effect. There may be INFERENCE and thus OPINION or SUPPOSITION, but there can be no FAITH, and whatsoever is not of faith is sin."
And from the reasonings set forth in this ADDRESS of Daniel Sommer’s, seeds were planted in the Restoration Movement that are bearing their awful fruit to this day. Prior to this ADDRESS, and the ADDRESS AND DECLARATION that follows, only those commandments expressly revealed in the Scriptures applicable to Christians were regarded as laws to be obeyed. Difference of views regarding matters not revealed and non-essential matters were permitted. Some have asked the question: How could this mighty and prosperous Restoration Movement come to be so divided? And I believe that the answer is to be found in a fragment of scripture quoted and misapplied that is found in these words of the last sentence of the preceding paragraph of the ADDRESS of Daniel Sommer’s in 1889; "and whatsoever is not of faith is sin." While it is true that Romans 14:23 contains these words, they are not in any way to be understood as Daniel Sommer suggested. The passage reads in its context as follows: "But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written, As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall give praise to God. So then each one of us shall give account of himself to God. Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this -- not to put an obstacle or stumbling block in a brother’s way. I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. For if because of food your brother is hurt, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food him for whom Christ died. Therefore do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil; for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. For he who in this way serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. So then let us pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another. Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are clean, but they are evil for the man who eats and gives offense. It is good not to eat meat or drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles. The faith which you have, have as your own conviction before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not of faith is sin" (Romans 14:10-23 NASB). Regarding this passage, Alford’s Greek Testament, first published in 1844, says: "Here the Apostle has in view two Christians, both living by faith, and by faith doing acts pleasing to God: and he reminds them that whatever they do out of harmony with this great principle of their spiritual lives, belongs to the category of sin." Henry Alford was a Greek scholar and familiar with the meaning and usage of the Greek noun pistis translated faith or belief and its related Greek verbal word picture pisteuo translated believe. The Greek Lexicons conclusively show that the words were in common use as are their English equivalents today and were not then nor are they now exclusively used regarding the concept of worship. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says that the Greek noun pi/stij - transliterated pistis and translated in Romans 14:23 as faith was in common use and commonly understood to mean: "1. Conviction of the truth of anything, belief." And the Greek verb pisteu/w - transliterated pisteuo was understood to mean: "To think to be true; to be persuaded of; to credit, place confidence in."
Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon says that the Greek noun pistis was in common use and was commonly understood to mean: "persuasion of a thing, confidence, assurance." And the Greek verb pisteuo was understood to mean: "To believe, trust in, put faith in, confide in, rely on a person or thing." And such is the testimony of other Greek Lexicons. We must believe that the Apostle Paul knew the meaning of the word he used to convey the idea he intended to convey. It seems that Daniel Sommer was not familiar with the meaning of the word faith. Surely, if he rightly understood the meaning of the word he would not have coupled "whatever is not of faith is sin" with "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" in a misapplication of scripture in order to craft the concept expressed in this ADDRESS, and he would not of proclaimed his humanly devised concept as Gospel truth. The English word faith as well as the English word belief, and the Greek word from which these English words are translated, describe a person’s own settled persuasion or conviction, and that may be in regards to a whole lot of different issues including, but not limited to, one’s own settled persuasion regarding essential and expressly revealed Bible commandments to be obeyed. The fragment of scripture "whatever is not of faith is sin" as stated in Romans 14:23 refers to a person violating his own conscience and should be rightly understood as used in its own context. The concept of faith, then, as crafted in this ADDRESS by Daniel Sommer is a false teaching.
Tragically, this concept is then applied, in the balance of his ADDRESS, to the following issues: The Church is God’s own divinely arranged missionary society. "But the point I wish especially to impress on your minds is, that no one on earth does or can believe such a society to be the divine will on that subject (Note: the reference here is to a Missionary Society other then the church), for the simple reason there is not one fragment of testimony to that effect. For want of testimony, belief or faith is simply impossible. Of course, there are inferences and opinions, reasonings and suppositions, views, notions and preferences. But there is no faith and there can be no faith, and the Apostle Paul declared, Whatever is not of faith is sin."
"Now your attention, my hearers, is invited to Rom, 12:8. Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation; he that giveth let him do it with simplicity. This clearly shows that giving is not to be done in complicity or complexity, but in simplicity. --Thus as we are to give with simplicity we should not adopt the complex or complicated or roundabout way, but the simple, direct way which consists of working and saving till we have something in our pockets for the Lord’s cause and then to put the hand directly into our pockets and hand it out. --But the point I wish to impress is that giving in the simple, direct way we all can believe and should believe to be the divine will on the subject, because that is a matter of divine testimony. On the other hand, it is impossible for any one to believe the modern, humanly-devised methods of raising money to be according to the divine will, because there is not one particle of testimony which thus declares." After citing various methods being employed to raise money such as providing jugs for the collection of certain funds that are deemed to be for worthwhile purposes, he concludes with: "But what I wish to say concerning this entire business is, that it is outside the domain of faith because it is outside the domain of divine testimony. No one can believe that to be the will of God which is not mentioned with approbation in the Book of God. But in this book it is declared, Whatever is not of faith is sin."
