Is there any New Testament scripture which explicitly says (or even implies) that the faith of believers that led to salvation is in anything other than – or in addition to – the facts that Jesus is Lord (Romans 10:9) and the Christ, the Son of God (John 20:31, 11:27; 1 John 5:1-5) … that He came from God and was going back to God (John 16:27-28); … that God raised Him from the dead (Romans 4:24; 1 Peter 1:21) … and that God will bring, with Jesus, those who have died in Him (1 Thessalonians 4:14)?

Is belief in any of those facts regarded by scripture as optional?

Isn’t a teaching which denies or refutes any of these tenets of belief called heretical?

It’s the question that the Sanhedrin, called to session by the Pharisees, asked of themselves in regard to Jesus’ ministry (John 11:47-48). I can sympathize with the question, though not with their motivation for asking it.

I see people – mostly younger people – engaged in the kind of ministry that I can clearly see in scripture. The kind of ministry which leads people closer to God through an acquaintance with Jesus, the Christ. The kind of ministry which actually, genuinely, really saves people.

And I look at my little blog and my paltry efforts at New Wineskins and my mostly evangelism-free duties at my church … and I ask the same question.

I’ve blogged for six years now. I’ve been working with the New Wineskins Web site just a little longer. I’ve worked full-time at my church for four-and-a-half.

I can’t point to baptisms, to responses for prayer, to glorious hallelujahs or even vague possibilities. I don’t know the names and stories of most of the people who visit here, or at New Wineskins, or even attend my church. I don’t know if what I think of as my ministry is actually a ministry at all.

Still …

I do know the name and the story of Jesus, and I can tell it.

I do know that there are people who are enslaved to the notion of scripture as solely law to be obeyed, and that law makes people slaves to sin (Romans 6).

I do know that knowing God is more important than knowing how to turn scripture into law by obeying the rules of command, example and necessary inference.

I do know that believers are one in Christ Jesus, who does not see race, gender or social class (Galatians 3:28); like God, He sees the heart (Matthew 9:4).

I do know that that the Holy Spirit was promised to those who ask, those who believe and are baptized … and He was given to empower disciples. I know that the gift of His presence is still real and active, because the time when perfection comes cannot have yet arrived: we still think and reason as children; we still see and prophesy and know in part; we still see but a poor reflection as in a mirror (1 Corinthians 13). And we still fail to love as we are loved.

I still fail to love as I am loved.

So I will continue to pursue this ministry, whether it garners results visible to me or not. Paul got to plant the seed, Apollos watered it, but it may well have been that only God saw the growth.

I will take this opportunity to express a gratitude felt more deeply than words can describe for those of you who visit and leave a little word of encouragement or disagreement or candor or wider perspective.

You have helped me grow these past six years.

A few days ago, a friend posted on Facebook that his wife had left him a note on the refrigerator that was something to the effect of:

“Tell Jesus to water the back yard.”

He evidently had the same chill run down his spine that I did when reading it, until he remembered that “Jesus” – probably pronounced “hey-seuss” – was the name of the gardener she had contracted with.

Most of our prayers are worded carefully enough that we realize we’re not telling God or His Son what to do … but I have to wonder sometimes if we could say that about some of the things we teach.

If we really backed up a few light-years and heard those teachings with divine ears, would they sound like we were telling God what to do … by telling others that our interpretation of His Word is exactly what it says and what it means?

And if so, does God find that insulting and infuriating? Amusing? Both? Neither?

Are there times when His Son still says, “Forgive them … for they don’t know what they’re doing”?

If He does … is it because we’re crucifying Him all over again?

An innocent Man, already tortured within moments of death, struggles to lift himself on feet nailed to a cross in order to take another breath. He has been doing it for hours. While afternoon darkness gathers, He will continue to do it for a few more.

It’s Good Friday.

What’s so good about that?

Nothing, if the Man were not the very Son of God.

Nothing, if the burdened cross was not succeeded by the empty tomb.

Nothing, if grace had not supplanted law.

It’s good because He is perfect.

It’s good because He lends us His righteousness.

