It is commonly accepted that "the Bible teaches by direct command, by approved example, and by necessary inference." Of these three ways, the first is unqualifiedly safe. What the word of God directly states or commands is unerringly true. But it is well to look carefully to distinguish between what it really does say and what we may have read into it. When, however, we take the second statement, "The Bible teaches by approved example," we face a danger. Most of the long, useless controversies that have troubled us, and a great many hobbies, have arisen from the misapplication of the "example teaching." The authoritative teaching of the Bible is by outright statement; but approved examples are only illustrative. They illustrate the carrying out of God's will under varying circumstances. And by no means must it be supposed that we are restricted and limited to copy these examples in their minute particulars. If, for instance, the Lord in his great commission said, "Go," Paul's going on foot or by ship is indeed an approved example, but does not debar us from going some other way. As long as we go, and as long as in our particular method of going we do not infringe on any other principle or direction of God's word, we are obeying God. This is plain enough. Nevertheless, most of us have heard of brethren who contended for going afoot or by boat, because that is "the New Testament example." When in Acts 2:42 we see the manner of the first church, how they worshiped and served God, it [51] is well for us to follow the example;, but we are not limited to the order in which the items of their worship and service were arranged, nor yet to the time of day when they met, and such like matters. "Can you find any example in the New Testament where the Bible was taught in a class?" one brother asked another. "What if I could not?" he replied. "The command to teach authorizes me to teach anywhere, in any manner, at any time of day or night--granted, of course, that I use no means or methods that contravene any of God's teachings elsewhere." It is only where the "approved example" touches a vital point not clearly taught by outright instruction that we should confine ourselves to the copy of it; as when in Acts 20:7 we find in the course of such an example the only plain indication in the word of God as to the day when Christians, as taught by the apostles, took the Lord's Supper.

      This principle is not dangerous. It gives no room for the creating of societies, for example. The society is not a method of preaching, but an organization which itself uses methods. This principle authorizes no instrumental music, as some might fear; for playing an organ is not a method of the singing which God commanded, but an addition to and an obscuration of it, involving the perversion of the whole spirit and purpose of worship. No, to refuse to be limited by approved examples, and to maintain the right of obeying God in any and every right method and time and place, is not dangerous, but to limit one's self by the "examples" is dangerous--it is the occasion of numberless hobbies and cranky conceits which spoil the spirit of Christianity and cramp and fetter every willing soul.

      The last of the three ways in which the Bible teaches--"necessary inference"--is also problematical. Not in the strictest sense, perhaps; but its strictest application [52] is rarely adhered to. I would not object to inferences, necessary or otherwise, for they often open up great fields of interest and may open our eyes to facts we would not otherwise have noticed. But we cannot be too cautious in making or weighing inferences. There is where men err. Thence come creeds and theories. We may infer, but we cannot be dogmatic about our inferences. Our logic may be good, but our premises may be mistaken. Our premises may be true, but they may not be comprehensive enough. Men blunder and blunder--always have, always will. And often just in proportion as their field of vision is contracted do they bluster and assert and dogmatize. The greatest minds have ever been most modest in presenting their conclusions. The things which God has said we may speak with all authority. But our reasonings, if presented at all, should be understood to hold a strictly secondary place, and should be held with a very light grasp; for these things mislead, these things create endless controversies, and in these things men tyrannize one another.

      Finally, when a man, for the love of God and out of his great desire to do God's will, seeks for the details set forth in the Word, he is on a good road and not likely to go astray; but if, for controversy's sake or to exhibit his own superior correctness in doctrine, he goes to ferret out finer and finer distinctions, he will end in the false, trivial, puerile scrupulousness of the Pharisees.--April 15, 1909,

[TAG 51-53]