Articles
Does Silence Authorize Anything?
In every religious discussion, it is of the greatest importance that both sides agree on what the standard of authority will be in any further discussion. If this is not discussed in the beginning and if not standard is agreed upon by all in the discussion, there will be no agreement in the end. Why so? It is inevitable that differences will arise in most religious discussions, and if there is no one standard that serves as the final word, then those differences cannot be resolved.
The problems in many religious discussions today are numerous, and much of it rests on what standard of authority — if any — is used to determine what is believed, taught, and practiced. I will note at this point that most of these problems are not due to a lack of Scriptures that outline what disciples are to believe, teach, and practice, but often fall within two realms: (1) Differing standards of authority and (2) a misunderstanding of how to establish authority from the Scriptures. Differing standards means no agreement will be reached when differences arise, and a misunderstanding of how to establish authority means that the issue of authority itself will be questioned by those who seek to do what is not found within God’s written word.
The issue of what is authorized is an old, old question, and it is not going away anytime soon. In the early history of the church, there were already some arguing, “the thing which is not forbidden is freely permitted,” but the claim was disputed by Tertullian, who wrote, “I should rather say that what has not been freely allowed is forbidden.” Many years later, even Martin Luther would argue, “whatever is without the word of God is, by that very fact, against God.” He would completely flip on this view years later. One of the reformers of Luther’s time, Ulrich Zwingli, would argue, though, that whatever teaching or practice “not enjoined or taught in the New Testament should be unconditionally rejected.” The major difference in Biblical interpretation came down to two views: (1) Silence is permissive, and (2) Silence is prohibitive. Who is correct?
If we at least agree that the Scriptures are our standard of authority in all religious and spiritual matters for those who profess to be disciples, then we should take note of a few examples that illustrate what God thinks on the matter of His silence. If it is God we seek to please [and not just self], then His word must be our rule and guide, should it not?
We may remember the story of Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron who were tasked with offering sacrifices before the Lord, and how it was said that they “offered profane fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them.” Because they did this, “fire went out from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the Lord” (Lev. 10:1, 2). Let us note here that it specifically notes they were punished because they did something “which He had not commanded them”; their punishment was for doing something when God was silent on the issue.
We might also remember the time in Israel’s history when they had strayed far from God. So far were they from doing what was pleasing God that it was said they set up altars in the high places “to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, nor did it come into My heart” (Jer. 7:31). The context where we read this is full of God’s condemnation of the Israelites, and partially for the fact they did something God did not command. Though God certainly did clearly prohibit the Israelites from following other gods, it is noted here that their condemnation was for doing something in violation of His silence.
In the New Testament, we find the writer of Hebrews claiming Christ to be “a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek” (Heb. 7:17), but notes that Jesus “arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood” (Heb. 7:14), so it might appear here that Christ was thus prohibited from being a priest, but a greater truth was the answer: “For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar” (Heb. 7:12, 13). The fact is, if Jesus had served on earth as a priest, He would have been in violation of the Law [since He lived under the Old Law while on earth], but Jesus did not serve while on earth; He now serves as priest in heaven, and there has been a change of law!
Our conclusion must be, from these passages, that silence is not permissive. We cannot presume to act when God has said nothing, In fact, with the occasion of David wanting to build a temple for the Lord, Nathan had told him to go ahead, but later, when God came to Nathan, he asked, “have I ever spoken a word to anyone from the tribes of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people Israel, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’” (2 Sam. 7:7), and then expressly forbid David from building (1 Chron. 17:4). God’s silence was not permissive, and when He did speak, it was a prohibition. Silence is not permissive.
With that said, we must turn to the question of why we must even make an appeal to God’s [or, in our case, Christ’s] authority for all we believe, teach, and practice. Again, what does the Bible say?
All Must Be Authorized of Jesus Christ. By Divine inspiration, the apostle Paul wrote, “And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Col. 3:17). Albert Barnes commented that this means, “Do it all because he requires and commands it, and with a desire to honor him. His authority should be the warrant; his glory the aim of all our actions and words.” [Barnes’ Notes]. He is correct! If we are doing it without His authority, well, it is unauthorized, and we do not have His permission or command to do it. [Remember, silence is not permissive.]
Barnes made an important point in his comments, too, regarding who it is we seek to honor and glorify as the impetus for our words and actions; if it is to honor and glorify Jesus, we will necessarily limit ourselves to what is expressly authorized, and not ‘presume’ what is not said.
How We Know What God Wants. Inevitably, some will question how we can know what God or Jesus Christ want; that is a good question, but I am afraid many will not accept the answer. Again, we go to the Scriptures for the answer.
When the apostle Paul wrote to the Christians in Corinth [again by Divine inspiration], he asked, “For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him?” and then declared, “Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:11). But he then noted how the Spirit had revealed God’s will to them [‘them’ being the apostles and prophets], and were the words he spoke to them (1 Cor. 2:12, 13). In his letter to the brethren at Ephesus, he noted “how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery…which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets” and that revelation [of the gospel] was the very things he had already written to them (Eph. 3:3-6).
The conclusion: We can only know what pleases God and Christ by what has been revealed in His written word — not silence, and not creeds of men. — Steven Harper
