What Does It Mean To Be “Providentially Hindered”?

Article “Unless Providentially Hindered”: original source: https://www.ilfordipc.co.uk/2022/08/19/unless-providentially-hindered/

I remember our first winter living in the USA, when it snowed heavily one Saturday afternoon. We’d been out enjoying the snow, when we got a phone call telling us that church was cancelled the next day; I remember being quite unimpressed! “These Americans don’t take church very seriously”, I thought. The next morning, we arranged to meet with some friends who lived locally for family devotions. We went on foot. And as we trudged the mile or two to their house, walking down unploughed roads, knee-deep in snow, without a car in sight, it dawned on me that cancelling church that Sunday had not been an over-reaction to weather. Rather it was a considered response to God’s providence. Given that virtually everyone drove to church, it just wouldn’t have been possible or safe to get to church that morning. 

This is a situation that Christians in the past would have described as being “providentially hindered”. The phrase described the fact that God in his providence sometimes prevents us from gathering to worship with his people. A good biblical example would be the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37). The Levite and priest in that story should have stopped on their way to worship to help the man on the Jericho road. They were providentially hindered. The Levite and priest hadn’t planned to stop on that road. But they should have stopped. The emergency demanded it. Likewise Jesus says, if a sheep falls into a pit on the Sabbath, won’t you take hold of it and lift it out? (Matt 12:11). This accident was something unforeseen and unplanned by the farmer, which required his immediate attention. 

The key point of the phrase is to recognise that it is God’s sovereignty that is preventing us using the Lord’s Day as we should, not our own decision-making. The hinderance is inadvertent from our point of view. But there are many hinderances to coming to church, and it’s easy to use God’s providence as an excuse. So, I know of students who try to justify writing their assignments on Sundays using the “sheep in a pit” principle. But that’s not really being “providentially hindered”. Really, they’re throwing their sheep in a pit on a Friday, and waiting until Sunday to do something about it. Agreeing to have family over on a Sunday, and not making it clear to them that you will go to church is not what it means to be providentially hindered! That’s a decision you’ve taken to put family before worship; it’s not a decision that God’s taken. It’s possible to let pseudo-emergencies (which can wait), or our own disorganisation or other people’s decisions about Sundays, hinder us from coming to church.

This apocryphal letter helpfully pokes fun at this mis-use of the idea: 

Dear Preacher,

You often stress attendance at worship as important. But, I think a man has the right to miss now and then because he might be providentially hindered. Please excuse me on the following days on which I will be providentially hindered: July 4 (national holiday – 1 day); Labor Day (even God had one day of rest – 1 day); Memorial Day (state holiday – 1 day); school closing (kids need a break – 1 day); school opening (last chance before fall – 1 day); family reunions (1 day each for me and the wife – 2 days); out-of-town ballgames (we must support our children’s teams – 5 days); tournaments (high school, college, tennis and golf – 4 days); anniversary (second honeymoon – 1 day); sickness (1 for each member of the family – 5 days); business trips (gotta make a living you know – 3 days); vacation (2 weeks but 3 weekends – 3 days); bad weather (rain, ice, hail, snow, etc – 5 days); Dallas Cowboys games (or whoever – 4 days); unexpected company (usually don’t bring church clothes – 2 days); alarm clock malfunctions (can’t blame me for shoddy workmanship – 2 days); time change (who can remember when that is – 2 days); house and car repairs (can’t afford plumbers and mechanics – 3 days); TV specials (good for kid’s education – 2 days); Christmas (only comes once a year – 1 day); New Year’s Day (need to start off rested – 1 day). This brings the total to 50 days. So, preacher, that only leaves two Sundays per year for me to attend worship. I’ll see you on Easter Sunday for sure, and the third Sunday in August (unless providentially hindered).

Yours truly,

Faithful Member

That’s using providence as an excuse, and trying to spiritualise our own poor priorities.

But to be “providentially hindered” is a real thing. When Jesus warned of coming tribulations, he said: “Pray that your flight may not be… on a sabbath” (Matt 24:20). Why? Well, your desire should be to keep the Sabbath, but Jesus recognises there can be circumstances, so bad, so dangerous, where, despite your desire to gather for worship, you’ve got to run for your life! So, this concept is really clarifying. It is liberating, in recognising the reality of emergencies, ill-health, and inadvertent situations that come along and interfere with worship. You don’t need to feel guilty when you’re stuck at home on a Sunday caring for a sick child. But neither is it a way to rationalise your bad choices and the things you let interfere with Sundays.

As far as we’re concerned, God wants us to be convinced that a day in his courts is better than a thousand elsewhere (Ps 84:10), and he wants us to plan, arrange our lives, and act upon that conviction. But he is sovereign, and he sometimes for his wise reasons interferes with our plans. Wouldn’t it be great if we committed to the principle that we will gather for worship 100% of the time, not “unless hindered”, but “unless providentially hindered?“.

