Search This Blog

Monday, August 30, 2021

The Validity and Right Use of Scriptural Implications

The Validity and Right Use of Scriptural Implications

James A.E. MacLellan


“Give me chapter and verse!”   That is a statement that I certainly have used and have heard used numerous of times.  It is a good and proper requirement.  The Bible, precisely interpreted, becomes our infallible and authoritative instruction in faith and in life.  The question that I’m seeking to answer is this: “Can Biblical inferences also provide an infallible, authoritative instruction to our life and faith?”  What I propose in this paper is that the Bible is also a valuable revelation of principles that when assembled properly do provide Divine guidance. Plainly speaking, a collection of Biblical truths, held together, can lead us to sound convictions. Stated in briefer terms, rather that establishing conclusions on induction[1], they can arrive by implication[2].

 In non-moral decisions this is a recognized manner of discerning wise choices.  Often the selection of a place of study for a university student is the result of bringing several factors or principles together and arriving at a decision.  The fact that this paper is addressing this topic is not to say that it is new.  In fact, the assumption is that we all do this all the time whether we categorize it this way or not. The question is, if we assemble several biblical implications can we understand the conclusion as authoritative.

 The Church has come to important conclusions solely based on Scriptural implications.  For example, there is no one word in the Bible for Trinity. Yet we arrive at the conclusion of the Trinity by affirming our God is one (Deuteronomy 6:4 and in that “oneness” there are 3 distinct personages. There are three persons all called God in different places in the Bible (i.e., Father — Galatians 1:1; Son — John 20:28; and Spirit — Acts 5:3-4).

 Other topics could also be concluded by just following through the implications of Scripture.  One that the Church deals with from time to time is the issue of Church Membership.  A careful study of Scripture (Adding the recognizable distinction of members of Israel to the practice of the early church through God “adding” to the number (a number that was known and quantifiable[3]) to the sad reality that this membership could also include excommunication[4] leads to only one implication: the visible community of believers is a known, quantitative, unique, identifiable group, i.e., Members. Another very important topic that we use the implication of Scripture to aid a conclusion is the death of a pre-born or young child, or the death of someone without the faculties to adequately understand the Gospel.  Most evangelicals embrace the realties of God’s mercy, the necessity of accountability, etc. to believe that people in that condition must be recipients of saving grace. (John MacArthur has written a comforting book on this: ‘Safe in the Arms of God’ and he solely uses the implications of Scripture to conclude that babies or those without the faculties or abilities to understand the Gospel are destined for glory.)

 

One can argue that even Jesus used the tools of implication in His teaching.  In Matthew 22:31–32[5] (ESV) we read:


31 And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”

 

Jesus is referring these men (who disbelieve in the resurrection but believe the Mosaic Law) back to Exodus 3:6 where God is talking to Moses from the burning bush.  It was not God’s purpose to discuss resurrection truths with Moses, but when God says to Moses that He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Jesus picks up the implication of that and argues to these Jewish leaders: Is God the God of the living or the dead? Therefore, there must be life after death!   My point is that Jesus is employing implication to present His argument. “The Apostle Paul also derives theological principles by use of such reasoning when he uses the Mosaic prohibition of muzzling oxen who tread grain to prove that pastors and missionaries deserve remuneration for their labours (1 Corinthians 9:9, 1 Timothy 5:8)”9.


Here’s another example:  John the Baptist was in prison.  He heard about the ministry of Jesus.  He sent his disciples to ask Jesus, “Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?” Matthew 11:3 (ESV).  Here’s Jesus answer:

“Go and tell John what you hear and see: 5 the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them. 6 And blessed is the one who is not offended by me.” Matthew 11:4–6 (ESV)

Jesus quoted to this prophet the selected words of Isaiah 26, 29, 35, 53, and 61 all pointing to the fact that He was the promised Messiah.  Jesus was clearly amassing texts to imply to John that He was the One.  Do you know what Jesus didn’t say?  “The opening of the prison to those who are bound.” Isaiah 61:1 (ESV.  Would Jesus be leading John toward the implication that he is going to get out of jail?   Is that why Jesus said, “Blessed is the one who is not offended by me”? 

 As I stated earlier, this ability to study God’s Word and assemble principles that point to a conclusion is not new to the Church. The Westminster Confession of Faith contains an excellent statement on this topic.  In chapter 1, paragraph six, the Westminster divines stated that “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequences may be deduced from Scripture ...”[i] [Emphasis mine] That is a tremendously important phrase: the good and necessary consequences deduced from Scripture.

 It neither nullifies nor demeans Holy Scripture to study it with due care and prayerful diligence and identify “good and necessary consequences” derived by implication.  But at the same time it should be done with caution.  The warning that seems appropriate is summed up in something we all know “it is possible to read anything into the Scriptural text.”  That may be an overstatement, but it contains truth.  A liberal pastor once quoted to me this text: “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God.” (1 John 4:7, ESV). He then said, “Anyone who loves is a Christian.”   Let me suggest some cautionary principles to follow when arriving at an implied conclusion from the Bible.

