Reasoning Around the Scriptures
There are numerous doctrinal issues brought up on this page. If you're wondering what I believe, almost all of which I got from the apostolic churches of the 2nd century and other churches I respect, you can find that out on other pages of this web site. None of those doctrinal issues are essential to unity or salvation, no matter how important they seem on the surface.
As [Jesus] was walking in the temple, the chief priests and the scribes and the elders came to Him, and began saying to Him, “By what authority are You doing these things, or who gave You this authority to do these things?” And Jesus said to them, “I will ask you one question, and you answer Me, and then I will tell you by what authority I do these things. Was the baptism of John from heaven, or from men? Answer Me. They began reasoning among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say, ‘Then why did you not believe him?’ But shall we say, ‘From men’?”—they were afraid of the people, for everyone considered John to have been a real prophet. Answering Jesus, they said, “We do not know.” And Jesus said to them, “Nor will I tell you by what authority I do these things.” (Mark 11:27-33, NASB. I apologize for the strange punctuation and the capitalization of all the pronouns referring to Jesus, even when used by the Pharisees. I've never understood that practice, but I'm quoting, so ...)
The key phrase in this passage is “They began reasoning among themselves ...” Notice all their reasoning. It had nothing to do with the true answer to the question. Their reasoning was all about the consequences of the answer they gave. They didn't give one thought or question to the real issue, which is by what authority John did his baptizing.
We can see through what the Pharisees were doing because we are on Jesus' side. We want Jesus to be correct. We know the Jewish leaders are stonewalling because Jesus has stumped them. It's a complete triumph on Jesus' part. They're not looking for truth. They're looking for a way out of checkmate. There's no way out, however; Jesus has got them.
But what about us? Do we notice when we are doing the same thing? When Jesus asks something of us that we don't want to do or shows us something that we don't want to face, do we begin reasoning the same way?
Let my give you a for example. Jesus says in Luke 14:33 that if you don't forsake all your possessions, you can't be his disciple. What goes through your mind? Is it not the same reasoning the Pharisees were doing?
Let's not make it so threatening. Millions of American Christians believe in eternal security (“once saved, always saved”). Now you read in Colossians that Jesus has reconciled you to present you holy, unblameable, and unreprovable in his sight (1:21,22). However, then verse 23 adds, “‘If’ you continue in the faith grounded and settled.” You're a little scared that this might be an argument against eternal security. So then you read the completely ridiculous suggestion—which you don't know is completely ridiculous yet—that the word “if” there, eige in the Greek, could mean “since” in this context. In other words, Jesus has reconciled you to present you holy in his sight, “since” you are going to continue in teh faith grounded and settled. If the word eige there means “since,” then this is still a good eternal security verse.
What do you do? Do you find out whether the suggested translation is true (which it isn't, since, in context, it makes the whole statement pointless), or do you just accept it because it defends your doctrine?
Or how about on the other side. You reject eternal security. But then you read, “They went out from us, and it was proof that they were never of us, for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us” (1 Jn. 2:19). Now there's a great eternal security verse if there ever was one. So what do you do? I know what I've heard someone do. I've heard someone say, “Well, that's a difficult verse that needs to be interpreted in the light of clear ones like 2 Peter 2:20-21.” Uh huh. What exactly is “difficult” about 1 Jn. 2:19 except that you don't believe it? Don't boast, eternal security people. I heard that argument first from one of you. Hank Hanegraaf, of the Christian Research Institute, said on one of his broadcasts that 2 Peter 2:20-21 is a difficult verse that needs to be interpreted in the light of clear ones like John 10:28. Again, there's nothing difficult about 2 Peter 2:20-21 except that Mr. Hanegraaf doesn't believe what it says. So much for being a Bible believer.