An Eschatological Misstep

Article “One Wrong Step Messes Up Your Eschatology” by Gary DeMar – original source: https://americanvision.org/posts/one-wrong-step-messes-up-your-eschatology/

The first time I read through the NT, beginning with Matthew’s gospel in 1973, I came across passages like Matthew 10:2316:27-28, and 24:34 that did not fit the popular end-time views of the day. At the time, in the early 1970s, Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth (TLGPE) was a massive best seller. “Despite some dated content, 28 million copies had sold by 1990.” In an off-handed way (so as not to be labeled a date setter) Lindsey predicted that the so-called “rapture of the church” would take place before 1988. Here’s what he wrote more than 50 years ago in TLGPE:

The most important sign in Matthew has to be the restoration of the Jews to the land in the rebirth of Israel. Even the figure of speech “fig tree”’ has been a historic symbol of national Israel. When the Jewish people, after nearly 2,000 years of exile, under relentless persecution, became a nation again on 14 May 1948 the “fig tree” put forth its first leaves. Jesus said that this would indicate that He was “at the door,” ready to return.

Then [Jesus] said, “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” (Matthew 24:34, NASB). What generation? Obviously, in context, the generation that would see the signs—chief among them the rebirth of Israel. A generation in the Bible is something like forty years. If this is a correct deduction, then within forty years or so of 1948, all these things could take place. Many scholars who have studied Bible prophecy all their lives believe that this is so.”[1]

Lindsey never mentioned any of these “many scholars.” The math was simple: 1948 (the year Israel became a nation again) + 40 (the number of years making a generation) = 1988. Johnny Cash sang a song about it in 1973: “Matthew 24 is Knocking at the Door.” In an interview published in Christianity Today on April 15, 1977, seven years after the publication of TLGPE and 11 years from the 1988 date, Lindsey told W. Ward Gasque:

“I don’t know how long a biblical generation is. Perhaps somewhere between sixty and eighty years. The state of Israel was established in 1948. There are a lot of world leaders who are pointing to the 1980s as being the time of some very momentous events. Perhaps it will be then. But I feel certain that it will take place before the year 2000.”

A 60-year generation would take us to 2008; a 70-year generation to 2018; an 80-year generation to 2028. Don’t be surprised if a generation is said to be 100 years. In the first edition of Tim LaHaye’s The Beginning of the End, which was published in 1972, he wrote, “Carefully putting all this together, we now recognize this strategic generation. **It is the generation that ‘sees’ the four-part sign of verse 7 **[in Matt. 24], or the people who saw the First World War. We must be careful here not to become dogmatic, but it would seem that these people are witnesses to the events, not necessarily participants in them. That would suggest they were at least old enough to understand the events of 1914-1918, not necessarily old enough to go to war.”[2]

Some prognostications changed in LaHaye’s 1991 revised edition of The Beginning of the End. The “strategic generation” was modified significantly. It’s no longer “the people who saw the First World War”: “Carefully putting all this together, we now recognize this strategic generation. It is the generation that ‘sees’ the events of 1948. We must be careful here not to become dogmatic, but it would seem that these people are witnesses to the events, not necessarily participants in them.” The change from 1917 to 1948 gave LaHaye another fifty years before this new generation passes away.[3]

In that same 1977 interview, Gasque asked Lindsey: “But what if you’re wrong?” Lindsey replied: “Well, there’s just a split second’s difference between a hero and a bum. I didn’t ask to be a hero, but I guess I have become one in the Christian community. So I accept it. But if I’m wrong about this, I guess I’ll become a bum.” He didn’t become a bum. He continued to write books like The 1980’s: The Countdown to Armageddon that was published 52 years ago.

But as I read Matthew’s gospel and came across the three passages I listed above, I began to question Lindsey’s claims. It was hard to disagree with him since most people (and I was one of them) put their trust in others who write authoritatively. I was a very new Christians. Could millions of people who read Lindsey’s book be wrong? Yes! Why did Lindsey and so many others get it wrong? Why do prophecy writers still get it wrong?

They ignored the first principle of Bible interpretation: Let the Bible interpret the Bible. “this generation always means the generation of Jesus’ day. Time words like “near,” “shortly,” “at hand,” “quickly,” and “about to” are used consistently in the Bible and often. There are more than 100 time-frame indicators. Once the interpreter says, “It can’t mean this; it must mean this despite what I’m reading and seeing,” the game is over. Consider the following from George Eldon Ladd, a respected Bible commentator, on the use of time words in Revelation, none of which are unusual:

These events are “soon to take place” [1:1] (cf. 11:18; 22:10). These words have troubled commentators. The simplest solution is to take the preterist view and to say that John, like the entire Christian community, thought that the coming of the Lord was near, when in fact they were wrong. Our Lord himself seems to share this error in perspective in the saying: “This generation will not pass away before all these things take place” (Mark 13:30).[4]

Ladd gives away the store. That generation of Christians understood “near” to mean “near,” but they were wrong in the same way Jesus was wrong. But Jesus can’t be wrong, more conservative writers agree, so what is clear to the reader must be reimagined to fit an already agreed-upon end-time system that demands a repeated set of events and actions. A temple has to be rebuilt, animal sacrifices reinstituted, and another great tribulation that will result in the death of, not just millions of Jews living in Israel, but billions more around the world.

