Recently, I came across a thought-provoking article by Aaron Blumer entitled “The Neglected Posture of Conscience” posted over at Sharper Iron. It stressed that for some matters, a militant attitude is necessary as we “contend for the faith”, but others require a much softer stance. They are matters of conscience, wheras the former are matters of clear-cut doctrinal error. While his article did not delve into how to determine which category a given issue falls under, it did call for us all to consider the possibility that a given issue may be merely a matter of conscience. In such matters, we must be fully persuaded before God, and need not feel compelled to give up our standard, simply because we understand that other valid positions may exist. Yet we must not adopt the stance of “contending for the faith” when we know we are merely dealing with an issue not clearly addressed in Scripture. He goes on to give some advice in using this “posture of conscience”, and I encourage one and all to check his article out!
In the few comments after his post, Dan Miller lists some principles he uses with regard to convictions of conscience. I repeat them verbatim:
- Consider as much Scripture and “general revelation” as possible in forming my convictions. Always be open to new light from the Word, and to information about the world we live in.
- Hold my conviction firmly – as an order for the Lord Jesus Christ to me. But also be open to His leading through His Word to a new conviction.
- Never suppose that my conviction (however “obvious” to me and however dearly held) must also be the Lord Jesus Christ’s order for my brother.
- Never judge my brother’s conviction as wrong (however much I worry that he’s ignoring the Word).
- Never judge my brother’s conviction as stupid (however crazy his reasoning sounds).
- Expect my brother to base his convictions on application of the Word, and thus to admit it when he has convictions which are not Bible-based.
- Accept my brother on the basis of the fruit of the Spirit in his life and his voluntary association with Christ through the ordinances of the church (“Receive him because God has received him.”). Conformity with my convictions is not an indicator of spirituality.
- Admit it when I can see the reasoning for my brother’s conviction – even when I do not take the conviction for myself.
Now, while numbers 4 and 5 may be a bit strongly worded, these principles are very worthy of following. He gives some Scriptural examples as a basis for these principles as well in his comment here.
Needless to say, this article (and this particular comment) got me thinking! Why is such an approach so rare among fundamentalists these days? (I realize that other groups may be equally over-militant at times, but I have seen this most in fundamentalists.) Why is it that when someone disagrees with them, the default response is a militant rejection and separation from them as if they have disagreed with God’s direct commands?
So, let me ask, “Is it a sin to be wrong?” Let us assume, for instance, that I am wrong about Calvinism. That although there are many passages which seem to support this view, and although many good men counsel us to accept this view, when I reach heaven one day, I discover that I was actually taking the wrong position. Let us assume this. Now, am I sinning in doing so?
I have encountered some who would answer this question with a definite “Yes!” They reason as follows. There is only one correct interpretation of the Bible, and of any given passage. Only one doctrinal position is true. To adopt the wrong position or the wrong interpretation is to reject the truth. We are commanded to hold to sound doctrine, after all. If you reject the correct doctrinal position on any point of doctrine, you are rejecting sound doctrine. This is actually morally wrong. It is evil and wicked sin! [Of course, the correct interpretation of each passage, they assume to be their own position. In reality, their own interpretations are the measure for judging everyone else’s. If they don’t see it in the Bible, then it isn’t there…]
Aaron Blumer in his article mentioned the “human imperfections of reading, reasoning and evaluating”. We must remember we live in a fallen world. We must also realize that not all Biblical truth comes with equal clarity and emphasis. Now, would those who claim being wrong is a sin argue consistently concerning such matters as which day Jesus died on? Now there is only one correct view, right? So if Jesus really died on Friday and not on Thursday, you are rejecting the clear teaching of God’s Word right?
I believe that the fundamentals of the faith are clearly revealed in Scripture, and that the rejection of these are what is primarily referred to in passages about maintaining sound doctrine and separating from those that do not. In areas where there is more ambiguity, and less clarity, where good men differ and reasonable (and Bible-respecting) arguments abound on both sides of the issue–there is room to be wrong, and yet not be sinning.
I welcome your thoughts concerning this. What do you think? Is it a sin to be wrong? Know, that if you reject my position, you are rejecting God and I will thus delete all further comments from you!!! (Just kidding!) Seriously, what do you all think concerning this. I am all ears.
∼striving for the unity of the faith for the glory of God∼ Eph. 4:3,13 “¢ Rom. 15:5-7
Like this:
Like Loading...
Anyways, he posted an excerpt from an article which compares the food and drink addressed in Romans 14 with music. The views expressed in that article (entitled “What is Christian in Music?”) are similar to my own. And Dr. Terry B. Erwell (of Towson University), the author, expresses his insights in a very clear and helpful manner. For the purpose of this post, I will quote briefly from that article, and then recommend that you go over and read the whole article