"But the music question must not be forgotten. I read Eph. 5:19. Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord. I also read Col 3:16. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord." --He concludes his comments on instrumental music with these words: "No one on earth can possibly believe that playing of any kind is a part of the worship of God through Christ, nor that it SHOULD or even MAY accompany the worship without offending Christ. There may be inferences, opinions, views, notions, suppositions, but there can be no such confidence as the word faith signifies. Whatever is not of faith is sin."
"What then must be done by those who are determined to remain loyal to Christ? --In the language of the Apostle Peter I answer: THE TIME IS COME THAT JUDGMENT MUST BEGIN AT THE HOUSE OF GOD."
The Octographic Review, September 5, 1889, reported that following the ADDRESS -- duration one hour and forty minutes -- by Daniel Sommer, Elder P.P. Warren then took the stand and presented a document entitled ADDRESS AND DECLARATION subscribed to by representatives of the Sand Creek Church, the Liberty Church, the Ash Grove Church, the Union Church and the Mode Church and beside these; Elder Colsen, of Gays, and Elder Hoke, of the Stricklyn congregation signed as individuals only, because the congregations whence they came had not been called together and formally sent them. The purpose of the ADDRESS AND DECLARATION is stated in its final paragraph as follows: "It is therefore, with the view, if possible, of counteracting the usages and practices that have crept into the church, that this effort on the part of the congregations hereafter named is made. And now, in closing up this ADDRESS AND DECLARATION, we state that we are impelled from a sense of duty to say, that all such as are guilty of teaching, or allowing and practicing the many innovations to which we have referred, that after being admonished and having sufficient time for reflection, if they do not turn away from such abominations, that we can not and will not regard them as brethren."
It is a remarkable fact, that this document, based on the Address that preceded its adoption by the elders and members of six congregations in a joint meeting at Sand Creek located in rural Shelby County, Illinois on August 17, A.D. 1889, has had an unbelievable negative impact on many churches of Christ and Christian churches in this country, and its impact is still being felt to this day nearly 114 years later.
Instead of unity in matters essential, as expressly revealed and enjoined in the word of God; and, liberty in matters not expressly revealed in the word of God, and therefore non-essentials; and, in all things LOVE; the stage was set at Sand Creek for Divisions and Factions that have occurred in the Body of Christ over issues that the Bible has nothing to say. This has occurred even in direct violation of the very clear teachings of the Word of God regarding divisions; unity; and proper respect for other brethren in Christ, including those of different views regarding matters which the Bible has nothing to say.
There was first a doctrine of a principle of Scriptural Silence and then it came to be taught as a negative command, and as the Law Of Silence. The Law of Silence is being taught in our day by some preachers and teachers as the very Word of God, either as the "Law of Silence" or by another name the "Principle of Silence" as a law, and, it doesn’t seem to bother them, at all, that Jesus and/or the Apostles never once mentioned the so-called "Law of Silence" or the "Principle of Silence." In other words the scriptures are completely silent as regards the Law of Silence or the "Principle of Silence." It is simply nowhere to be found in God’s statute book. If God had wanted such a law He would have included it in His Book.
As recently as February 2001, the foundational concept originally propagated at Sand Creek appeared in a different form in Seek The Old Paths as an article entitled: Hebrews 7:14 Teaches About The Silence Of The Scriptures. The author quotes Hebrews 7:14 as follows: "For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah: of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood." The writer of this article, by virtue of his own supposition, says that this passage makes known the importance of the Lord’s silence and he proceeds to misapply this portion of text, totally out of its context, to a whole host of issues to which it does not relate at all. He asserts that the silence of the Scriptures must be properly respected as a limitation, not recklessly regarded as a license.
It should be evident to all that this scripture is in no way related to the issues that are dividing the churches today. This scripture speaks to the subject of which the writer of Hebrews was addressing: "If perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of a an indestructible life. For it is witnessed of Him, Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect). And on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God" (Hebrews 7:11-19 NASB).
Under the New Covenant, Jesus is our high priest, a descendant of the tribe of Judah, the priesthood is changed, and also, the law is changed. The message of this scripture is self evident and very clear. It has nothing to do with authority based on a "Law of Silence" or a "Principle of Silence." It has to do with authority based on that which is expressly taught in the words of Scripture.
The expression
"of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood" is written to Jewish Christians to make it very clear that Jesus was not a priest under the Mosaic Law because He was descendant of the tribe of Judah. He was not of the Levitical priesthood. The priesthood was changed and by necessity the law was changed. Jesus is a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. This is the communication of an idea or concept through the use of words reduced to writing. This expression is simply making it clear that the law of Moses expressly required that the priests were to come from the tribe of Levi. There was nothing said about Judah because Levi was specified. Again, it has to do with authority based on that which is expressly taught in the words of Scripture.
