Warning:

Having a lot of Scripture stored away in your brain can be a dangerous thing.

I have been reading, listening to, discussing, or reflecting upon verses and passages from the Bible almost daily for more than thirty years (I might have missed a few days if I was amnesic for a brief period, but I don’t remember). I have never been one to intentionally memorize Scripture (except when required during seminary) but, not surprisingly, I still have a pretty good storehouse of God’s words sprinkled throughout the four-pound, gelatinous grey mass that masquerades as my brain.

This is a very good thing at times: I am convinced that, in certain situations, the Holy Spirit has brought a verse or passage to mind and provided me with wisdom. I don’t consciously try to remember things at such times but, like a tap on the shoulder and a whisper from a faithful friend, the words just seem to arrive unannounced. They are sometimes unwelcomed at first but eventually appreciated; they are always unexpected.

The danger arises from the fact that it is not only the Holy Spirit who accesses verses and brings them to mind. Sometimes – and especially when I have a headache and am mildly homicidal as a result – verses or truths pop into my head like unsheathed daggers, ready to inflict pain and suffering on whoever might be so brash as to speak to me on such days. It is my flesh, I’m convinced, persuading my redeemed spirit to take righteousness, justice, and vengeance into my own hands (if typing) or upon my own lips (if speaking) and thereby extract a pound of flesh.


The maddening thing about it all is that I am sometimes unsure who is bringing the verses to mind: is it me or Him? I don’t trust myself sufficiently to rush to judgment, fearful of either quenching the Spirit by not obeying Him or grieving the Spirit by obeying the flesh.

All of the above is a lengthy caveat for what follows. I have a murderous headache today (too much chocolate last night) and my fuse is not only short but lit. I think what follows is true, but I also recognize that it might be a tad more vicious – or is it vacuous? – than need be. So let the reader beware.

[Note to Grace Bible Church members, especially those in the Wednesday night Men's Bible Study: This has nothing to do with any of you. These thoughts and observations have to do with my experience online, not with questions or variant opinions I have encountered at church. I have found almost everyone at GBC to be very teachable and very open to having their views challenged by alternate perspectives or approaches.]

A few clusters of verses have been flitting in and out of my awareness for the past several days. Both are from the Old Testament and both, I believe, are relevant for much of Western culture today.

In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.” – Judges 17:6 (ESV)

“And you, son of man, be not afraid of them, nor be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns are with you and you sit on scorpions. Be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house. And you shall speak my words to them, whether they hear or refuse to hear, for they are a rebellious house.” – Ezekiel 2:6-7 (ESV)

“If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die for his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul.” – Ezekiel 3:18-19 (ESV)

In the days of the judges, you will recall, the variegated nation of Israel had entered the promised land and begun to secure their sovereignty in the midst of a hostile environment. The leadership and single-minded devotion of Joshua had died with him, and the people languished in their territories and failed to acknowledge God. The Book of Judges is a record of the hot-and-cold relationships the various tribes had with God during the period.

To say that there was no king in Israel is to say that there was no final, absolute authority that the people recognized and to whom/which they submitted. At the same time, to say that everyone did what was right in their own eyes means that each individual viewed themselves as the final authority in whatever matters they encountered. There was no absolute truth; everybody determined their own truth.

Perhaps it’s just me, but this seems to be eerily similar to the situation that has been developing in the church for the last two decades. It’s a situation about which Francis Schaeffer warned us in the 1970s and for which Nancy Pearcey sounded the alarm in her book Total Truth.

Self-proclaimed authority and expertise is at least endemic in our American churches, perhaps nowhere more evident than in the emergent movement. To limit it solely to one group, however, would be unfair to that group and to all other groups, as well. In the case of the former, it would be unfair because it would categorize them as somehow being unusual or unique in such an approach when (in reality) they are only more open and vocal – albeit curiously proud – about it than others. With regard to the latter, it would be unfair because they might come away believing that they are not susceptible or guilty of it themselves. But they are.

This disdain and dismissing of authorities is prevelant on blogs and, as such, is a microcosm of the Christian subculture in general. There is a lot of teaching going on in the blogosphere, but not much learning; a lot preaching, but not much listening. Many people seem to have their minds made up and will not be moved: attempts to sway or persuade are largely futile. Everyone decides what is right and true according to their own perceptions; scholars’ observations are ignored or refuted because some scholars have been wrong in the past.

Certainly scholars have been wrong in the past, but my suspicion is that they’ve been wrong a lot less than non-scholars have been. Who is more likely to misunderstand a passage or teaching, one who has researched and studied it professionally or one who spends an hour or so a day reading the Bible? Scholars get more attention, I think, not because they are wrong more often but because they announce their beliefs in a public forum and are carefully evaluated and scrutinized. People like me, in contrast, can teach heresy and get away with it (temporally speaking) because no one listens to me, relatively speaking. So the scholars-have-been-wrong-in-the-past is pretty lame as far as I am concerned.