Here’s an example of how it’s been done. First, it was argued that the Greek genea is best translated as “race” as Scofield codified in a footnote in his The Scofield Reference Bible. This is an impossible translation (e.g., Matt. 1:17). Most prophecy writers have given up on this translation and logical absurdity. Now it’s “the generation that sees these signs will not pass away until all these things take place” even though Jesus told His present audience, “even so YOU too, when YOU see all these things, recognize that it is near, at the door” (24:33). What’s the “it”? Either the destruction of the temple, the tribulation, or the manifestation of the kingdom (Luke 21:31).

Others claim that what Jesus really meant was “this type of generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” The problem is in both cases, words must be added to Matthew 24:34 to get the desired meaning. If this is acceptable, then there is no telling what we can get the Bible to say and mean. We have a history of cults in the United States. They often begin by adding something so one of their pet doctrines has “biblical” support. Here’s an example from the JW’s unique translation of the Bible adding the word “other” to make Jesus a created being:

see: https://reachouttrust.org/nwt-translation-bias/

The seed idea for this article came about because of a comment I read on the Christian Post. By ignoring specific time indicators, the actual definition, number, and time of the many antichrists mentioned by John, the Bible reader is thrown off course because there’s a magnet in the cockpit affecting the compass needle. He’s headed north (the future) instead of south (the past) because time indicators are either ignored or they have been seduced by Ladd and others who argue that “[t]he problem is raised by the fact that the prophets were little interested in chronology, and the future was always viewed as imminent.”

Christian Post Comment:

The fourth kingdom, legs of iron are the kingdom of Satan, the angel of light. The iron of the feet is his son the angel, Apollyon who is responsible for killing Jesus. Genesis 3:15Re 9:11. Apollyon, the angel, the son of Satan, is the anti-Christ, the beast from the bottomless pit that rises at the 5th trumpet as king of the locusts. It is he whose image is placed into the temple by the man, the clay of the feet, the false prophet. Anti-Christ rules for the last 42 months. The week of trumpets, the book in God’s right hand, Re 5:1, is Daniel’s 70th week. Da 9:24. It is 2520 days long. Seven 360-day lunar years.

Gary DeMar:

There is no gap between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel’s 70-weeks-of years prophecy (490 years). [Jesus is “cut off” in the middle of the 70th week and the gospel goes exclusively to the Jews for the last 3.5 years of the seven-year final week]. The book of Revelation never mentions “the anti-Christ.” There were many antichrists in the first century. John wrote that these many antichrists (most likely apostate Jews: Rev. 2:93:9) in his day were evidence that it was “the last hour” (1 Jn. 2:18), most likely a reference to the lead-up to the destruction of the temple and judgment on Jerusalem that Jesus predicted would take place before their (“this generation”) passed away (Mt. 24:34). The feet of iron mixed with clay refers to first-century Rome (iron) and Israel (clay) colluding against believers against Jesus that we see in the gospels — “We have no king but Caesar” (Jn. 19:15) — and the book of Acts. The sea beast (Rev. 13:1) and the land beast (13:11) join forces against the people of God in the first century. But iron and clay do not mix. The Romans eventually turned on the Jews, demolished their temple as Jesus had predicted (Mt. 24:1-2), took thousands captive, and destroyed their city. “For the days will come on you,” Jesus said, “when your enemies will build an embankment against you, surround you, and hem you in on every side” (Lk. 19:43). This is why Jesus said, “But when YOU see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are inside the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city” (Lk. 21:20-21).

Once the time indicators are dismissed as not being relevant or the assertion that “the prophets were little interested in chronology, and the future was always viewed as imminent,” interpreting Bible prophecy is open to fanciful speculation and eventually great doubt.

[1]Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, [1970] 1971), 53‑54.

[2]Tim LaHaye, The Beginning of the End (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1972), 165, 168. Emphasis added.

[3]Tim LaHaye, The Beginning of the End, rev. ed. (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1991), 1993. Emphasis added.

[4]George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972), 22.

When It’s Going Well Or Poorly

Two Articles:

  1. “What to Remember When It’s Going Well” by Ray Otlund (original source – https://www.9marks.org/article/what-to-remember-when-its-going-well/)

“Be ready in season and out of season” (2 Tim. 4:2).

Pastoral ministry is seasonal. We pastors inevitably experience both winter-like blasts of ice-cold resistance and spring-like bursts of fresh life and responsiveness. And these changes aren’t always explainable in terms of our ministerial performance. Maybe the greatest pastor of all time, the apostle Paul himself, knew the full round of pastoral seasons.

However your ministry is going right now, you know to do this: “Be ready.” That attitude of urgency and alertness and eagerness is always right. But a guarded self-interest or a cowardly passivity or a defeated resignation is always wrong. As Jim Elliot put it, “Wherever you are, be all there!” Or to quote Richard Baxter, “Whatever you do, let the people see that you are in good earnest.”

When the ministry is going well and people are flocking in and being converted and set free, you will be helped by remembering these three things.

When the ministry is going well and people are flocking in and being converted and set free, you will be helped by remembering these three things.

1. Remember how you got here.

Not by good luck, nor by good works. The blessing of God is the blessing of God—by his grace, for his glory. Remember how Paul put it? “I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ this will turn out for my deliverance” (Phil. 1:19). The apostle knew how the blessing of God comes down. It’s by bold prayer and the direct help of the Holy Spirit.