It’s good because He commends His Spirit to God, who pours Him out on us.

It’s good because there is evening and morning, a third day.

And God sees that it is good.

Goebel Music, in his text Behold the Pattern!, blithely responds to the charge of being a legalist by quipping, “I’d rather be a legalist than an illegalist!”

Which makes about as much sense as someone responding to the charge of worshiping contrary to God’s command – but sincerely – by saying, “I’d rather worship sincerely than insincerely!”

Both quips miss the point, you see.

It’s too easy to do when paradigms are so far separated that someone from one background can’t understand the arguments from another background.

So often, attempts at dialogue and even debate are stymied by deep differences – not just in language, terms and idiom – but in the underlying assumptions upon which attempts at logical argument are made.

And we’re not being honest with ourselves if we think there are no assumptions on “our” side, just on “theirs.”

My desire is for clarity. I’ll bet it’s yours, too.

So how do we get past the need for tinted lenses in the way we view scripture, our beliefs and each other?

I think we need to ask for help.

“But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.” ~ Jesus, John 16:13

“If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” ~ Jesus, Luke 11:13

“I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better.” ~ Paul, Ephesians 1:17

Of course, if we don’t really deep-down take Jesus at His word and don’t believe that God still offers the gift of His discerning Spirit to help His children … well, we might as well just keep depending on our infallible human logic.

We might as well just go on being sincere and legal.

(That’s been working so well for us.)

… in order to qualify for the fellowship of some believers in my church tradition:

• That God is sovereign. Because Romans 9:18 says so: “Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.”
• That God is not sovereign. Because if you complete the five acts of salvation, He has to save you by contract because He said He would, and that is the only way you can be saved. (Jesus extending grace to the thief on the cross was a one-time only exception to this rule. And maybe Zacchaeus. And the man who was sick of the palsy. And the woman who anointed his feet. Maybe. But she probably sinned again after He said that, and was lost.)
• That God tells us everything we know to be saved. Because Romans 15:14 says so: “And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.”
• That God doesn’t tell us everything we know to be saved. Some of it we have to logic out for ourselves because He has hidden it in scripture, like the fact that He forbids everything that He does not specifically command, exemplify or imply there. And since he doesn’t mention instrumental music in (most of) the New Testament, it’s forbidden. Except pitch pipes, which are expedient. Or tuning forks. Or harps, when we get to heaven, but not before. Or when you’re not in church. Maybe.
• That we are no longer under Old Testament law. Especially the parts about instrumental music. And the Sabbath.
• That we are still under Old Testament law. Especially the parts about God punishing those who disobey His unexpressed will, like Nadab and Abihu … and we’re still under most of the Ten Commandments, because Jesus repeated them. Except the one about the Sabbath.
• That couples who divorce and marry others must never divorce their new partners and remarry each other. Because Deuteronomy 24:4 says: “Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.” Although this one’s dicey, because it might be part of the old law that we’re no longer under.
• That couples who divorce and marry others must divorce their new partners and remarry each other. Because that’s what 1 Corinthians 7:11 means when it says: “But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife” and, hey, we’re being generous because literally this only applies to the woman; the man should not divorce anyone in the first place.
• Women are to keep utterly silent in churches. Because 1 Corinthians 14:34 says so: “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law” and the Greek word for “keep silence” there means utterly silent, making no sound.
• Women are not to keep utterly silent in churches. Because they are commanded to sing like everybody else, but that’s all they’re authorized to do. Except for teaching other women or little children under the age of accountability, which is twelve even though the Bible doesn’t say so and teaching them is not forbidden because, well, we say so because it’s hard to find men who are willing to do it. And they probably really ought to wear a veil, too; but good luck making that stick.

Oh, there’s a bunch more: Faith saves without works; faith plus works saves. In Christ there is no male-female difference and we should all submit to each other; women should submit to men and never vice-versa. Early Christians met every day to break bread; early Christians only met on Sunday to break bread.

This is just a bare sampling. I don’t think I’m smart enough to be able to believe all of it at the same time. It’s just too complicated.

