Lesson 9: Necessary Inference and Expedients

Necessary Inference

and Expedients Another factor one must consider in understanding Bible authority is necessary inference. An inference is a logical conclusion (Webster). A necessary inference is a logical conclusion that one must the text. For example, we are commanded to observe the Lord’s Supper regularly. We observe that the early church met on the first day of the week (1 Corinthians 16:2) and observed the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). We can necessarily infer that since Paul commanded them to meet on the first day of the week, and every week has a first day, that we must meet Sunday. Peter used this principle of authority in Acts 15 when he pointed out the works done among the Gentiles and their ability to be saved without keeping the Old Law and concluded (inferred) that God did not treat them differently from the Jews and that the Old Law was not binding on them. The inference must be a conclusion. An is speculative and not binding. For example, Acts 16:15 tells us that Lydia and her household were baptized. Some have inferred that this incident sanctions infant baptism. To assert that Lydia’s household had infants is an unnecessary inference. In most churches that I have attended there have been some families with children, all of whom were teenagers. It is an unnecessary conclusion to assume that the household included infants. Necessary inference is not an independent authority. Necessary inference helps us to understand direct commands and approved examples. Necessary inference must be drawn when all of the evidence is assembled and the logical conclusion cannot be avoided.

Expedients

Webster defines an expedient as something “useful for effecting a desired result.” An expedient is a suitable way to accomplish an end, but not the only way to do it. Biblical expedients must be lawful (1 Corinthians 10:23) and must edify (1 Corinthians 10:23-24; 14:26). If it violates God’s law or is divisive, it is not expedient. When Paul was collecting money for the needy saints in Jerusalem, he told the Corinthians they could send the money and, if they desired, a represe ntative, with him to Jerusalem (1 Corinthians 16:3-4). The church determined whether it was expedient to send the money by Paul or a representative traveling with Paul, or a representative traveling alone to Judea. We use expediency where God has not specified how to obey a command. We are commanded to assemble (Hebrews 10:25) but not told where to assemble. We might meet in houses, in a park, a rented room, or construct a building. The meeting place is expedient. We are commanded to baptize those wanting salvation (Mark 16:16). We could use a swimming pool, a lake, a river, a bathtub, or build a baptistery. These are expedient ways to accomplish immersion. We are not substitute pouring or sprinkling since that is an addition to baptism, not an expedient way to accomplish it. Some have falsely argued that something is lawful expedient. This reverse logic is contrary to the scriptures. Jenkins quotes Foy Wallace: “The once famous Henry Ward Beecher said, ‘infant baptism is like an ox yoke, it works.’So it is now argued that a think is expedient if it works!” We must first establish the legality of the practice before we can determine the expedient way of implementing it. One cannot disobey God’s law in the name of expediency. For example, it would be wrong for me to steal a Bible from the bookstore to fulfill the command to preach the gospel. Likewise, we cannot substitute something contrary to w h a t G o d h as s pe ci f ic al l y commanded. God commanded Noah to build the ark out of gopher wood. Other types of wood might have been more abundant in his general area and preferable for constructing a boat, but God commanded gopher wood so any other wood, no matter how convenient, would be wrong. However, Noah was free to choose what tools to use and what work to do each day. Many unlawful practices have been started and unscriptural organizations formed by men who ignore the law of God in the name of expediency. We must be extremely careful that our “expedient” does not supplant an existing command of God. For example, the missionary societies were separate organizations formed to do the work that God commanded the church to do; therefore, these organizations are unlawful. As cited above, expedients must edify or build up. Many supposed

“expedients,” such as the missionary societies and instrumental music, have troubled churches. It is clear from scripture that God wants the church to do the work of evangelism and to sing in worship. No one disagreed with this. However, when men brought innovations that were additions to God’s command, they caused dissention. Men who stubbornly promoted these “expedients” were often divisive for they would not cease to do what God had not commanded in order to maintain peace. A notable example is the introduction of the melodeon at a church in Midway, Kentucky despite the scriptural opposition by many of the members. When members objected to the instrument in a service, the preacher said, “play on” and the church split. Hardly edifying. Any expedient must be scripturally sound.

Questions for Discussion & Study

1. How is necessary inference used to establish authority?

2. What care must we exercise when using necessary inference?

3. Fill in the blanks below. The Command Expedient Included Not Expedient Baptism Singing Go Teach Assemble Collection Lord’s Supper

4. How can expedients become divisive?