I remember a time, during the Jesus Movement of the late 1960s and 1970s, as we were being carried along by an out-gushing of divine blessing we’d never experienced before, a friend said to me, “Ray, you know why this is happening, don’t you? It’s because for years there were little old ladies in our churches praying for revival.” Those hidden heroes never saw the answer to their prayers. But we did. When my friend pointed it out, a sense of gratitude and wonder filled my heart. I wanted to steward the blessing humbly. I didn’t get myself there, and it didn’t belong to me.

When the risen Christ is pleased to pour out newness of life on your church at levels you never dreamed could be real in this life, remember how it came down. You didn’t cause it by your cleverness or even by your faithfulness. You entered into an inheritance Someone Else paid for, an inheritance other people prayed for, a season of blessing the Holy Spirit himself activated—and all that, in spite of what you deserve.

Remember to stay humble.

2. Remember to savor this moment.

When God takes up the work in his own hands and accomplishes in two weeks what would take us twenty years, and we find our churches caught up in his felt presence as never before, it would be wrong to stay grumpy and demanding. Whenever God blesses us in this life, his blessing is both real and imperfect—real because he is involved, and imperfect because we are involved. And the very flaws embedded in the blessing should move us to more wonder and more joy and more gratitude, not less. Francis Schaeffer taught us that if the only outcomes we’re willing to accept are perfection or nothing, in this life we will get nothing every time. And we will deserve it.

Theologically serious men like us can fall into our own version of perfectionism. But of all men, we who believe strong doctrines of the fall of man and the grace of God should be the happiest, even when our churches stay messy. What stands out in our eyes is not the human mess but the divine grace in the midst of it all. Indeed, if God super-blesses our churches, the mess will pop up to the surface more obviously than ever. Good! It’s because God is dealing with us. And that is when, by his same grace, we can apply gentle pastoral remedies to people’s real problems more helpfully than ever before. What a privilege!

Ezra and Nehemiah wisely urged the people when they were experiencing eye-opening clarity about themselves: “This day is holy to the LORD your God; do not mourn or weep” (Neh. 8:9). In a season set apart as unusually holy by the heart-revealing power of the gospel—remember to counsel your people not to spiral down into miserable shame but to rise up in joyous praise to God! We are so evil, we can corrupt even a holy day by an unbelieving self-focus, terribly dishonoring to the finished work of Christ on the cross!

Don’t allow yourself to think on a Sunday afternoon, “Yes, today’s service was like another Pentecost. But you never know. It’ll probably come crashing down to nothing this week.” What defeatism! When the book of Acts says “there was much joy in that city” (Acts 8:8), it isn’t saying, “And wasn’t that stupid?” It is calling us to respond to Christ with our own “much joy.” If you and I accept the authority of the book of Acts, then let’s act like it.

Remember to stay thankful.

3. Remember what’s up ahead.

Hardship is coming. How could it be otherwise? “Man is born for trouble, as the sparks fly upward” (Job 5:7). But we’re fine with that. Suffering is our super-power.

What did our risen Lord say to us? “My power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor. 12:9). In other words, the most perfect way his power is experienced and displayed is when we can offer him nothing but our need. Our “best case scenario” is not our dream ministry career but “weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong” (2 Cor. 12:10).

When the ministry is going well, remember that tomorrow’s setbacks and reversals will be bent around in God’s mighty hands into yet more blessing. You will not see it all in this life. But if you will put your trust in the Lord for your ministry, he will ensure that your impact resonates on and on into future generations.

Remember to stay expendable.

*****

Article 2: “What to Remember When It’s Going Poorly” by Ray Otlund (original source – https://www.9marks.org/article/what-to-remember-when-its-going-poorly/)

“Be ready in season and out of season” (2 Tim. 4:2).

Pastoral ministry is seasonal. I made this simple observation in my last article, “What to Remember When Pastoring Is Going Well.” Briefly, we thought through together the seasons of ministerial abundance. But what about the hard times? What should we remember when tragedy overwhelms us, or when we lose our way in confusion, or when we seem unable to please anyone and the congregation is stiff and cold—or even walking out?

1. Remember to accept hardship as ultimately from the Lord himself.

If the people aren’t responding well, maybe you’re the reason. Maybe, without realizing it, you’re doing something to put them off, sabotaging your ministry. It might not be you at all. But maybe?

“Who can discern his errors?” (Ps. 19:12), David asked. In verse 13 he speaks of “presumptuous sins”—proudly obstinate sins. But the “errors” in verse 12 are a matter of our obliviousness. We can offend our Lord and step on people with the best of intentions! So our loving Lord allows the negative impact of our errors to land on us. It hurts. But that shock and embarrassment—it is of the Lord. He is opening our eyes, so that next time we’ll be more careful, more sensitive, more respectful. Let us therefore deeply accept our Lord’s discipline and let our defenses down and have a good laugh at ourselves—and do some healthy changing.

We ministers, in accepting the Lord’s call to gospel work, have planted our flag for his kingdom with profound sincerity of heart. But sincerity is not enough. Indeed, our earnest sincerity can, by its very nature, make us feel more virtuous than we really are. We need others to help us discern our irritating mannerisms and discourteous words and unconvincing emphases. It’s like a guy with bad breath. Who will love him enough to tell him?