And – well – contradictory.

You know what’s much easier – though still deeply difficult in a way – for me to understand and believe?

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” ~ John 3:16

“He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” ~ Micah 6:8

That tells me that He loved the world to death. That law wasn’t good enough anymore. That we couldn’t pay off the debt of sin under it. That we all sin. That Jesus levels the playing field. He satisfies the justice, extends the mercy, walks the walk, fulfills the faith, loves the love, works the work, lives the life, dies the death, pays the debt, lives the life again and wants for all of us to be blessed by the fellowship of doing the same, to the very best of our ability – with Him walking at our sides! And with His help, we can share that blessing of fellowship with others who don’t yet know and don’t yet believe. That’s life worth living forever.

And the rest of stuff some require for that fellowship is just so much mint, dill and cummin.

Well, we know that Esther was pretty, anyway (Esther 2:7). Ruth may have been as physically attractive as she was noble of character (Ruth 2:11 and 3:11). She’s described as a Moabitess several times in the text, and Israelite men throughout the Old Testament seemed to find the women of Moab attractive, even when forbidden to mix with their people (Numbers 25:1; 1 Kings 11:1); etc.).

But that’s not my point.

These two rather extraordinary women – Ruth for her boldness and character; Esther for her courage – have books in the Bible written about them. Moses doesn’t have a book named after him. David doesn’t have a book named after him. Books which do carry a person’s name there often tell their story, and how God worked through them.

Esther’s book is unusual in that it does not mention God at all, nor prayer, nor any of the practices of Israel (except fasting, which was almost always done in connection with prayer/mourning) – yet God’s fingerprints are all over the ironies of the events which take place in it.

Similarly, God makes only cameo appearances in the book of Ruth; the strongest reference is to the fact that expatriate Israelite Naomi (mother of Ruth’s late husband) “heard in Moab that the LORD had come to the aid of his people by providing food for them.” Most of the rest of the references are Naomi’s prayers that God will bless Ruth’s acquisition of a husband after being widowed – or the frequent prayers of blessing which season the conversations of Boaz.

They’re not long books – Ruth has four chapters; Esther, ten – and it’s almost as if the writers (men?) felt uncomfortable in their culture, directly attaching the work of God as something done directly through these women.

Yet the results of His actions through them are unmistakable. In the time of the judges before the kings, Ruth woos and marries Boaz, and bears a child who will become the grandfather of Israel’s greatest king – David. And in the time after the kings, when Israel is divided, disbanded, and dispersed mostly to Persia, Esther’s actions will save her people from genocide.

Inculturation dies hard.

Jesus would show extraordinary, unprecedented grace toward women in His time: speaking to them, touching and healing them when they were ill, permitting those with damaged reputation to speak to and touch Him, permitting them to witness the truth about Him, even commissioning them to tell others the blessed news of His resurrection. On sons and daughters, according to Joel’s prophecy, the Holy Spirit was manifest upon His followers at Pentecost. Prisca as well as Aquila instructed the visiting Apollos. The Lord opened Lydia’s heart at Phillipi, and her entire household – perhaps even including employees of her business – were converted as well, and a church began as she hosted Paul and Silas.

But even the gospel writers seem reticent to divulge too much detail; to imply too strongly that God actually worked through these women.

Inculturation dies hard.

Today, believers continue to perpetuate a church culture which is completely uncomfortable recognizing God’s work through women; the partnership which they share with men in the ministry of the gospel.

We justify it by quoting two instructions of Paul given to mixed Jew-and-Gentile-believer churches in Corinth and Ephesus, where there were difficulties with women disrupting worship with questions, not learning in quietness, dressing and behaving inappropriately. While there might still be churches where these problems exist, it’s not likely that they exist to these biblical extremes.

Inculturation dies hard.

But at some point, inculturation has to give way to common sense – and scripture. The demise of inculturated values which have too long outlived their value to culture has to begin somewhere.

In scripture, it largely begins with Sarah and Rebekah and Miriam and Deborah and Jael … and these two beautiful women – beautiful not wholly because of their physical attributes, but mostly because of their character.