Under the New Testament dispensation, according to God’s Word, Christians are to obey the commandments of Jesus not the inferences and suppositions of men. The attempt to use this fragment of scripture as a basis of an effort to defend a humanly-devised "Law of Silence" or "Principle of Silence" as the Word of God, is, to say the least, absolutely absurd. It should be evident to all that the Silence of the Scriptures is simply Silence, nothing more, nothing less, neither a limitation nor a license.
The expression "of which tribe Moses spake nothing
" is simply not a commandment of Jesus, forbidding Sunday School Classes, or a commandment of Jesus forbidding plural communion cups, or a commandment of Jesus forbidding Activity Buildings, or a commandment of Jesus forbidding congregations meeting in rented or owned buildings, or a commandment of Jesus forbidding Special Singing Groups, or a commandment of Jesus forbidding Joint Support of Orphan Homes & Church Projects, or is it a commandment of Jesus forbidding the hiring of Preachers, or a commandment of Jesus forbidding instrumental music; in fact it is not a commandment of Jesus at all.
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the first four books of the New Testament, contain the record of the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ and include His final instructions to the Apostles - "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:19-20 KJV). That is what the rest of the Bible is all about: it is the record of the Apostles and their converts going into all the world teaching men of all nations to observe the teachings of Christ. "Therefore they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word" (Acts 8:4 KJV).
They taught the words of Jesus, "If ye love me, keep my commandments" (John 14:15 KJV). "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love" (John 15: 10 KJV). In fact it was their mission to teach all things that Jesus had commanded and this they did. Whether it had to do with anger, bitterness, wrath, murder, adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, seditions, heresies, drunkenness, or other similar sins, they were uncompromising in their presentation of the words of Christ. And they were equally quick to teach the words of Jesus regarding love, forgiveness, salvation, joy, meekness, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, kindness, temperance, and other virtues and fruits of the Spirit. In short, they were committed to teaching the words of Christ, the teachings of Christ, the law of Christ, the doctrine of Christ and they simply did not teach as their doctrines the precepts of men.
When Jesus was baptized in the river Jordan, "the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: and lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Matthew 3:16-17 KJV). Later, on the Mount of Transfiguration; "Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them. And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow-, so as no fuller on earth can white them. And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus. And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles- one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. For he wist not to say; for they were sore afraid. And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him" (Mark 9:2-7 KJV).
Hear Him
is the message throughout the New Testament. In the closing chapter of the last book of the Bible, we have these words "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city" (Revelation 22:14 KJV). On the mount of transfiguration it is Jesus, not Moses, and Elias, and Jesus. It is Jesus, hear Him. Today it is not humanly devised principles, necessary inferences, Pattern Theology, laws of exclusion and Apostolic precedents, and Jesus. It is Jesus, hear Him.
Early Christians had to deal with the issue confronting us today: Are we to believe God or men? We must reject the "teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." We must believe Jesus when he said "He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself, but the father which sent me, he gave me a commandment what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak" (John 12:48-50 KJV).
"And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought also to walk, even as he walked. Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye heard from the beginning" (1 John 2:3-7 KJV). "Whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep His commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight" (1 John 3:22 KJV). "For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments: and His commandments are not grievous" (1 John 5:3 KJV). Serious issue? You bet your eternal life it is.
"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 unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will" (Hebrews 2:3,4 KJV).
The New Testament contains facts to be believed and commands to be obeyed.
The Law of Silence or the Principle of Silence is not contained in that which was "at the first began to be spoken by the Lord and was confirmed by them that heard Him." It is, very simply, not a teaching or a command of the New Testament.
There are essentials of
faith in Christ and there can be no compromise here. The words of the Lord Jesus Christ must be the focus of our teaching. "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth --- from such withdraw thyself" (1 Timothy 6:3-5 KJV).
The teaching for doctrines the commandments of men undermines the clear teachings of the Word of God and the supreme authority of Jesus Christ. They are the fountain of all corruptions of Christianity from the beginning until now. I plead with you, in the name of Christ and for the sake of His Church - reject these doctrines.
What CAN be said for the "Law of Silence" or the "Principle of Silence" is that the Scriptures have nothing to say about the humanly-devised "Law of Silence" or "Principle of Silence" derived from concepts based on the misapplication of portions of unrelated texts, or however derived from inference or supposition. Again, if God had wanted such a law, He would have included it in His Book.
It was for freedom that Jesus set us free not only from the bondage of the Mosaic Law, but also free from the doctrines and precepts of men as having any authority over Christians in matters religious. Let us therefore stand firm in (A): The teachings of Jesus to believed; and, (B): The commandments of Jesus to be obeyed.
Unity
in essentials; Liberty in non-essentials; and in all things Love.
James S. Davis
E-mail: jamesdavis@focusonthescriptures.com
The text of three of the documents referred to above are listed as RM Reference on this website, including: (1). Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery; (2). Declaration and Address by Thomas Campbell. (3). Address by Daniel Sommer.
|