handy
Member
Lewis' thread on cremation, the thread on music in worship and the threads on hunting and eating meat have brought up the issue of how Christians should make decisions on things that are not either commanded nor condemned.
Various people have various ideas.
One such idea is that as long as the Bible has never condemned anything...then it's OK. Some will even take this a step further and state that as long as Jesus Himself didn't condemn it, it's OK.
Another idea is that unless the Bible specifically tells us to do something...then we shouldn't.
For instance...the idea that there should be no musical instruments during worship services...even though they were clearly a part of Old Testament worship...because the New Testament never specifically mentions musical instruments. Or we shouldn't be cremated because no one in the Bible was.
Others take a "spirit but not the letter of the law" approach...someone who looks at things this way will make a decision based more upon what they believe the principles found in the Bible teach, rather than just what the Bible actually says. You will find this approach when folks are debating ideas such as smoking pot or abortions, neither of which are mentioned in the Bible.
I usually go along with the "spirit of the law" idea...that we use the Bible to look at the principles that are taught and apply them to our lives. In matters in which there were once laws, but then are not mentioned beyond the OT, I usually find a great deal of freedom for the Christian...but still plenty to put perimeters on behavior.
For instance, in my home, Steve and I often discuss the ethics of copying CD's and DVD's. We have Netflixs and so get DVD's a lot. Steve would like for me to copy movies that we really like. I won't do it, because I feel it violates the commandment of stealing. It is the gainful employment of others to produce those DVD's. Netflixs pays them a rate based upon the rental of the DVD, but not the sale of it. One pays a different rate if one purchases it. Now, once I purchase a CD or DVD, I don't mind copying the thing for personal use...for instance I purchase music on-line and then will download it onto my kid's mp3s and onto a disk for my husband's truck. I believe I've purchased it, paid the producer's their wage...and am just using it for my family. However, I wouldn't purchase it, and then make endless copies to hand out to friends and others free of charge, because again, then the producers are being ripped off.
This is just an example of how I see looking at the principles laid forth in Scripture can be applied to something that isn't mentioned in the Bible.
My own opinion is that it's not wise to go with either the "Only if the Bible says so" or the "If the Bible doesn't say no, then go ahead" approach because there are a lot of ethical dilemmas that were never dealt with in Scripture. The first can lead to way too much legalism and the latter can lead to way to much license.
Thoughts?
Various people have various ideas.
One such idea is that as long as the Bible has never condemned anything...then it's OK. Some will even take this a step further and state that as long as Jesus Himself didn't condemn it, it's OK.
Another idea is that unless the Bible specifically tells us to do something...then we shouldn't.
For instance...the idea that there should be no musical instruments during worship services...even though they were clearly a part of Old Testament worship...because the New Testament never specifically mentions musical instruments. Or we shouldn't be cremated because no one in the Bible was.
Others take a "spirit but not the letter of the law" approach...someone who looks at things this way will make a decision based more upon what they believe the principles found in the Bible teach, rather than just what the Bible actually says. You will find this approach when folks are debating ideas such as smoking pot or abortions, neither of which are mentioned in the Bible.
I usually go along with the "spirit of the law" idea...that we use the Bible to look at the principles that are taught and apply them to our lives. In matters in which there were once laws, but then are not mentioned beyond the OT, I usually find a great deal of freedom for the Christian...but still plenty to put perimeters on behavior.
For instance, in my home, Steve and I often discuss the ethics of copying CD's and DVD's. We have Netflixs and so get DVD's a lot. Steve would like for me to copy movies that we really like. I won't do it, because I feel it violates the commandment of stealing. It is the gainful employment of others to produce those DVD's. Netflixs pays them a rate based upon the rental of the DVD, but not the sale of it. One pays a different rate if one purchases it. Now, once I purchase a CD or DVD, I don't mind copying the thing for personal use...for instance I purchase music on-line and then will download it onto my kid's mp3s and onto a disk for my husband's truck. I believe I've purchased it, paid the producer's their wage...and am just using it for my family. However, I wouldn't purchase it, and then make endless copies to hand out to friends and others free of charge, because again, then the producers are being ripped off.
This is just an example of how I see looking at the principles laid forth in Scripture can be applied to something that isn't mentioned in the Bible.
My own opinion is that it's not wise to go with either the "Only if the Bible says so" or the "If the Bible doesn't say no, then go ahead" approach because there are a lot of ethical dilemmas that were never dealt with in Scripture. The first can lead to way too much legalism and the latter can lead to way to much license.
Thoughts?