Because they were willing to let God work through them.

This article appeared in the April-June, 2002 issue of the Gospel Gleaner, a very conservative publication within the fellowship of Churches of Christ, published not too far away from me in Mabelvale, Arkansas. I could see no copyright on the issue, and that issue was not the article’s original publication, so I hope I am not in violation by republishing it here.

When ‘Conservative’ Isn’t Sound
by Mike Vestal

Being religiously “conservative” is not necessarily the same as being sound in the faith (Titus 1:13; 2:2). The two are not synonymous terms. Without any doubt, there are many areas in which Christians are to be, and must be, conservative. But this is not always so. Rather, we must always endeavor to be sound. Of the twenty-three passages where the Greek word for “sound” does occur, twelve are in the gospel accounts and nine are in 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. The Greek word always has reference to health, wholeness and well being, whether in a physical or spiritual sense.

The idea of spiritual soundness is especially to be seen in 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. We are to be sound “in the faith” (Titus 1:13; 2:2). We must cling to sound doctrine (1 Timothy 1:10; 2 Timothy 4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1). And we must speak, hold and yield to the sound words of Christ (1 Timothy 6:3; 2 Timothy 1:13; Titus 2:8). The emphasis in these passages is on God’s word as a received body of fixed teaching that is to be used to give us the spiritual health we all should desperately desire, as well as to counteract any teaching, concept or practice that would threaten our soul’s health and well-being.

The fact is, there are real dangers in thinking that conservative always equals sound and vice versa. And this is not just an exercise in semantics or straining at some technical, but unimportant, subtlety. This becomes particularly true at a time in which an increasing number of brethren seem to be showing less respect for the authority and all sufficiency of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17). It is possible to become so carried away with the disregard for God’s word that we are seeing on the part of some brethren that we fall from our own steadfastness (2 Peter 3:16-18). And just as some in their quest for something more have been guilty of compromising Scripture and of damaging their relationship with God, so some in their efforts to be conservative may unwittingly have exhibited something considerably less than what the Lord desires. Christianity involves all the love a man has — his heart, soul, mind and strength (Mark 12:30).

Sometimes “conservative” is merely a buzz word for being sound asleep, or for excusing oneself from at least some aspect of the will of God. And that’s when “conservative” isn’t sound! To be more specific, consider the following occasions when being “conservative” isn’t sound.

Soundness always has reference to good health, wholeness and well being, whether in the spiritual sense (cf., 2 Timothy 1:13) or physical (cf., Luke 15:27). But this is not always true of conservatism. There is a “carnal conservatism” that is every bit as real and wrong as the increasingly blatant disregard a number of brethren are displaying toward the authority and all-sufficiency of Scripture. To be more specific, consider the following occasions when being “conservative” isn’t sound.

When One is Not Motivated by Love. Revelation 2:1-7 speaks of the church at Ephesus. This church was an active congregation as well as one interested in doctrinal purity. In many ways it would have seemed to be a wonderful congregation. But the Lord said they had “left” their “first love.” And that’s serious! 1 Corinthians 13:1-3 speaks of the possibility of eloquence in communication, depth in knowledge and sacrificial giving (all good things) being worthless unless one is motivated by love.

When One Fails to Act Wisely and Expediently. This has to do with the need to humbly respect God’s will and to do what He has authorized in a manner that reflects sound judgment and action (1 Corinthians 6:12). It is possible to believe what is right, but to lack a sense of discernment and diligence in properly carrying things out (Philippians 1:9-11; Hebrews 5:11-14).

When One Talks but Doesn’t Do. What is so sound about any individual or church that talks but does not practice it? (See James 4:17). And while none of us is perfect, those who truly love the Lord will ever strive to do His will more completely (Ephesians 6:6; 1 Thessalonians 3:8-10). As John penned, “My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue, but in deed and in truth” (1 John 3:18).

Are both our actions and attitudes sound?

