In his classic work, Biblical Hermeneutics, Milton S. Terry, one-time Professor at the Garrett Biblical Institute, declared there is a “general harmony” which pervades the entire Scriptures. Consequently, “no single statement or obscure passage of one book can be allowed to set aside a doctrine which is clearly established by many passages” (1890, 449). This procedure is called “the analogy of faith.”
Another expression is labeled the Synthetic Method (cf. synthesis — “to bring together”). This is a study procedure whereby one assembles the relevant biblical information on the same theme, then draws reasonable conclusions of action, based upon a harmonization of the material. This is a form of “Inductive Logic,” which is reasoning from independent but related points, to a general conclusion.
While this mode of reasoning is used by everyone to some degree (though many would not know how to formally identify it), it is a tragedy that this common sense procedure is flung to the four winds when applied to biblical truth — specifically, the components of God’s plan of salvation for humanity.
Let us first consider a number of the terms that are used to depict the “no-longer-lost” state. Here are several: saved, forgiven, delivered, cleansed, blotted out, washed, redeemed, life, set free, etc.
We will now reflect upon a number of New Testament texts in which these various expressions are connected with conditions preliminary to the reception of the associated goal. Along the way, we must remind ourselves that we are seeking biblical harmony among these passages — not contradiction. The Bible, being the inspired word of God, is harmonious. No “interpretation” may be placed on one text that forces it to conflict with another on the same theme. Note the following.
The first chapter of Genesis is a literary phenomenon. Though written 3,500 years ago, it still is unblemished in its accuracy and sublimeness of presentation. Some years back, one of the world’s foremost archaeologists declared that “modern cosmogonies show such a disconcerting tendency to be short-lived that it may be doubted whether science has yet caught up with the Biblical story” (Albright, 1948, 135).
The narrative begins with a fiat declaration of the origin of the entire universe. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” The material universe was created ex nihilo (out of nothing) by the spoken word of God. The term bara’ is used only of God in the biblical record, and it lends itself to the sense of a “creation out of nothing” (Unger & White, 1980, 84). “For he spoke, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast” (Psalm 33:9). “By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen has not been made out of things which appear” (Hebrews 11:3). The sense is, “God summoned into existence what had no existence before” (Bruce, 1990, 279).
Earth is given special attention. Initially, it was without its current spherical form and was uninhabited. The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the deep (i.e., an organizing process was begun), and God (elohim – a term hinting of power) spoke light into existence out of darkness (though this “light” was not the sun; cf. v. 14ff). The expression “God said” is found 10 times in this chapter.
On the second day an “expanse” was created to separate the waters above from those below (vv. 6-8). The next day earth’s waters were gathered together in one place, and dry land appeared. Too, God spoke and vegetation sprang up to bless the earth, the various forms being designed “after their kind” (vv. 9-13). On day four heavenly luminaries were created to accommodate both daytime and nighttime (vv. 14-19). Day five saw the birth of various forms of marine life, then birds as well (vv. 20-23). Finally on day six, animals of various “kinds,” both wild and domestic, came forth to populate the planet (vv. 24-25). And “it was good” (v. 25b). At this point no death or destruction had marred the pristine environment.
The pinnacle of the initial week was the unique commencement of humankind. Moses wrote: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, and after our likeness … And God created man in his own image … male and female created he them” (vv. 26-27). There are three points we would like to develop from this text: (1) the significance of the plural pronouns; (2) the verbs used of the action; (3) the implication of the “image and likeness” phrase.
Plural pronouns are employed by God on several occasions in the OT (cf. 3:22; 11:7; Isa. 6:9). Various views are suggested to explain this phenomenon. First, some allege that God was speaking to angels. This theory has no biblical support. Nowhere is it indicated that God and angels share the same nature, or that humans are in the image of angels (cf. “his” image v. 27). Second, more commonly a number of modern scholars have advanced the theory that these plurals are the so-called “plurals of majesty,” a form allegedly used by ancient pagan kings. In response one may ask: Why would the Lord pattern his declaration after pagan rulers—especially since there weren’t any at the time! Further, there is no example of this alleged figure elsewhere in Hebrew scripture (Leupold, 1942, 1.86-87; Aalders, 1981, 1.70).
Jesus Christ declared there are three elements to appropriate Christian worship. It must be directed to deity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); worship must be rendered in “spirit” (sincerely), and it must be offered consistent with revealed “truth” (John 4:24; 17:17).