I believe that every man should be in regular conversation with other godly men, with this humble appeal as the agenda: “Brothers, help me see myself.” Who wouldn’t benefit from that? Who can be above it? Your dear wife will help you, of course. But she might be too biased in your favor. Let other men, whom you trust, help you too. The Lord himself will be in it all, honoring your humble openness. Brother, your ministry can become “acceptable to the saints” (Rom. 15:31).

Remember to stay teachable.

2. Remember that you are fully equipped in every essential.

I love 1 Corinthians 2:1–5 where Paul rejoices in his ministry. He knows what he has going for him, even with his modest persona and rattled nerves. Moving through the sophisticated cultures of our world, as Paul did then, facing both passive indifference and bold rejection, what can you and I count on everywhere we go? Nothing less than “the testimony of God, . . . Jesus Christ and him crucified, . . . the demonstration of the Spirit and of power.” What in all this world can compete with that?

Your church might be small in numbers, but you are mighty with divine power. You might be lowly in prestige, but you are exalted with Triune glories. You might be limited in programs, but you are immeasurable in eternal significance. Stop feeling sorry for yourself. Stop resenting that big church across the street. Your small church is fully equipped in every essential with the truth of the gospel and the power of the Spirit. Your small church might well become Ground Zero for the next worldwide awakening.

How wonderful to remember that, with God, you just never know what he might do next! Stay close to him. Keep “swinging for the fence.” And the Lord will surprise you with encouragements and breakthroughs, as you give your all to him.

Remember to stay confident.

3. Remember that your rugged, cheerful endurance will prevail.

The power of faithfulness is so great, our Lord Himself claims it as one of his own glories: “the faithful God who keeps covenant and steadfast love” (Deut. 7:9). If our Lord doesn’t resort to a quick-fix but works faithfully over the long-haul, can we resent walking that same path?

We don’t like patient waiting. Amazon Prime is counting on us being impatient! But it is those who “wait on the Lord” who renew their strength (Isaiah 40:31). The medieval rabbi, David Kimchi, explained that that Hebrew word “wait” suggests stretching, lengthening, extending. So “waiting on the Lord” is not like resting in a hammock with a glass of iced tea; it’s like holding a plank position until our coach tells us we’re done. But that place of unresolved tension is spiritually creative and surprisingly refreshing. Our strength is renewed. So we fight on, and we will prevail, because the Lord will come through for us.

“We wait with patience” (Rom. 8:25). The early church understood that. Yes, they saw miracles. But look at Romans 16 and how Paul greets his friends: “They risked their necks, . . . he worked hard, . . . my fellow prisoners,” and so forth. They were powerless. But they prevailed. How? They waited with patience and refused to quit. They believed God is in no hurry, so they were in no hurry. They believed God is in control, so they felt no need to be in control. They believed God is powerful, so they didn’t get pushy. Bishop Cyprian wrote to his suffering people, “As servants and worshipers of God, let us show the patience that we learn from the heavenly teachings. For that virtue we have in common with God.”

One final thought. The world is racing toward final judgment. But God is with us. All his promises are true, all his purposes successful. And now it’s our turn, in our generation, to bear witness to his glory. How? Keep going, keep going, keep going, keep going, keep going. And when we’ve done that, keep going! And that is how we prevail.

Remember to stay faithful.

Worship’s Regulative Principle

Article by Derek Thomas, “The Regulative Principle of Worship” – original source – https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/regulative-principle-worship

Put simply, the regulative principle of worship states that the corporate worship of God is to be founded upon specific directions of Scripture. On the surface, it is difficult to see why anyone who values the authority of Scripture would find such a principle objectionable. Is not the whole of life itself to be lived according to the rule of Scripture? This is a principle dear to the hearts of all who call themselves biblical Christians. To suggest otherwise is to open the door to antinomianism and license.

But things are rarely so simple. After all, the Bible does not tell me whether I may or may not listen with profit to a Mahler symphony, find stamp-collecting rewarding, or enjoy ferretbreeding as a useful occupation even though there are well-meaning but misguided Bible-believing Christians who assert with dogmatic confidence that any or all of these violate God’s will. Knowing God’s will in any circumstance is an important function of every Christian’s life, and fundamental to knowing it is a willingness to submit to Scripture as God’s authoritative Word for all ages and circumstances. But what exactly does biblical authority mean in such circumstances?

Well, Scripture lays down certain specific requirements: for example, we are to worship with God’s people on the Lord’s Day, and we should engage in useful work and earn our daily bread. In addition, covering every possible circumstance, Scripture lays down a general principle: “present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom. 12:1–2). Clearly, all of life is to be regulated by Scripture, whether by express commandment or prohibition or by general principle. There is therefore, in one sense, a regulative principle for all of life. In everything we do, and in some form or another, we are to be obedient to Scripture.