When Sinful Pride Replaces Humility. Is it not possible to become so proud of our stand on various biblical matters, as well as the acclaim, associations, and opportunities that may come along with that stand, that pride rears its ugly head in us? (cf., 1 Corinthians 10:12; Proverbs 16:18). One may take a stand for truth without knowing God deeply and richly, but God desires both! (Colossians 1:9-10; Philippians 3:10). Humility drives away sinful ego when we truly seek to know Him. As John the Baptizer said, “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30).

When the “Whole Counsel of God” Gets Lost in the Issues and Controversies of the Day. Truth is often controversial, and error must be dealt with, but the “whole counsel of God” must be proclaimed too (Acts 20:27). It is not enough to just rebuke and reprove error; one must exhort, comfort and strengthen (cf. 2 Timothy 4:2; Acts 20:20). God’s people must not be known only for what we are against. We must also be known for what we are for! (Acts 20:32; 2 Timothy 3:16-17). There is seemingly no end to the number of errors which may be seen about us, but that is no reason to give congregations a steady and constant diet of every issue and controversy among us. Evangelism and vital forms of edification can easily get lost in the shuffle when this is done. May God give us all greater wisdom in exercising biblical balance in this regard.

One of the greatest dangers of “carnal conservatism” is that it is so insidious. It is easier seen in others than in ourselves. And while I trust, “carnal conservatism” isn’t so in any of us, it is still wise and proper to ask, “Master, is it I?” (Matthew 26:22; 2 Corinthians 13:5; 2 Peter 1:10). For to be guilty of such is to be unhealthy and unsound. — Granbury Street Church of Christ bulletin (May 11, 18, 25, 1997).

I don’t know if this is the same Mike Vestal who is now on staff at the Westside Church of Christ in Midland, Texas, but I strongly suspect that it is, for in a recent church bulletin, there is an article commending love above other law to the members.

And, while I would probably use different words to express similar ideas here and there in communicating the text of the article above, I cannot at all disagree with it. Nor can I insist that what it says can be said only of “conservative” members of churches of Christ. It is just as applicable to those of us who are called “progressive.” (Though, within our fellowship, I would have to say that disregard for the authority and sufficiency of scripture is extremely rare among those of us called “progressive,” much more scarce than those who are called “conservative” might believe.)

It is often a struggle for me to remember to love, to express love, to live out love – especially when engaged in impassioned debate with some of the folks whose views do not agree with mine.

But Mike Vestal has nailed it, in my opinion: If our actions and attitudes aren’t as “sound” (and I would use the word “Christ-like”) as our doctrines, we are only “only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal” (1 Corinthians 13) – whether we are “conservative,” “progressive” or in that vast in-between.

Think of a doctrine you have been taught in church.

Any doctrine. I don’t care which. It doesn’t matter.

Now ask yourself a question: “How can I be sure that this is God’s will – for me; for His people; for His church; for anyone; for everyone?”

I’m betting your first answer to that question is: “Look in the Bible.”

Good answer.

If you can find that doctrine taught explicitly in scripture, just as it was taught to you, you have been taught well and you have learned well.

What if the doctrine you thought of can’t be found in scripture? And I don’t mean that just you yourself cannot find it; I mean if no one can find it. What then?

You could pray for clarity and an answer from God. He gives them sometimes; don’t tell me He doesn’t. Gideon and the fleece. Job and the whirlwind. Elijah and the still, small Voice after the whirlwind and the earthquake. Jonah under the withering vine.

What if you don’t receive an answer? Does that mean God doesn’t want you to know? That you couldn’t understand the answer? That it’s none of your business what His will is in this matter?

Or does He want you to look some more?

Maybe outside of scripture. Maybe in a library, or on the Internet, or from a wise and beloved friend and/or teacher.

What if you find the doctrine in a book or on a site or from trusted lips, and it’s attributed to someone who wrote long after the canon of scripture was collected?

Does that automatically mean it’s a teaching of man, and not credible? Or is it possible that it is a teaching of a man acquainted with God’s word and will and nature, and reliable as an interpretation of scripture?

