CENI Blunders
I found a little article by a guy named Dwaine Dunning, who wrote sometime in the 1970's about the authority of the Bible as gleaned by command, example, and necessary inference (CENI). Here are some of his thoughts on the power (or lack thereof) of "inference".
"For many years, Bible questions have been discussed from the standpoint of a given viewpoint having 'command, example and inference' in support. Such use, listing three types of argument without distinction as to value, has given the impression that all three are equal in value. This is not true! Thomas Campbell, who developed the system, wisely limited it and showed that the third area of 'authority', that of inference, was of such a nature that questions affecting fellowship should never be determined by using inference, or argument by logical process."
"A vast majority of 'unity problems' are in this third area of 'authority'. There is little disagreement among Bible-believing people about what God said. There is some disagreement about what should be made of apostolic practice or precedent. There is a lot of disagreement on non-commanded, non-precedented matters where human reasoning is the factor by which the position of some individual or group is determined. This is precisely what we should expect. If a process of reasoning, a logical procedure, is properly the grounds upon which unity may be extended or withheld, then unity is at the absolute mercy of the weakest intellect and the most uncharitable dispositions in Christendom."
" To say 'direct command, approved precedent, and necessary inference' without distinquishing between them, thus giving the impression that all are of equal strength, is to do violence to the insight of the the man who contrived they system."
So where the Bible is silent, being silent might be a good thing, not speaking where God has not spoken, keeping your beliefs between you and God, and keeping the lines of fellowship open between those who differ with your contrived belief. Peace and unity just might spill out.
"For many years, Bible questions have been discussed from the standpoint of a given viewpoint having 'command, example and inference' in support. Such use, listing three types of argument without distinction as to value, has given the impression that all three are equal in value. This is not true! Thomas Campbell, who developed the system, wisely limited it and showed that the third area of 'authority', that of inference, was of such a nature that questions affecting fellowship should never be determined by using inference, or argument by logical process."
"A vast majority of 'unity problems' are in this third area of 'authority'. There is little disagreement among Bible-believing people about what God said. There is some disagreement about what should be made of apostolic practice or precedent. There is a lot of disagreement on non-commanded, non-precedented matters where human reasoning is the factor by which the position of some individual or group is determined. This is precisely what we should expect. If a process of reasoning, a logical procedure, is properly the grounds upon which unity may be extended or withheld, then unity is at the absolute mercy of the weakest intellect and the most uncharitable dispositions in Christendom."
" To say 'direct command, approved precedent, and necessary inference' without distinquishing between them, thus giving the impression that all are of equal strength, is to do violence to the insight of the the man who contrived they system."
So where the Bible is silent, being silent might be a good thing, not speaking where God has not spoken, keeping your beliefs between you and God, and keeping the lines of fellowship open between those who differ with your contrived belief. Peace and unity just might spill out.
posted by Brad at 7:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home