The hypocrisy of such an attitude also troubles me. It is apparently OK to have this approach to the Scriptures and things of God but not in other, less important things in life. I have written about this elsewhere, but allow me to flog this decomposing horse once again. What do you think the chances are of any of the following happening?

    Your child is deathly ill and in need of medical attention. Rather than go to an emergency room, you decide to cut out her appendix yourself because you read on the internet and in Reader’s Digest that her symptoms are consistent with that malady.
    The weatherman says there is a tornado on the ground near your house and to seek cover immediately. You know, however, that the weatherman has been wrong in the past and decide to take a bath instead.
    Your employer tells you that a certain project must be finished by the end of the day or the business might go under. She doesn’t give you any information about the risk, however, and you can’t see what the big deal is. So you take off early and let the project wait for another day. After all, it’s just her opinion.

The above behaviors may seem ridiculous or foolish – and so they are – but how are those examples any different than the approach to the Bible about which I am concerned? If one’s own opinion is just as good as that of biblical scholar, why isn’t that same judgment just as good as a physician’s, a weatherman’s, or an employer’s? The fact that some engage in the former – which all have to do with eternal matters – but not the latter – which all have to do with things destined to perish – smacks of hypocrisy and exposes a cavalier attitude about spiritual realities.

Finally, if one opinion is as good as another, why argue? If I believe that people should not regard themselves so highly and another believes that they are every bit as competent as the most learned biblical scholar in the world, why get upset and debate the point? Isn’t my opinion just as valid? Don’t I have the same right to be a self-appointed authority on a matter? If I want to quote Pr 26:12 –

Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for him.

- who can say that I’m wrong or misapplying the verse? The knife is double-edged. You may not think so, but I do and I’m brandishing it!

The Ezekiel quotations have more to do with my attitude about this entire matter and my role in it. I believe I have a responsibility to state what I believe to be true. I try to be persuasive and convincing, but ultimately I need only be faithful. A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I heard the following definition:

Successful evangelism is sharing the gospel in the power of the Holy Spirit and leaving the results to God.”

I think that holds true for a lot of other things, too, including warning others about potentially harmful behaviors or attitudes: what a person does with whatever information I – or anyone else – put forth is not my responsibility. I will answer for what I say and believe, not what anyone else says or believes. But I do have a responsibility to speak the truth in love. If I announce it and I’m wrong, I’ll pay for it; if I’m right, I won’t pay for it – but someone else might.

Unquestionably, I will be accused once again of being an elitist. This is a favorite dismissive term that is employed by those who would be their own authorities; it is, obviously, no argument at all. It is simply an ad hominem attack.

Two things about elitism:

    1. Let’s consider the definition first of all. Here’s one:

    1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
    2.

      1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
      2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

    (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
    Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.)

    Now, if I understand the charge against me, it is in the sense of “control, rule, or domination” that I am accused of being elitist. But I have nowhere argued for such a thing. I have only said that to ignore expertise is foolish and that it is against sound judgment. I have not said anyone should blindly follow what an expert proclaims. I know I have not said this because I do not believe it.

    For example, I am presently studying the Book of Romans. As part of my study, I am reading more than a few commentaries on Paul’s treatise by a variety of experts in the field. I usually try to get input from those who approach the Scriptures with the same presuppositions and hermeneutic as my own, but who also disagree with one another on various points. I read, reflect, and study some more. Ultimately, however, I must decide what it is that I believe and adhere to that. Jesus Christ will not allow me, at the bema seat, to blame Moo, Cranfield, Murray, Calvin, or anyone else for what I concluded. There are some beliefs that I have that I don’t particularly like (right now there’s one re Rom 8:13 and its application for believers) but am persuaded that they are correct. But I am completely responsible for whatever I decide.

    People seem to confuse elitism with relying on expertise. As my examples sought to demonstrate, however, we trust experts all the time and do not regard ourselves as elitists when we do. I thank God for experts and their input and impact on my life, even when it is contrary to what I would like it to be.

    2. Let’s say the charge is correct, i.e., I’m indeed a snobbish elitist that believes I know better than others. Does that necessarily lead to the conclusion that I’m wrong? Maybe I’ve come to the right conclusion for all the wrong reasons, but to dismiss the warning simply because you’ve decided I am an elitist is foolishness.

In the final analysis, we will all stand before Jesus Christ and explain why we did what we did. As I said before, I will not be able to blame anyone for my own false and erroneous beliefs. Hopefully, I will be able to say that I came to the conclusion based on the information that was available to me at that point in my life, and that I did not reject the expertise (read: wise counsel) of others and rely only on my own judgment. Certainly I could have done more but my hope is that I will have done enough, and that Christ will say to me, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”


2 Cor 1:13