Sola Scripura, or Scripture Alone, was one of the great rallying cries of the Reformation. It carries, I think, two potential dangers. The first is to neglect the authority of church tradition, to see oneself as isolated from two thousand years of christian history. The church, not one pastor or one member, was given to be the “pillar and ground of the truth.” The second one is harder to spot, and thus more deadly. It is the attempt to have a verse for everything, and then twist the Scriptures to speak to things it simply does not. This is bad hermeneutics. Don’t get me wrong, the Bible is applicable to all of life. I believe that. But that does not mean there is a chapter and verse for every circumstance, far from it. What the Bible gives is specifics about things God wanted to be specific about, like, “You shall not commit adultery.” It also provides a general worldview that gives authoritative clues for the rest of life. I have heard sermons on “courtship” based on Isaac’s marriage to Rebecca. This is ridiculous. I’m not against courtship, per se, but that story is a historical narrative that tells an intriguing story of the union of two people who were essential for the foundation of the faith. Now obviously this is not a “what not to do” story, so I think it can be deduced that this is at least a pattern one could follow if desired, but it’s not a must. What the Bible forbids must not be done, what the Bible commands must not be left undone, and, so long as it does not conflict with a basic Christian worldview, what the Bible does not forbid is permitted, as far as the faith is concerned. What does going against a basic Christian worldview mean? To offer one example, the Bible nowhere forbids the raising of children on petri dishes, and yet that is a clear breach of how God created the universe to funition, and it cheapens human life, therefore it is against God. The Christian libertarians love this doctrine, thinking that unless God forbids it, no man, state, or tradition can hold them back, namely, that outside of the Holy Writ there is no other authority. Here they fall back into the same ditch. They are seeking to stretch the Bible to say things it never does. As far as the demands of faith are concerned they are correct. There are clear rules in the word of God, but beyond that the earth has been given freely for the use of mankind, which would include the use of reason to establish human institutions. Jurisdictions have derivative powers. These institutions must be created with reference to a Christian view of life, but otherwise they are free. The traditions of men are faulty when used in the worship of God, or in salvation, but outside of that, traditions passed within communities are the lifeblood of being human. Therefore we could say that Biblically there is no prescribed way for couples to get to the point of marriage –except no premarital sex, marry in the Lord, and honor for parents– but culturally we can lay down patters to govern these things. It must, however, be recognized that these laws are mere cultural traditions, and therefore if they prove unhealthy may be dispensed with. The issue is when tradition or human law gets equated with divine law, then people get stuck, because, unlike the transitory states of culture, the Word of God abides forever. Sure, you are free to skip wedding rings or even marriage ceremonies, but these things, instituted by tradition, are supported by a Christian worldview, and point to something outside of themselves, something which is eternal. All clicks and clubs are built on unifying principles, so is the admittance into local cultures, one’s own family, or state; this is good insofar as these codes are good and not evil. Ask yourself, does this law or ritual lend itself to what is good, unifying, and healthy? If yes, then submit yourself to it, if no, then, and only then, you are required to be a rebel. If your culture says to wear green on Wednesday’s you are perfectly free to wear orange, but equally free is the culture to establish wearing green shirts once a week, and you should expect to feel like you “don’t fit in” on Green Day. But if a culture decides that Wednesday is Walk Around Naked Day, well, now you have a cause to back up by Scripture. God’s Word is final, but it is an equal offense to add to His demands as it is to take away from them, as Nadab and Abihu can testify.
Reflective Wanderer 