 1. What is your heart motivation?  There is a subtle and deadly difference between studying Scripture and accumulating principles simply to arrive at a conclusion you have already pre-determined (That is called “proof-texting”) as opposed to studying Scripture and allowing the noted texts to point to a conclusion that does not originate with you.  Is your motivation pure and God-centered?  The scalpel of the Holy Spirit is necessary to keep one’s motivations pure.  We should ask, “Am I trying to read a conclusion into the text?” Or, “Am I trying to make the Scripture say what I want it to say?”  Better to be humble and upon studying diligently noting the multitude of texts that point to an important implication.

 2. Consider the Law of Non-contradiction. There can be no deduction from Scripture that is also contradictory to the clear and plain revelation of Scripture.  This principle goes without discussion.  For example the collection of evidence pointing to women in ministry (from Deborah to Phoebe) cannot be stated in a way that contradicts Paul’s admonition in 1 Timothy 2:8ff.  Therefore, if we assemble some texts that seem to point to an implied conclusion, that conclusion must be handled in submission to the rest of Scripture.  For example someone might careful note the multitude of occasions in the Bible where polygamy is practiced.  One cannot deduce that this is by implication permissible for it contradicts what is plain and prohibitive.  

 3. Peer review[6] is more than a wise secular notion.   The proliferation of “expert” news and social media prognostications,  with absolutely no peer review during the last seventeen months is a good example of this.  The Bible asserts a principle in Deuteronomy 19:15 that extends throughout the Canon, that matters should be determined by more than one person. Practically speaking this means that if a student of God’s Word arrives at a deduction by implication, that conclusion should be tested by those who are workmen (women) that rightly handle the Word of God.  The early Church (at least for the first 400 years) was known for working out its theology in community.  It is wise and prudent to follow their example. The words of the Sage are relevant: “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.” (Proverbs 11:14, ESV).  In this day when self-publishing abounds, there is no end to so-called Christian literature totally lacking peer review.  One should count it a red flag when someone arrives at a conclusion that is new to the history of the Church, new to highly respected theologians and new to brothers and sisters within the local, visible Church. 

 4. Lastly, test the characteristics expressed in the Westminster Catechism.  This may be the most difficult.  The authors of the Catechism showed immense wisdom in authoring the phrase, “good and necessary”.  We must learn to decide between “good” and “necessary” consequences and those that are imaginative and unnecessary. This is an extreme example, but many years ago a man in my Church exuberantly wanted me to watch a video that had gotten him very excited.  The so-called Bible “teacher” made the implication that as mankind was originally given dominion over animals, even naming them, that in the age to come, redeemed people will be restored to a communicative relationship with birds, animals and fish.  The law of “unnecessary” rules. (I actually used less sophisticated language at the time.)

 Paul helps me in this when he writes about our daily conversations with one another. He wrote, “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.” (Ephesians 4:29, ESV). I think we should show evidence that this implication we have drawn from Scripture is good and necessary. There can be a fascination with the marginal, a unnecessary interest in the bizarre.  “As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.” (1 Timothy 1:3–4 (ESV))

 So I conclude: The careful, studious, prayerful study of God’s Word that leads the reader to observe an implication of such study, neither nullifies nor demeans Holy Scripture when it stands in harmony with the Bible, is clarified and embellished by inviting healthy critique and it, in fact, leads people to “good and necessary consequences”. It such cases they can be considered binding upon the conscience.  When done properly, the end result of sound Biblical implications is just as authoritative as a “chapter and a verse”. 

 I have attempted to develop these thoughts for the benefit of my fellow Elders.  To them I encourage to be men of the Word, familiar with a much as possible.  Most importantly we should know the clear and dogmatic truths contained within.  We should also, in time, be able to amass principles that lead to God-glorifying conclusions.  One that is on the table for discussion is in regard to the Biblical requirement for Members who sin publicly.  That entire topic finds it’s conclusion in the assembly of Biblical principles that all lead to a “good and necessary consequence”.

 Here’s a test case to be considered.  The Bible gives no specific, (chapter/verse) statement of the age of a child must be before taking Communion.  Could you arrive at a conclusion based upon a plurality of principles in the Scripture?  Or, here’s another one to think through: is there a principial order to the events of repentance/belief, baptism, church membership and participating in the Lord’s Table?

 

“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” - 2 Timothy 3:16–17 (ESV)

 

 

 

 

 



[1] The process or action of bringing about something.  In Scriptural interpretation it is called the “inductive” method or the exegetical method.

[2] The conclusion that can be drawn from something although it is not explicitly stated.

[3] Acts 2:47; 4:32, etc.

[4] Matthew 18:15-17; 1 Corinthians 5:4-5

[5] I am indebted to my friend and colleague, Pastor Jeff Jones, Grace Church of Cochrane, for pointing this out to me.

[6] Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (peers). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field.



[i] “VI. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word: and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.”


No comments: