Satan's most successful attacks against the inspired writings are not direct, outward denials of their authority. He works instead to bring about a condition where, while professedly upheld, the testimonies are largely made of none effect.
The most common way this is done is by an emphasis on the difference between the culture of the times in which the counsel was given and our culture today. People are led to believe that because times have changed, we must first direct the testimonies through the filter of current custom, then devise an interpretation that is agreeable to us and acceptable in today's culture. Instead of taking the counsel as it reads, we are encouraged to look for a "principle" behind the counsel which we can adapt to our situation in such a way that the resulting application frees us from performing the original requirement.
Identifying principles certainly can be valuable for applying inspired instruction to other settings. But while principles may be used to broaden the application of the counsel, they should not be used to reverse the counsel.
Identifying principles certainly can be valuable for applying inspired instruction to other settings. But while principles may be used to broaden the application of the counsel, they should not be used to reverse the counsel.
Misunderstanding the proper use of principles, people begin to disregard the counsel and underestimate the relevance of the Spirit of Prophecy. The resulting decline in the reading of the testimonies makes people less familiar with the counsels, and a significant amount of what they do know is passed off as irrelevant to our era. It is now possible for a person to live directly contrary to specific counsel while feeling comfortable that he is complying with some hidden principle which is supposedly behind the instruction.
The question I would like to address in this paper is, Where in the Bible or Spirit of Prophecy are we ever instructed to follow this method of interpretation? We know of inspired guidelines for comparing Scripture with Scripture, reading a passage in its context, and taking all available counsel on a subject. But where are we told that the customs of the day possess the power to change God's instructions to His people?
Suppose that was actually the way we were to interpret the Bible. Let's take John 13:14 for example. "If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet."
In the times in which that instruction was written it was the social custom for a servant to wash the feet of the guests when they gathered for certain occasions. In those days they wore sandals, and in the dry middle east climate their feet got dusty.
If it is proper for us to reinterpret inspired instructions to fit contemporary culture, then we actually do not need to wash one another's feet at our communion services today. Our culture and footwear are different now. We should instead seek to apply the principle of Christ's instruction to something that fits contemporary society. The very fact that Seventh-day Adventists practice the foot washing ordinance shows that the founders of our church believed in obeying the Bible just as it reads, without cultural interpretations.
A curious example of taking a Spirit of Prophecy quotation out of its context is the oft-cited statement that when dealing with the testimonies, "time and place must be considered." From this it is construed that before we can determine how the counsel applies to us, we must first compare the situation that existed when Mrs. White wrote, with our situation today. But taken in its context, the "time and place" statement has nothing to do with that issue at all.
The statement is found in Selected Messages, Book One, page 57. It reads, "Regarding the testimonies, nothing is ignored, nothing is cast aside; but time and place must be considered." Now, instead of stopping there, we must ask Sister White what time and place she is talking about.
There is nothing in the context to suggest that it is the time and place of Sister White's writing that must be considered. The subject being discussed is when and where it is appropriate for us to present to others the instruction contained in her writings. In fact, she makes it abundantly clear that all of her writings are for us today, "nothing is ignored; nothing is cast aside," it must all be presented. But the crucial consideration is when and where it is appropriate for us to present it.
Let's continue with the quotation:
"Time and place must be considered. Nothing must be done untimely. Some matters must be withheld because some persons would make an improper use of the light given. Every jot and tittle is essential and must appear at an opportune time."
Now let's widen the context more.
"It requires much wisdom and sound judgment, quickened by the Spirit of God, to know the proper time and manner to present the instruction that has been given. When the minds of persons reproved are under a strong deception, they naturally resist the testimony; and having taken an attitude of resistance it is difficult for them afterward to acknowledge that they have been wrong.
"In the early days of this cause, if some of the leading brethren were present when messages from the Lord were given, we would consult with them as to the best manner of bringing the instruction before the people. Sometimes it was decided that certain portions would better not be read before a congregation. Sometimes those whose course was reproved would request that the matters pointing out their wrongs and dangers should be read before others, that they, too, might be benefited." Ibid., p. 51.
Sister White then relates more on her own personal practice of considering time and place when presenting the Lord's instructions:
"Faithfully I endeavor to write out that which is given me from time to time by the divine Counselor. Some portions of that which I write are sent out immediately to meet the present necessities of the work. Other portions are held until the development of circumstances makes it evident to me that the time has come for their use. Sometimes in ministers and physicians bearing responsibilities there has developed a disposition to discard the testimonies, and I have been instructed not to place testimonies in their hands; for having yielded to the spirit that tempted and overcame Adam and Eve, they have opened mind and heart to the control of the enemy." Ibid.