However, the Reformers (John Calvin especially) and the Westminster Divines (as representative of seventeenth-century puritanism) viewed the matter of corporate worship differently. In this instance, a general principle of obedience to Scripture is insufficient; there must be (and is) a specific prescription governing how God is to be worshiped corporately. In the public worship of God, specific requirements are made, and we are not free either to ignore them or to add to them. Typical by way of formulation are the words of Calvin: “God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by his Word” (“The Necessity of Reforming the Church”); and the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689: “The acceptable way of worshiping the true God, is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imagination and devices of men, nor the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures” (22.1).

Where does the Bible teach this? In more places than is commonly imagined, including the constant stipulation of the book of Exodus with respect to the building of the tabernacle that everything be done “after the pattern . . . shown you” (Ex. 25:40); the judgment pronounced upon Cain’s offering, suggestive as it is that his offering (or his heart) was deficient according to God’s requirement (Gen. 4:3–8); the first and second commandments showing God’s particular care with regard to worship (Ex. 20:2–6); the incident of the golden calf, teaching as it does that worship cannot be offered merely in accord with our own values and tastes; the story of Nadab and Abihu and the offering of “strange fire” (Lev. 10); God’s rejection of Saul’s non-prescribed worship — God said, “to obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Sam. 15:22); and Jesus’ rejection of Pharisaical worship according to the “tradition of the elders” (Matt. 15:1–14). All of these indicate a rejection of worship offered according to values and directions other than those specified in Scripture.

Of particular significance are Paul’s responses to errant public worship at Colossae and Corinth. At one point, Paul characterizes the public worship in Colossae as ethelothreskia (Col. 2:23), variously translated as “will worship” (KJV) or “self-made religion” (ESV). The Colossians had introduced elements that were clearly unacceptable (even if they were claiming an angelic source for their actions — one possible interpretation of Col. 2:18, the “worship of angels”). Perhaps it is in the Corinthian use (abuse) of tongues and prophecy that we find the clearest indication of the apostle’s willingness to “regulate” corporate worship. He regulates both the number and order of the use of spiritual gifts in a way that does not apply to “all of life”: no tongue is to be employed without an interpreter (1 Cor. 14:27–28) and only two or three prophets may speak, in turn (vv. 29–32). At the very least, Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians underlines that corporate worship is to be regulated and in a manner that applies differently from that which is to be true for all of life.

The result? Particular elements of worship are highlighted: reading the Bible (1 Tim. 4:13); preaching the Bible (2 Tim. 4:2); singing the Bible (Eph. 5:19Col. 3:16) — the Psalms as well as Scripture songs that reflect the development of redemptive history in the birth-life-death-resurrection- ascension of Jesus; praying the Bible — the Father’s house is “a house of prayer” (Matt. 21:13); and seeing the Bible in the two sacraments of the church, baptism and the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 28:19Acts 2:38–391 Cor. 11:23–26Col. 2:11–12). In addition, occasional elements such as oaths, vows, solemn fasts and thanksgivings have also been recognized and highlighted (see Westminster Confession of Faith 21:5).

It is important to realize that the regulative principle as applied to public worship frees the church from acts of impropriety and idiocy — we are not free, for example, to advertise that performing clowns will mime the Bible lesson at next week’s Sunday service. Yet it does not commit the church to a “cookie-cutter,” liturgical sameness. Within an adherence to the principle there is enormous room for variation—in matters that Scripture has not specifically addressed (adiaphora). Thus, the regulative principle as such may not be invoked to determine whether contemporary or traditional songs are employed, whether three verses or three chapters of Scripture are read, whether one long prayer or several short prayers are made, or whether a single cup or individual cups with real wine or grape juice are utilized at the Lord’s Supper. To all of these issues, the principle “all things should be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40) must be applied. However, if someone suggests dancing or drama is a valid aspect of public worship, the question must be asked — where is the biblical justification for it? (To suggest that a preacher moving about in the pulpit or employing “dramatic” voices is “drama” in the sense above is to trivialize the debate.) The fact that both may be (to employ the colloquialism) “neat” is debatable and beside the point; there’s no shred of biblical evidence, let alone mandate, for either. So it is superfluous to argue from the poetry of the Psalms or the example of David dancing before the ark (naked, to be sure) unless we are willing to abandon all the received rules of biblical interpretation. It is a salutary fact that no office of “choreographer” or “producer/director” existed in the temple. The fact that both dance and drama are valid Christian pursuits is also beside the point.

What is sometimes forgotten in these discussions is the important role of conscience. Without the regulative principle, we are at the mercy of “worship leaders” and bullying pastors who charge noncompliant worshipers with displeasing God unless they participate according to a certain pattern and manner. To the victims of such bullies, the sweetest sentences ever penned by men are, “God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in anything, contrary to His Word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commands out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience: and the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also” (WCF 20:2). To obey when it is a matter of God’s express prescription is true liberty; anything else is bondage and legalism.

What is Meant By Sola Scriptura?

Article: What Sola Scriptura Does and Does Not Mean By Dr. Sam Waldron – original source: https://cbtseminary.org/what-sola-scriptura-does-and-does-not-mean-sam-waldron/

Preface:

There is a great deal of discussion in Reformed Baptist circles about What Sola Scriptura Does and Does Not Mean. I thought it might be helpful to you if I offered you some reflections on this issue. There are those who are decrying what they call biblicism. These folks warn us constantly that sola scriptura does not mean solo scriptura or biblicism. There are others to whom I have spoken who have a really hard time thinking of biblicism as something bad and wonder what all the concern is about.