What if you find credible, intelligent, reasonable, spiritual sources which contradict that doctrine and outline believable reasons why it is in doubt or error.

How can you be sure?

These are some of the things I would want to know about that doctrine:

• Does it say more than scripture says?
• Does it say less than scripture says? (Does it ignore scripture which may contradict it? Explain away those scriptures?)
• Does it actually say something different and contradictory to what scripture says?
• Is it consistent with both the just and merciful nature of God; His kindness and severity?
• Is it reasonable inasfar as human knowledge extends?
• Is it logical inasfar as human logic extends?
• Is it something that genuinely contributes to the transformation of the believer into the image of the living Christ? (Or does it have only an appearance of righteousness?)
• Does it reflect the nature of Christ to be shone among His followers, exhibiting the fruits of His Spirit? (Or does its practice lead to self-righteousness, judgmentalism, arrogance, hatred, envy, strife, anger, divisiveness, and the like?)
• Does the environment in which that doctrine is taught disallow or discourage investigation, especially using sources that are outside of its influence or which contradict the doctrine?

I would say that if my answer to any of those questions regarding that doctrine is undesirable, unscriptural and unenlightening, then I have a serious and legitimate cause for doubting the doctrine.

You can bet I am going to ask God again. And I am going to keep asking. And keep asking. And keep asking.

Would you like to know why?

I believe God listens, and He answers, and He wants us to know His will. I believe this because of Luke 11:1-11. If that passage were suddenly expunged from all scripture and remained only in my head, I would still believe this because of John 14:12-14. And if all the red-letter words in all the red-letter Bibles faded bleachingly away in the night tonight, I would still believe because of James 1:5-7. And 1 John 5:1-5.

And many others.

He might speak through His word in a way you’ve never read and perceived it before. He might speak through His very Spirit commingled with yours, in a still, small voice that hushes whirlwinds and earthquakes and brings peace to the soul. He might speak through others with whom you converse, circumstances in your life, songs that you hear, books that you read, e-mails that you receive – any way He chooses.

If it is a doctrine you need to know and obey, He will not encrypt it, obscure it nor hide it. He is not in business to make your life more difficult to be like Him; to make it harder to obey.

That’s Satan’s job.

And that should give you some idea where false doctrine – hidden doctrine, secret doctrine, gnosis doctrine – comes from.

You can be sure of it.

But don’t just take my word for it.

Ask. Seek. Knock.

Especially ask.

I am willing to give it a try.

Anything that doesn’t work can be adjusted or repealed.

I am saddened that it has become a wedge to further drive apart two extremist positions connected to the major political parties who believe they have the uncontested fealty of 100% of Americans.

They do not.

Republicans seem to feel that this bill is some kind of referendum that declares their laissez-faire policy toward all free enterprise, including health care, a failure. Well, it’s not. But more legislation was needed to rein in greed, and Congresses dominated by Republicans had plenty of opportunity to file and pass it for many, many years. They didn’t step up to the plate.

Democrats seem to feel that this bill gives them the opportunity to throw as much money as they want to at a problem, that cost-saving efficiencies and total coverage will pay for it, and oh-well-what-the-hay-we’re-in-debt-up-to-our-eyeballs-anyway-so-how-can-this-make-it-much-worse. Well, it can. The savings numbers are optimistic to say the least, so we’ll see. Congresses led by Democratic majorities had brief opportunities to file and pass legislation that would have helped over the years. They didn’t step up to the plate.

Health care providers and insurance companies, with free rein to charge whatever they wanted to, give as many unnecessary tests as they wanted to, refuse care to whomever they wanted to, ran amuck.

And we all let them. Believers in Christ, and those who do not yet believe. We treated health care as if it were something sacred, and forgot what truly is sacred.

It was not that way in the early centuries of the Christian faith. While plagues ravaged Europe and outlying areas and a lot of non-believers abandoned cities to escape the contagions, a lot of Christians stayed behind and cared for their sick and dying – at risk to themselves, but at no risk to their faith or their promised destiny.

Some day, believers need to take back the care of the poor and the sick.

Will we step up to the plate?