The counsel to consider the time and place is what Jesus meant when He said, "Neither cast ye your pearls before swine" Matthew 7:6. It is what Solomon meant when he said, "Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of thy words." Proverbs 23:9.
While we are to consider the appropriate setting for sharing the Lord's counsel with others, our own personal conformity to that light is always essential. And there is no support for the assumption that the counsel means anything different today than it did when it was written.
Often it is said that Sister White's "bicycle" counsel demonstrates that the testimonies cannot be accepted at face value. How many of us have accepted that idea without ever having read the counsel for ourselves? Look up everything Sister White ever wrote on bicycles, and you will be surprised to find that her advice is not as irrelevant as we have been led to believe. "The righteousness of thy testimonies is everlasting." Psalm 119:144. "The truth of the Lord endureth for ever." Psalm 117:2.
Let's look at the subject of dress. Does time change God's definition of modesty? Is His standard subject to the changing moral attitudes of society? It is often assumed that our only concern should be that we conform to what our society considers modest. With that question in mind, notice this enlightening statement from the Health Reformer, Vol. 7, No. 5, p. 76.
"We have traveled extensively the past twenty-five years and have been eye-witnesses to many indecent exposures of the limbs. But the most common exposure is seen upon the streets in light snow, or wet mud. Both hands are required to elevate the dress, that it may clear the wet and filth. It is a common thing to see the dress raised one-half of a yard, exposing an almost unclad ankle to the sight of gentlemen, but no one seems to blush at this immodest exposure. No one's sensitive modesty seems shocked for the reason that this is customary. It is fashion and for this reason it is endured. No outcry of immodesty is heard although it is so in the fullest sense. . . . See that lady passing over the muddy street, holding her skirts nearly twice as far from the ground as ours, exposing, not only her feet, but her nearly naked limbs. Similar exposures are frequent as she ascends and descends the stairs, as she is helped into, and out of, carriages. These exposures are disagreeable, if not shameful; and a style of dress which makes their frequent occurrence almost certain, we must regard as a poor safeguard of modesty and virtue."
This statement is significant because it shows that God's standards are not culturally dependent. Just because it is common and customary for women to expose their unclad ankles, and just because no one thinks anything about it, does not mean that it is acceptable in God's sight. We must stop attempting to determine right and wrong by what is acceptable to society. How vastly more important it is to know what is acceptable to God.
"As the truth is brought into practical life, the standard is to be elevated higher and higher to meet the requirements of the Bible. This will necessitate opposition to the fashions, customs, practices, and maxims of the world." 6T 146.
"Especially should the wives of our ministers be careful not to depart from the plain teachings of the Bible on the point of dress. Many look on these injunctions as too old-fashioned to be worthy of notice; but He who gave them to His disciples understood the dangers from the love of dress in our time and sent to us the note of warning." 4T 630.
But, someone will ask, doesn't the Bible say to render "custom to whom custom" is due? Doesn't that mean that we are to follow the customs of the day? And wouldn't that mean that we must sometimes have a different application of counsel simply because customs have changed? The passage quoted is found in Romans 13:7, and it has absolutely nothing to do with that kind of "custom." The word is used in Luke 5:27 and Matthew 17:25 and means "taxes." Paul is simply saying that we are to pay our taxes. Nowhere in the Bible or Spirit of Prophecy are we instructed that the popular customs of the day are to have any bearing on our behavior.
"Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen . . . . For the customs of the people are vain." Jeremiah 10:2, 3. "Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs." Leviticus 18:30.
Why would anyone want to explain away the Testimonies? "Many close their eyes to the plainest teachings of His Word because the cross stands directly in the way. If they lift it, they must appear singular in the eyes of the world; and they hesitate, and question and search for some excuse whereby they may shun the cross. Satan is ever ready, and he presents plausible reasons why it would not be best to obey the Word of God just as it reads. Thus souls are fatally deceived." FW 41.
It is time that we learned to distrust our own culturally-conditioned opinions, and submit our beliefs, our behaviors, and our methods of interpretation, to a plain "Thus saith the Lord."
No comments:
Post a Comment