In order to address this subject, I will first attempt to provide a confessional definition of sola scriptura and in this way show what sola scriptura does mean. Having done that, I want to explain briefly what is wrong with biblicism properly defined and how it differs from sola scriptura.

I want to assert that chapter 1 of our Confession (which is entitled, Of the Holy Scriptures) provides us with an extended explanation of what our Baptist forefathers understood sola scriptura to mean when they affirmed it. It takes the diamond of sola scriptura turns it in different ways to show us the various brilliant facets of sola scriptura. With this venerable and extended explanation of sola scriptura in hand, we will attempt to distinguish what is condemned as biblicism from it.

Section 1: What Sola Scriptura Does Mean

I. Paragraph 1: The Necessity of Holy Scripture

The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience, although the light of nature and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation.  Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

2LCF 1:1

Sola Scriptura means that Scripture alone provides the saving knowledge which men require to be saved. The 1689 adds the words that I have placed in bold italics at the beginning of the first paragraph of the Confession. The very first assertion distinctive to the 1689 as opposed to the Westminster is sola scriptura. The light of nature has the power to condemn men, but it does not have the power to save them. Scripture alone provides that.

II. Paragraphs 2-3: The Identity of Holy Scripture

Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these: [There follow the names of the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven books of the New.] All of which are given by the inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life.

2LCF 1:2

The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon or rule of the Scripture, and, therefore, are of no authority to the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings.

2LCF 1:3

Sola Scriptura means that Scripture consists in the 66 books of the Hebrew and Greek testaments alone and does not include the Apocrypha or any other merely human writings.

III. Paragraphs 4-5: Its Authority

The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the Author thereof; therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God.

2LCF 1:4

We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church of God to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures; and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, and the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, and many other incomparable excellencies and entire perfections thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God; yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.

2LCF 1:5

Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is self-authenticating and self-attesting. We do not believe in Scripture because of the testimony of any man or church. The testimony of the church of God in a secondary and subordinate way may move us to esteem Scripture. Yet, the great assertion of Calvin and the Reformed tradition following him is that Scripture is self-attested and not church-attested. Cf. Calvin’s Institutes Book 1, Chapter 7. It attests itself and the Holy Spirit enables fallen men to accept that powerful and self-authenticating testimony.

IV. Paragraph 6: Its Sufficiency 

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men.

2LCF 1:6a

 

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.

2LCF 1:6b

Sola Scriptura means that we need nothing else to know what is for God’s glory, man’s salvation, faith and life. It further means that the proper way to worship God formally and corporately is entirely contained in God’s holy Word. Cf. 22:1: “But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by himself and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imagination and devices of men, nor the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures.”

V. Paragraph 7: Its Clarity

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.

2LCF 1:7

Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is clear enough in itself that unlearned men may by ordinary means obtain a sufficient knowledge for their salvation and life. Though learned studies of the grammatical and historical backgrounds of the Scripture may deepen our knowledge of Scripture, they are not necessary for ordinary men through ordinary means to understand sufficiently what they teach for his salvation and life. If unlearned men may with ordinary means attain a sufficient understanding of Christian doctrine, clearly courses in philosophy are not necessary to rightly divide the Scriptures.

VI. Paragraph 8: Its Availability

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old),1 and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal unto them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar [i.e. common] language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.

2LCF 1:8

Sola Scriptura means that God will preserve the Scriptures so that men have an authentic understanding of their message. Thus, the church may appeal to them as the final authority in religious controversies and is not forced to appeal to other religious foundations.

VII. Paragraph 9: Its Finality (For the Interpretation of Scripture)

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly.

2LCF 1:9

Sola Scriptura means that Scripture alone is sufficient for the interpretation of Scripture. It is self-interpreting. Sola Scriptura is seen in the fact that the Scriptures are self-interpreting.

VIII. Paragraph 10: Its Supremacy (For the Resolution of Controversies)

The supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Scripture delivered by the Spirit, into which Scripture so delivered, our faith is finally resolved.

2LCF 1:10

Sola Scriptura means that Scripture alone is sufficient for the resolution of all religious controversies. Scripture alone is the supreme court of religious truth. Heresy is discovered and determined not by the ancient creeds but by the teaching of Scripture.

Section 2: What Sola Scriptura Does Not Mean

This is a very extensive and variegated understanding of sola scriptura with which the Confession provides us. Clearly, its place in the Confession (as the very first chapter) and its prominence in the Confession (as one of the longest chapters) show its importance for our Baptist forefathers. Given this, the question might be asked, What could remain to be said?

Yet much remains to about what Sola Scriptura does not mean. There are some common misunderstandings of sola scriptura which bedevil contemporary Christian thought. The Confession itself mentions and rejects many of them. Together these deficiencies have been described as biblicism. That is, they compose an exaggerated and unqualified understanding of Sola Scriptura. They are “solo scriptura” and not Sola Scriptura. Let me identify seven such distortions of Sola Scriptura.