We're quick to condemn Pharisees. We're not so quick to condemn ourselves. Do you believe that we are judged by our works? I don't know how many times I've heard that our judgment will only be for rewards, or worse, that as Christians only our good works will be judged because the rest are drowned in a sea of forgetfulness. Yet the Scripture specifically mentions that both our good and bad works will be judged (2 Cor. 5:10), and it specifically says that the judgment according to works will be for eternal life (at least three times!!! Matt. 25:31-46; Rom. 2:5-8; Rev. 20:13-15). Ephesians 5 adds a warning to Christians to avoid immorality, uncleanness, and coventousness because the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience for those very things. It warns that we will have no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God if we do those things. But we don't want to believe that entering the kingdom of God or receiving eternal life at the judgment has anything to do with works, so our reasoning kicks up as soon as we read those verses. In the end, we believe the most outrageous things in an attempt to justify what we believe. “Ephesians 5 refers to ‘kingdom living here on earth,’ not going to heaven.” “Romans 2 just discusses possibilities, but we know that no one will have good works at the judgment.” “Matthew 25 is the judgment of the nations, not of Christians.” (Huh? Are nations going to heaven and hell? What if you're a Christian member of that nation? Do you go to hell with the nation, but go to heaven by yourself?)
Then, when someone mentions that the early church fathers believed things different than we believe today, we call them legalists and heretics. Incredible! I remember talking to one Roman Catholic who was defending the Catholic view of the Trinity (which is similar to the view of the early church, but not the same). He referred to Tertullian, and early 3rd-century Christian, as an authority to defend his viewpoint. Unlike him, however, I had read Tertullian, so I showed him that Tertullian didn't agree with him. He said, “Oh, maybe Tertullian is a heretic.” Don't be fooled, my friends, it is our nature to act like the Pharisees of Mark 11.
It is the belief of born-again Protestants that we get our views from the Bible. As you can see above, that is not true. Where the Bible disagrees with us, we simply reason our way around what it says in exactly the same manner as the Pharisees sought to reason their way around the teachings of Christ. They dodged his words, and we are guilty of doing the same.
In doctrinal matters, this really doesn't matter that much. However, it carries over into areas that are much more important than our doctrinal beliefs. “Be diligent,” the Bible says, to maintain the unity of the Spirit. However, we have abundant excuses for our lack of unity. Most of us deny it even exists! We meet in separate buildings over doctrinal issues, and we disagree on subjects as basic as baptism, how we receive salvation, on who is saved, and on how we maintain that salvation, or even on whether we need to maintain that salvation, but we claim to be in unity. Unbelievers tell us, “Why should I listen to you? There are a thousand churches and a thousand Christians with a thousand different interpretations of the Bible,” yet we are not stricken at heart. Jesus hinged his whole reputation on the unity of his followers (Jn. 17:20-23), but we are not stricken by the lack of unity among believers. Paul tells us that divisions and denominations (“factions” or “sects,” Gal. 5:20) will keep us out of the kingdom of heaven, yet our divisiveness does not make us mourn.
Paul tells us that if we “diligently” maintain the unity of the Spirit, it will lead to unity of the faith (Eph. 4:3,13), but we try to produce unity by beginning with the unity of the faith. John tells us that if we do not keep God's commandments, then we are liars when we claim to know him (1 Jn. 2:3,4), yet we have numerous reasons why this cannot be true. Paul tells us three times that the practice of fleshliness will keep us out of the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:5), yet we tell ourselves that this cannot be true. Not inheriting the kingdom of heaven must be something other than being kept out of heaven, despite the fact that Jesus, too, tells us that our behavior has everything to do with entering heaven (Matt. 7:21).
These issues matter. We need a salvation that is real and that overcomes the flesh. We need a salvation that produces unity of Spirit, a deep love for one another (Jn. 13:34,35), and the ability to obey God, but we are satisfied with mining the Scriptures for verses that say we are saved even if we have none of these things. We condemn the Pharisees, but we are the Pharisees. We can easily imagine Christ saying about us what he said about the Pharisees: “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of 21st century, American Christians, you shall by no means enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:20).
I need to add one final note. In our passage above, Jesus responds to the Pharisees by saying, “Nor will I tell you by what authority I do these things.” Jesus knew it was not a matter of the Pharisees' ability to answer his question. It was a matter of their will. So it is with us. These things are not a matter of our understanding but of our will. We are not willing to face the answers to the “difficult” verses we see in the Scriptures. I assure you, God will not hold us guiltless.
HomeTeachings