WALKING BY FAITH

"For we walk by faith, and not by sight" (II Cor. 5:7).

Christianity is pre-eminently a religion of faith. Let us get this fact well and firmly fixed in our minds, for it will be seen that upon a proper understanding and appreciation of this vital principle, all acceptable service to God depends.

Many skeptics attempt to throw discredit upon the Bible because its religion is purely a religion of faith. They tell us we have never seen the joyous "summer land," nor heard the enchanting music of angels in sweet vibrations "beyond the river," but that it all rests on faith. But the same may be said of other things founded on faith whose credibility, in the estimation of skeptics, is not affected by this circumstance. The fact that in sowing and reaping, boarding a railway car for transportation, or carrying on commercial intercourse with each other, men can only believe success will crown their efforts, as it has the efforts of others in the past, is never urged as a reason for not acting. On the contrary, it only shows that men act on the principle of faith, and that they act in proportion as the evidence is strong and convincing. Hence, as a matter of fact, it is not unreasonable to act where action rests exclusively on faith; and hence, the objection has no force against the Bible.

But, not only is Christianity, as a system, purely a system of faith (Gal. 3:23), but, in order to its acceptableness, all service, which we render to God, must be of faith. No proposition is more clearly established in the word of God than this. Not only is it plainly declared that "we walk by faith," but in Hebrews 11:6, is the explicit statement that "without faith it is impossible to please God." Any act of religious worship, therefore, however great or small, must be of faith in order to please God. This does not mean that every act of man outside of religious service must be of faith. Man may follow his own wisdom or reason in the management of his own affairs, but in the service or worship of God, the only legitimate use of man's wisdom or reason is to acquiesce in whatever divine wisdom has revealed, and thus to "walk by faith." In the management of all affairs exclusively his own, man has the unquestionable right to follow his own judgment, provided he contravenes no principle of moral propriety or righteousness. In other words, beyond the regulation of man's conduct in all spheres of action by principles of moral integrity and righteous dealing, God has nowhere legislated for man, except in the service to be rendered exclusively to him. In this sphere, however, God has legislated. He has ordained the worship to be rendered to him, and human wisdom must neither add to, take from, nor in any way modify what he has prescribed, otherwise those who do so are walking by their own judgment, and not by faith. Hence, that we may see the principle on which all acceptable service to God must be rendered, let us now consider the following.

I. Faith Defined in Distinction from Opinion

Two questions properly answered will present this distinction in its true light.

1. What is it to walk by faith? In Romans 10:17, Paul declares: "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." This settles it as to how faith comes; it comes by hearing the word of God. Accordingly, where there is no word of God there can be no faith; and if no faith, then no walking by faith. This is not the opinion of any man or set of men; it is the unquestionable teaching of God's word. Hence, if hearing the word of God is the way faith comes, then where the word of God is, there can be faith, but none beyond that. If, therefore, the word of God says nothing concerning a given course, there can be no faith in pursuing that course, for faith comes by hearing the word of God. And hence, since we are to "walk by faith," it follows that in any matter whatsoever in which we are not directed by the word of God, we are neither walking by faith, nor pleasing God. This prepares us for the second question.

2. What is it to walk by opinion? In John 3:1-2, we have the words: "There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews; the same came to Jesus by night and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God; for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him." But, you are ready to ask, what has such a passage to do with the questions before us? Let us see. There are two questions in connection with this famous conversation to which I wish to call attention: (1) Did Nicodemus come to Jesus by night? The universal and unanimous response from all believers in the Bible of every class and distinction is, that he did. But what is the cause of this perfect unity of sentiment? Simply because the Bible says he came by night, and there is always union where all follow what the Bible says. (2) Why did he come by night, and not by day? It would be easy to find an answer to this question among the theologians. But the trouble with this class of wise men is, that to attempt to follow their guidance in such matters is like the attempt to ride two horses in opposite directions at the same time. One class of them tells us Nicodemus acted in this instance through fear of his colleagues in the Jewish Sanhedrin, choosing the curtain of night behind which to converse unobserved with the Great Teacher. Others tell us that it was not through fear, but to avoid the crowds that gathered about Jesus during the day, the eminent ruler of the Jews preferring the stillness of the night that he might converse undisturbed with the Galilean Reformer. Now, one or the other of these views may be correct; but as the Bible does not say one word about it, no mortal can know why he came by night. And this is precisely what is true of all the learned theologians. They only tell what they think about it; that is, they express their opinion. The word opinion signifies what one thinks, and in religious matters, it means what men think concerning matters on which the Bible is silent. The distinction, therefore, between faith and opinion is perfectly clear. Faith comes by hearing the word of God; opinion is what men think where the word of God does not speak. Hence, when men introduce as worship to God, as service to be rendered to him, things on which his word is silent, they walk by opinion and not by faith. And now, that the essentiality of walking by faith in all religious matters, and never by opinion, may still more clearly appear, let us make further examination.

