The Silence of the Scriptures

 From a book entitled A Short History of Christianity by Stephen Tomkins I quote as follows:  "The basic difference between Zwingli and Luther was in their attitudes to the Bible.  Zwingli saw it as a precise blueprint for church life.  For Luther, what is not forbidden is permitted; for Zwingli, what is not permitted is forbidden." (page 141)  Both Zwingli and Luther lived in the Age of Reformation, often referred to as the Protestant Reformation, and both men were leading figures in its beginnings.

The subject of this article is the issue that separated Luther from Zwingli, namely, the silence of the scriptures.  While I will be concentrating primarily on issues related to worship practices in this article the principles enunciated extend beyond what happens inside the doors where we meet for worship weekly.  Does the silence of the scriptures permit a practice or forbid it in Christianity?

This can only be answered by an appeal to the scriptures to which we will go but before doing so it would be good to make the point that some have answered this question without an appeal to scripture at all.  Authority within the Roman Catholic Church, for example, resides in the church itself, the Magisterium, not in scripture.  However, I suppose, if one was forced to put them in either Luther’s camp or Zwingli’s camp they would have to be placed with Luther.

When one takes the position Luther took one cannot complain too much, and be consistent, about wild innovations in the church.  If what is not forbidden is permitted then pretty much anything goes.  On what basis could you forbid it? 

But what do the scriptures teach for those desiring to know?  If there was only one passage one could use to settle this debate as it relates to worship it would be for me John 4:24, "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (NKJV)  It is easy to overlook a very important word in this passage, the word "must."  That means neither you nor I have any choice in the matter.  It is we "must."  It is the only worship God will accept, that which is in spirit and truth, or else the word "must" is a word without meaning.

We know what is meant when we are told we must worship in spirit.  I think we all agree about the meaning of that part of the passage.  That leaves only the word truth and the question about that only revolves around what is truth, where it’s found, and how you can know it.  The Bible tells us. 

"Truth came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17 NKJV)  Whatever Jesus spoke was "truth."  In prayer to the Father, Jesus said, in John 17:17, "Your word is truth." (NKJV)  The words Jesus spoke, whatever, wherever, to whomever were truth.  He spoke the words the Father had given him.  Hear Jesus, “I have not spoken on my own, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a command to say everything I have said.”  (John 12:49 CSB)  And, again, “I speak just as the Father has told me.” (John 12:50 CSB)

All the words of the New Testament, red letter or not, are the words of Jesus, the words of God the Father, the words of truth.  After Jesus’ death and ascension, when the Holy Spirit was given to men, the Holy Spirit did not speak independently of Jesus and the Father.  Jesus referred to the Spirit calling him “the Spirit of truth.” (John 14:17, 15:26 NKJV)

Jesus further speaking of the Holy Spirit said, “He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.  He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.  All things that the Father has are Mine.  Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.” (John16:13-15 NKJV)

To worship in truth, then, involves worshiping by the word of God.  That means, and it seems so obvious that I do not see how men overlook it, that if there is no word from God there is no truth in matters religious.  If God has not spoken on a practice how does man practice that thing, whatever it be, and say he is worshiping in truth?

Additionally, how can we have faith in a worship practice if there is no word from God when “faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” (Rom.10:17 NKJV)  And, again, “Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Col. 3:17 NKJV)  If there is no word from Jesus (God) how do you practice an activity in worship “in the name of the Lord Jesus”?  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say we are doing it in our own name.

There is such a thing as the teachings of men.  Listen to Jesus again, "Hypocrites!  Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: …'And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' " (Matt. 15:7-9 NKJV)  Paul says in Titus we are to not give heed "to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth." (Titus 1:14 NKJV)  A worship practice that does not have a book, chapter, and verse for it in God’s word is a commandment of men, an invention of men, and is certainly not worship in truth for if it was book, chapter, and verse could be provided.

Now I know many are with Luther on this—if a practice or act is not specifically forbidden then it’s permitted.  If he was right then truth, God’s word, does not matter and one can on his own authority, manmade and man-given, institute worship according to one's desire.

Paul's rebuke of the Corinthians regarding the Lord's Supper provides further evidence that what is not clearly revealed in scripture is prohibited.  The Corinthians had been taught about the Lord's Supper or else they would not have been observing it, correctly or incorrectly.  Furthermore, Paul comes right out and tells us they had been taught when he says, "For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you." (1 Cor. 11:23 NKJV)  That is past tense.  Since he had last met with them they had obviously made some changes in the way they were partaking of the supper.  I ask—on whose authority did they do so? 

Note the principle Paul is establishing.  He is telling the Corinthians to do what you are told to do by inspiration and do not make changes, or additions, or subtractions.  To do so is to change the word of God and is to go outside of truth for one's worship.

In the book of Deuteronomy, we find Moses addressing the children of Israel, acting as God's spokesperson.  Hear what he has to say, "You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." (Deut. 4:2 NKJV)  Upon what evidence do you think that principle has changed today?  Do you think that today God does not mind us adding to his word or taking from it?

We recognize the principle of silence being prohibitive in human wills and legal documents.  Why do we not recognize the same principle in the last will and testament of our Lord and Savior, the New Testament?  What was left out of that will was left out for a reason.

If a doctor writes you a prescription for drug X then you cannot use it to get drug Y in addition to drug X.  The silence of the prescription prohibits that.  And there is no substitution unless it is specifically written on the prescription that is allowed, normally to a generic.  Silence has meaning.  Silence prohibits and does not authorize.  It is impossible to gain authority from silence.

The police need a search warrant to search your home.  That warrant does not give them the legal right to search your neighbor's home.  Why not?  Because the warrant is silent, it does not speak about your neighbor's house.  You cannot have faith in silence no matter how strongly you may feel about what ought to be.  Our faith must be in what is written, not in the unsaid.

We cannot change what is written in the New Testament (the guide for Christians and Christ's last will and testament).  If we add to it we do so without having the authority to do so and thus do so as men using man's authority, not God's.  If we take away from what is written, ignoring it, then we may as well take a pair of scissors and cut it out of the biblical text.  Who would dare do that?  There is a Day of Judgment when men must stand before God and tampering with his word is not something you want to do when you contemplate that fearful day. 

A practical application of all of this, because it is such a widespread practice, is that of the use of instrumental music in worship.  It was allowed under the Law of Moses.  Why?  Because there was word from God commanding it (see 2 Chron. 29:25).  It is prohibited, even though commonly practiced, under the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2, 1 Cor. 9:21) under which we live today.  Why?  There is no command for it.  The scriptures are silent.  You can only bring it into New Testament worship by adding to the words of Christ.

The secular history of the church is such that it can be proven instrumental music was not used in the New Testament church for a few hundred years after the first century.  Most historians date it to the late seventh century.  The Jews were a people well versed in the use of harps and other musical instruments.  One must ask why Jewish Christians did not use them in the earliest years of the church.  I think the answer is self-evident. 

I close this by reiterating what I have already said.  If the silence of the scriptures allows freedom to do as we please there is no end to the man-made innovations that men can dream up and bring into the church.  Who can believe we can do anything and everything with God’s approval?

[To download this article or print it out click here.]