Paul declared worship must be “in the name of Christ”; the phrase signifies by his authority (Colossians 3:17; cf. Matthew 10:1; Mark 16:17), not a rote recitation of certain words. The apostle condemned “will-worship,” which is any form of worship explicitly “forbidden,” or “unbidden” (Thayer, 1968, 168). There are three components of proper music in corporate Christian worship:
The two major categories of “music” are mechanical and vocal. Which is authorized by the New Testament? Clearly only vocal music. All passages mentioned in the New Testament having to do with Christian worship authorize singing (Acts 16:25; Romans 15:9, 1 Corinthians 14:15, Ephesians 5:18-19; Colossians 3:16-17; Hebrews 2:12; James 5:13) — nothing more. Mechanical accompaniment was an innovation that came centuries later.
The renowned McClintock & Strong Cyclopedia notes that while the Jews used instruments in their worship, the early Christians did not. “The general introduction of instrumental music can certainly not be assigned to a date earlier than the 5th or 6th centuries” (1968, VI.759). Even leading Protestant scholars have opposed the use of instrumental music in Christian worship, e.g., Calvin (Presbyterian), Clarke (Methodist), and Spurgeon (Baptist). These men acknowledged that the early church did not employ instruments and that such were human additions unauthorized by the Lord. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary states: “There is no record in the [New Testament] of the use of instruments in the musical worship of the Christian church” (Pfeiffer, et al. 2003, 1163).
“Determinism” is a term widely used in philosophical and religious circles with varying connotations, depending upon the convictions of those employing the expression. This article will focus upon two of these theories.
A general definition of “determinism” contends that: “[A]ll events whatsoever are to be understood as the necessary outcome of certain causes and so may be regarded as instances of laws” (Harvey, 1964, 69). In this view, the universe is a conglomerate of causes and effects. How such began is never explained. Snow melts at a certain temperature, leaves fall to the earth, and objects grow older with the passing of time. Similarly, according to atheist Bertrand Russell, human beings, as strictly material objects, yield to causes over which they have no control (1957, 48ff). Hence there is no such thing as “free will”—supposedly!
Russell elsewhere wrote: “The first dogma which I came to disbelieve was that of free will” (1952, 79). He wrote as though he volitionally changed from belief to disbelief—which, from the nature of the case, suggests “free will.” His daughter later wrote: “‘Do we have free will?’ He said ‘no,’ writing philosophically; but he acted ‘yes’ and wrote ‘yes’ when his moral passions were engaged” (Tait, 1975, 184). If one is enslaved by the determinism of natural law, why chastise believers for their “foolish” faith, and urge them to abandon such since, according to this philosophy, they haven’t the “will” to alter their conviction? Every line they write is afflicted with the seizure of inconsistency.
Follow the “no free will” position to its logical consequence, as celebrated attorney Clarence Darrow did, and one is forced to conclude there is no human responsibility for any action. In 1902 Darrow addressed the inmates of the Cook County Jail (Chicago), asserting: “There is no such thing as crime as the word is generally understood. …The people here can no more help being here than the people outside can avoid being outside” (Weinberg, 1957, 3). What kind of lunacy is this? What sort of world would “determinism” fashion?
John Calvin occasionally used the expression “free will,” though he confessed he hesitated to do so lest others conclude that man “of his own nature” might be able to “aim at good either in wish or actual pursuit” (1975, 1.265). The reformer imposed his own definition on “free will,” contending that, “none but the elect have a will inclined to good.” Again, “a right will is derived not from man himself,” but only from God (1.257). When God “converts” a person, Calvin alleged, he destroys man’s depraved will and “substitutes a good will from himself” (1.256). Thus, as one modern Calvinist argues: “Human free will is a myth” (Storms, 1984, 80-81).
J. Carl Laney is a Professor of Biblical Literature at Western Conservative Baptist Seminary in Portland, Oregon. Laney is a respected scholar but in some serious particulars his theology is flawed. For example in his book, Answers to Tough Questions From Every Book in the Bible, he raises the issue of whether baptism is essential to salvation. In response to that question, Professor Laney writes:
“The Bible teaches clearly that salvation and the forgiveness of sins is always through faith in Christ (Ephesians 2:8-9), not the result of baptism” (1997, Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 243).
Let us carefully reflect upon this matter. First, Paul was an apostle of Christ, and his teaching was a revelation from God (1 Corinthians 2:10ff; Galatians 1:11-12).
In view of this, one must conclude that whatever the apostle taught obviously was consistent with:
To suggest otherwise is an indictment of the Holy Spirit himself. Thus, consider the following.
© 1997-2010 by Christian Courier Publications. All rights reserved. ISSN: 1559-2235. Website version: 3.0a
The Christian Courier is a journal dedicated to the study of religious doctrine, Christian evidences, and biblical ethics. It is associated with the churches of Christ.