Please see the previous articles for background material. If you do not have copies of the articles, please ask someone where they can be found.
Last week, our look at the relationship between specific authority and generic authority also called attention to related conclusions. We left off with the following concluding paragraphs:
Too often, there is agreement that we are to act with Divine authority (according to command, example or necessary inference), but no understanding of how generic options are seen and expressed. Remember the following, from last week’s article:
"The other sense in which God is silent relates to those matters about which God has spoken specifically (seen in what is commanded or stated, exemplified, or necessarily inferred), but has not regulated how we are to do those things. This is a very important part of determining God’s will."
We must be careful to NOT regulate what God has not regulated. Just because something is not familiar does not mean it is not authorized. And, here’s the key principle to remember: Our obligation is to do, exactly and everything that God has commanded, exemplified, or necessarily implied. We do not act with Divine authority when we pick and choose what we want to do out of what God has specified.
We pointed out that we have no authority to act in the absence of God’s specific instructions. To do so would be to act in what God has not revealed. To ask why we should not do this is almost to answer the question: How can we act according to the will of God if He has not told us what His will is?
But, God has not regulated everything. Within those matters that He has given by revelation are things that are necessary to the doing of these things. These things are called generic options. Generally speaking, God has not regulated these things, except according to the principle of 1 Corinthians 10:23: They must (1) be lawful; that is, not in violation of some principle of scripture (this is determined by the presence of specifying information that shows the action to be authorized), (2) they must edify; that is, they must work to the building up of the body of Christ (this may be done by bringing the church into compliance with the will of God, or as an action that unifies, encourages, or supports all in doing what God expects of us).
However, some people press generic options as though they are specific authority. When this is done, division always occurs. What needs to be understood is that generic options are exactly that, options. They are the optional ways in which we may do what is specified. But, in every case, these optional ways must respect what is specified. If God has given several specifics about some action, we have no authority for doing anything less than all of what God has specified.
It is very easy to take practice that is familiar and scriptural, and require both of all who do whatever is authorized. On the other hand, something may not be familiar and still be entirely scriptural. This is why it is so important to not require what God has not required. We can only know what is required by what God has revealed. It is not our prerogative to impose obligations and actions beyond what God requires, but we must also do all He has said.
Let us use prayer as a simple illustration. Imagine three specific things God has attached to acceptable prayer (there are others, but for simplicity, let us assume this is all God has said):
If I pray in the name of the Lord, in a language that is understood, but doubt that He will answer my prayer, I am not praying in a scriptural way. On the other hand, if I pray in an understandable language, with great faith that God will answer my prayer, but I do so on the basis of Confucian philosophy (the Chinese religious philosopher who lived in 551-479 BC), surely we can see that I am not praying in the name of the Lord and my prayer is not acceptable to Him. ALL of God’s specifics must be present in my prayer.
Now, let’s apply some generics to the scenarios: If I pray in the name of the Lord, in an understandable language with my head bowed and believe that He will answer my prayer, I am praying scripturally. I may also pray while kneeling, or standing on my tiptoes, or sitting on a lawn chair in the rain, BUT as long as I am praying in the Lord’s name, understanding my words and believing that He will hear my prayer, I am praying scripturally.
But, someone may say, we MUST bow our heads in prayer. Although bowing one’s head in prayer IS scriptural, it is not the ONLY posture that is authorized in prayer. Some may bow their heads, others may stand, still others may kneel…posture does not make prayer right or wrong. What matters is what God said. We do not have the right to bind one option above others!
In the same way, I can pray in Spanish or English, Russian or Hawaiian – the language is a generic option (as long as I and those, with whom I am praying of course, understand the language). Those who pray in Spanish only do so scripturally when they pray in the name of the Lord AND believe He will hear AND do so in words that are understood. The same thing is true about those who pray in Russian. However, if I pray in Hawaiian, but those who hear me do not understand my words (in other words, they are not edified by my prayer), then my language (which is ordinarily an option) is no longer scriptural (for it does not edify), regardless of whether I am praying in the name of the Lord and believing He will answer me.
Surely, we can all see that if we impose English as the ONLY language in prayer, that there are teeming millions of Christians across this globe who can never pray scripturally. The truth is, God has NOT specified a language, but has left that up to our own choice.
God has given four specifics that govern our eating of the Lord’s supper:
If we do 1, 3 and 4, but leave out 2, we have not done what God has specified. If we do 2, 3, and 4, but leave out 1, we have not done what God has specified. In order to do what God has specified, we must do ALL of what God specified. In other words, if we are to eat the Lord’s supper on the first day of the week (a scripturally correct day), we must eat the bread, drink the fruit of the vine and do it together. If we are going to eat the bread and drink the fruit of the vine scripturally, we must do it together on the first day of the week. What right do we have to leave out anything that God has specified?
When you add generics to what God has specified, you have anytime on the first day of the week, and home-baked or store-bought unleavened bread, and hand-picked/pressed or store-bought fruit of the vine, and in a church building or under an oak tree togetherness. EVERYTHING God has specified must be present, regardless of the options we choose in doing what He has specified. Options are always subordinate to what God specifies, but if we are acting according to what He has specified, we have many options from which to choose.
Next week, our final article, subtitled "Resolving Questions and Differences"