All have heard
the old saying, "Necessity is the mother of invention." It's
truthfulness is demonstrated daily. There is a religious variation
of this proverb. "Desire is often the mother of new
interpretations."
Our Protestant neighbors greatly desire salvation without baptism.
Faced with the several verses that clearly link salvation and
baptism, what can they do? They interpret all the verses that link
faith with salvation and pronounce that the Bible teaches salvation
by faith alone. Some desire to have their infants baptized. Finding
nothing in the New Testament about infant baptism, they discover the
Hebrew ordinance for circumcising baby boys. Noting that the surgery
made them members of the covenant nation, they conclude the New
Testament must teach infant baptism. Then they discover that Lydia
was baptized and all that were in her household (Acts
16:15)
and voila they interpret that to mean babies were baptized. They are
free to proceed as they wished.
There was a time when any man who preached among churches of Christ
understood this and exposed those who used this faulty method for
their distortion of God's Word. Now a generation of exegetes have
arisen among us who, because of faulty training, are using this same
discredited method to achieve the approval they seek for their
doctrine, worship and congregational activities. They need authority
for such things as women in church leadership roles, instrumental
music, infant dedication, interpretative dancing in worship and
similar practices. These things they desire to have, but no
authority is found for them in the New Testament of Christ. Refusing
to accept that as the final word (Matt. 28:20), they search
the Old Testament and find just what they are looking for. But there
stands Colossians
2:14
as an impediment to their desires. Paul says that Christ blotted
out" the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was
contrary to us: and he hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to
the cross...Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
in a new moon or a Sabbath day...." (2:14-16).
Not to be deterred, they reinterpret the passage to mean that Christ
merely took away our condemnation, nailing it to the cross. Now they
can claim those verses from the Hebrew Scriptures and offer them as
justification for their innovations.
The desire to be free to add anything they wish to the worship of
the church drives them to deny the oft repeated principle that God's
silence is prohibitive. It is respect for that principle that caused
our brethren to reject instrumental music, choirs, solos, communion
on other days than the first day and a host of other practices of
denominational bodies. Positively stated, we must "not go beyond
that which is written" (I Cor. 4:6
ASV).
The example is seen in Hebrews 7:13-14. There, the writer
notes that since the priesthood was reserved to Aaron's sons, of the
tribe of Levi, and since Moses said nothing about men of Judah
serving as priests, there had to be a change of the law before
Christ could be our High Priest. Other citations commonly given are
the cases of Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:1-4) and Noah's
instructions for building the ark (Gen. 6:14-17). We now see
our promoters of change laboring long and hard to find a new way to
interpret God's Word that will eliminate the idea of a law of
prohibitive silence.
Wishing to preach new and different doctrines and yet remain among
Churches of Christ, change agents labor to find a new meaning to
II John 9 which says, "Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in
the teaching of Christ hath not God..." After much hard labor they
bring forth a new interpretation, "Behold, it means the teaching
about the divinity of Christ." Now they can teach and do as they
wish and this verse cannot be used to reprove them.
To escape the binding authority of the New Testament of Christ,
these brethren have employed their exegetical skills and concluded
that the New Testament is not the law of Christ. It is a love letter
from the husband to his bride. The epistles are friendly letters to
churches, but not to be considered as of binding authority. It is
hard to do, but their system allows them to neutralize those many
verses that speak of the law of Christ (Rom. 8:2; Gal. 6:3; Jas.
1:25; I John 3:4,etc.).
Desiring to be accepted by their local ministerial alliance and
their
Evangelical theological peers, these brothers have had to
reinterpret the role of baptism in salvation. Since our religious
neighbors flatly reject the idea that baptism is necessary to
salvation and since they tend to scorn those who think it is
necessary, the masters of creative hermeneutics have restudied the
matter and concluded that baptism is a declaration or testimony of
ones salvation. So much for Acts
2:38 and 22:16.
Thus is fulfilled the saying, "Desire is mother of the new
interpretation."