Silence May Be Prohibitive

I'd like to introduce the theme of this article with these four illustrations:

1. In the New Testament, baptism is defined as immersion. Does this mean that sprinkling and pouring are not valid modes of "baptism?" Neither mode is explicitly condemned. The Bible doesn't say "not to" sprinkle or pour water on the baptismal subject.
2. In 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, we're told that the Lord's Supper consists of the bread, which represents the body of Christ, and the fruit of the vine, which represents the blood of Christ. Does this mean that we MUST use bread and grape juice? Would it be wrong to use oreos and milk? Could we at least spread butter and jam on our bread to give it more flavor? After all, the Bible doesn't say we can't change out the emblems!
3. Regarding the organization of the local church, it is repeatedly stated that elders were appointed in every church (Acts 14:23; Acts 20:17; Titus 1:5). These were qualified men (Titus 1:5-9) who shepherded the local church of which they were members (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:1-2). Even though it is specified that these were men, would it be wrong to appoint female elders? The Bible doesn't say "not to." Or could we appoint a "chief elder" to oversee the eldership? Could we do away with the eldership altogether and institute a different type of organization? God never condemns these things, so does that mean that these things are permissible?
4. When it comes to music in worship, God specifies singing (Rom. 15:9; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; Heb. 2:12). This is portrayed as being a congregational activity as well. So what about the use of instruments (i.e. pianos, guitars, etc.) in our worship? What about choirs, solos and quartets? Even though God specifies singing, He never condemns instruments in worship. And even though this is said to be a congregational activity, the Scriptures never directly forbid choirs!

In each of these four examples - and there are many, many others - the issue is whether or not silence is permissive or prohibitive. Are we permitted to do something so long as God doesn't condemn it? Or, is it that when something is specified, everything else is excluded (i.e. the "law of exclusion").

I would suggest to you that when it comes to what God specifies, silence is prohibitive. And there are a number of examples in God's word to illustrate this point.

• In Leviticus 10:1-2, Nadab and Abihu were struck down by God when they "offered profane fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them." You see, God specified the type of incense and fire that He wanted the priests to offer Him in worship...and that's exactly what He expected. When they offered this other type of fire - what is called "profane fire" - they disobeyed God.
• In Numbers 20:7-9, God told Moses to "speak to the rock" in order to bring water out of it for the people of Israel to drink. However, instead of speaking to the rock, Moses "lifted his hand and struck the rock twice with his rod" (vs. 11). Even though the rock still brought forth water for the people, God punished Moses by refusing him entrance into the promised land (vs. 12). Now...did God tell Moses that He couldn't strike the rock? No, He never directly condemned that method. This is another case where God's silence was prohibitive. When God gave the "law" to speak to the rock, every other method was necessarily excluded.
• Under the Law of Moses, the Levites were to carry the ark of the covenant using two poles which were inserted through the rings in the side of the ark. However, when the Israelites set out to relocate the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem under King David, they put it on a cart (or wagon) and used men who were not Levites to transport it (1 Chronicles 13:1-8). When Uzza touched the ark to steady it, God struck Uzza dead (vs. 9-10). At first, David was angry, but he later realized his error. In 1 Chronicles 15:2, David said, "No one may carry the ark of God but the Levites," and in verse 13-15, "'For because you did not do it the first time, the Lord our God broke out against us, because we did not consult Him about the proper order.' So the priests and the Levites sanctified themselves to bring up the ark of the Lord God of Israel. And the children of the Levites bore the ark of God on their shoulders, by its poles, as Moses had commanded according to the word of the Lord." Did God ever say that they couldn't use oxen and a cart to carry the ark, or that another tribe couldn't assist? Not directly. But again, God specified the method He wanted, which, of necessity, excluded every other method.

These three examples alone prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the "law of exclusion" holds true. When God specifies what He wants, everything else is excluded; we need to obey exactly what God has commanded in such cases.

If baptism is immersion, then sprinkling and pouring are invalid modes of baptism.

If the Lord's Supper consists of bread and grape juice, then other emblems are forbidden.

If the congregation is only authorized to sing, then instruments and even choirs are forbidden.

If God has specified that elders are to shepherd the church, all other types of organization are unauthorized.

Before I close this article, I want to point out that not all silence is prohibitive. Some commands are very general, or the means of obeying the command isn't specified. Here are two examples:

• God specifies bread and grape juice for the Lord's Supper, but doesn't tell us how to secure these emblems, or even how exactly to serve them in the church assembly. We must use our judgment in determining what we must do to expedite our obedience to God's command to observe the Lord's Supper.
• God specifies singing, but doesn't give us a list of songs to sing or even how we're to ensure the unified singing of the entire congregation. While song books aren't directly authorized, they are indirectly authorized because they aid us in fulfilling the command to sing.

So silence isn't always prohibitive, but as we've already seen, it may be prohibitive...and is prohibitive when God specifies what He wants.

How serious is this? God may not strike us down today as He did with Nadab, Abihu and Uzza, but clearly He will hold us accountable for our disobedience. If we humbly and sincerely will abide in the doctrine of Christ, we will have fellowship with God...but if we step outside the bounds of God's authority, we will lose our fellowship with Him (2 John 9).

I'd say that's pretty serious, wouldn't you?