I. Sola Scriptura does not mean that all of Christian doctrine is found explicitly in Scripture.

Scripture truth is composed not only of what is taught explicitly in Scripture, but also what is “necessarily contained in Scripture.” This is what the Westminster calls in the same paragraph:  good and necessary consequence. This is the meaning of the contrast in paragraph 6a between expressly set down and necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture. This is a contrast between what is explicit and what is implicit in Scripture. What is necessarily contained in Scripture by good and necessary consequence is Scripture.

Of course, the key word in both the 1689 and Westminster is necessary. The consequences which logical analysis draws from Scripture must necessary. Sola Scriptura means that such consequences as we may draw must be more than compatible with Scripture. They must be deductions which it is necessary to draw from Scripture. Otherwise, we are on the path back to oral traditions that may be compatible with Scripture, but which are not necessary deductions from Scripture.

This means, however, that we must arrive at some truth by the synthesis of Scripture like that in which systematic theology engages. We do not need an explicit proof-text to prove a doctrine if it may be deduced from a synthesis of scriptural premises. Modern, New Testament theologians have fallen into this problem and sadly rejected doctrines like double imputation because of such an insensitivity to the proper synthesis of Scripture. D. A. Carson in Justification: What’s at Stake in the Current Debates (Edited by Mark Husbands and Daniel J. Treier. Downers Grove: IVP, 2004) properly critiques this.

II. Sola Scriptura does not mean that we may safely ignore the witness of the Christian tradition in the way we interpret Scripture.

Christ has been giving the gift of pastor-teachers to the church for 2000 years. It is a proud man who thinks he may safely ignore those teaching gifts in his own approach to the interpretation of Scripture. Such a man is practicing solo scriptura not sola scriptura.

Nevertheless, two things must be remembered and not concealed.

  • The value of this tradition is only to help us understand Scripture itself. It has no authority in and of itself. It is only helpful as it assists us to see the meaning of Scripture.
  • The emphasizing of this tradition must never assume that this teaching tradition is monolithic and unvarying. It is not. It is Roman Catholicism which speaks of what has believed by all everywhere. St. Vincent of Lerins epitomized this when he wrote in his Commonitory (ca. 434) his famous maxim: “Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all.”

III. Sola Scriptura does not mean that all truth of every kind is found in Scripture.

As we have seen, paragraphs 1 and 6 of the Confession are very clear in limiting the sufficiency of Scripture to saving truth. We must distinguish between such truth and other truth not sufficiently contained in Scripture. The Bible is not a textbook on auto mechanics or biology. It is not sufficient for such studies.

IV. Sola Scriptura does not mean that the light of nature fails to proclaim truth to men for which they are held accountable and may be condemned.

Paragraph 1 makes clear that the light of nature reveals the existence and character of God and that by this truth men are justly condemned for what they know.

V. Sola Scriptura does not mean that the divine revelation found in Scripture does not assume the light of nature and reason in men.

Paragraph 6 makes clear that the light of nature is necessary to apply properly the principles of the Word of God to the circumstances of corporate worship and the government of the church. This in turn implies that the light of nature or natural reason is assumed in the interpretation of Scripture.

VI. Sola Scriptura does not mean that the work of the Spirit in understanding Scripture is unnecessary.

The Spirit’s work is necessary because the natural reason just mentioned is fallen and inevitably twists the light of nature and scriptural teaching. Thus, the testimony of the Spirit is necessary to untwist the fallen reason and make the truth known to men. Cf. Matthew 16:17.

Cf. 1:5: our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.

Cf. 1:6b: 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.

VII. Sola Scriptura does not mean that a “simple” grammatical-historical interpretation of Scripture is sufficient.

I was taught in my Bible college that the right method of interpreting Scripture could be summarized as grammatical-historical interpretation. This was wrong.

The Reformed tradition (Cf. Louis Berkhof’s Principles of Biblical Interpretation and many other treatises.) is committed to the need to supplement such grammatical-historical interpretation with a theological interpretation of Scripture which remembers that the Scripture has a divine author as well as human authors. Thus, the canonical trajectory of Scripture, its divine authorial intention, its unfolding interpretation of its earliest parts, its typological character, and its messianic metanarrative must be considered in its interpretation. (Remember according to 1689:1:9 that Scripture is self-interpreting.) Thus, we may attribute meaning to Scripture which goes beyond what the human author might have comprehended. “Us” in the creation narratives (Cf. Genesis 1:26) may refer to the Trinity even if Moses would not have comprehended this meaning. The meaning of the divine author may go beyond the understanding of the human author of Scripture. Thus also, the meaning of Genesis 2:3 is illumined and confirmed by the canonical trajectory of Scripture. Cf. the comments of Yahweh in Exodus 20:8-11 and Jesus in Mark 2:27 on Genesis 2:1-3.

Conclusion:

The 1689 Baptist Confession gives us an extensive doctrine of sola scriptura. This is a glorious inheritance from our Baptist forefathers. We must not truncate its meaning or significance.

Nevertheless, there is abroad an exaggeration of sola scriptura in the ways I have attempted to explain in the second half of this short paper. We need to be wary always of our fallen, human tendency to swing from one extreme to another which is equally in error.