II. The Fundamental Principle Laid Down by Jesus in His Definition of Vain Worship

The principle is found in Matthew 15:9, "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Here is a plain statement of two undeniable facts: (1) These scribes and Pharisees were worshiping God. I am aware that what they were doing was condemned by Jesus, but it was worship, nevertheless, for Jesus himself so pronounced it. (2) But it was vain worship, because they were doing, as religious service, things which God had not commanded. Even the small matter of washing the hands was among the things severely condemned by Jesus; but is it wrong to wash hands? No, if it is done outside of religious service; but yes, emphatically yes, if it is done in religious service where there is no command of God for it. Here is a fact, then, that should be thoroughly and indelibly impressed upon every heart, that according to Jesus, an act, such as washing the hands, which is wholly sinless outside of religious service, is, nevertheless, sinful when performed in religious service in the absence of any command of God. Hence, although engaged in worshiping God, men may at the same time be under the condemnation of Jesus, because they are doing that which is ordered by man, and not by the Lord, which Jesus says is vain worship. Much of the worship in the religious world today is vain worship. We are now prepared to notice the following.

III. The Application of These Principles in the Light of God's Dealings with Man

First of all, the inspired scriptures clearly set forth the fact that whenever and wherever persons attempted to do as service to God, either what he had forbidden or what he had not commanded, it was rejected.

Through Samuel the prophet the Lord issued a command to King Saul in the following words: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass" (I Sam. 15). The record informs us that Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah to Shur, but that he and the people took Agag, the king, alive, and spared the best of the sheep and oxen. That is, they followed their own wisdom in the matter. Further on, we will see why Saul did this, and that he has many successors and imitators today. When he and Samuel met, the disobedient king addressed Samuel thus: "Blessed be thou of the Lord; I have performed the commandment of the Lord." Samuel replied: "What meaneth, then, the bleating of the sheep and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?" Hoping to make amends for his wrong by offering a sacrifice, which had not been commanded, Saul replied: "The people spared the best of the sheep and oxen, to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God," adding further on, "I have obeyed the voice of the Lord and have gone the way which the Lord sent me;. . .But the people took of the spoil to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God in Gilgal." The prophet of God replied: "Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice," showing that obedience consists in doing what is commanded, and that all service not commanded, though it be the sacrifice of the cattle upon a thousand hills, is vain worship. God's word clearly reveals the fact that no kind of service which man may render to the Lord is acceptable, unless the Lord himself has ordered it. Gratuitous service is never acceptable to God. Seeing his great mistake, Saul now gives out the secret of his departure from the will of God in the following open confession: "I have sinned; I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord and thy word; because I feared the people and obeyed their voice." There it is, Saul yielded to the will of the people instead of maintaining loyalty to the will of God. The same spirit is abroad today. To keep abreast of denominational fashions, the people clamor for departures from the will of God, while lax and latitudinarian leaders in the pulpit yield to the popular demand. Instead of leading the people along the pathway of loyalty to the Lord, they are themselves led by the people to copy after the denominations around them. One divine purpose in placing elders over a church is to guard against false teachings (Acts 20:28-31; Titus 1:7-11), but unfortunately in many instances, instead of maintaining a loyal stand by the word of God, thus showing the young and uninstructed that it is wrong to follow the wisdom of men, the elders themselves yield to the imperious demand of the young people.

The schismatic and subversive scheme of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (Num. 16), is another illustration in point. God's order was that Aaron and his sons should burn incense, while the Levites, to whom Korah and his company belonged, had other duties assigned them. Becoming tired of God's order, they protested to Moses that he and Aaron were assuming too much authority and that they had as much right to burn incense as Aaron and his sons. To carry out their scheme more effectively, they gathered together "two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown." Here were two hundred fifty of the most prominent men among the people taking counsel against the Lord's order. Conventions and councils have been the hotbeds of heresy in all ages. The present instance was not an exception to the rule. Seeing they were determined to carry out their purposes, Moses told them get ready with their censers, and then added: "Hereby ye shall know that the Lord hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of mine own mind; if these men die the common death of all men,. . .then the Lord hath not sent me, but if. . .the earth open her mouth and swallow them up,. . .then ye shall understand that these men have provoked the Lord." No sooner had Moses delivered this loyal speech than the earth clave asunder and swallowed up Korah and all his company. The Lord had just spoken words of warning to Moses and Aaron, and through them to the congregation, saying: "Separate yourselves from among this congregation;. . .depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men,. . .lest ye be consumed in all their sins," thus teaching the solemn lesson that, when men deliberately depart from the will of God, we should separate ourselves from them.

Through Paul, in Romans 16:17, the New Testament enjoins the same duty: "I beseech you, brethren, mark them who are causing divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned, and turn away from them." This is the commandment of an inspired apostle of Christ.

Thus, we see there are but two ways, in general terms, to treat God's order—either obey it, or disobey it. Obedience consists in doing what God says, no more and no less. Disobedience consists in any departure from God's order, whether it be doing what he forbids, omitting all or a part that he commands, doing as religious service what he does not command, or in any modification of his will.

Let us now view this principle in light of New Testament facts.

According to the teaching of Jesus, the same principle holds good in the service of God today. It is still true that whenever and wherever men do, as religious service, what they are not commanded to do, it is rejected. But there is a broad distinction between doing a thing as a religious service, and doing the same thing outside of religious service. As already observed at another point, an act wholly harmless in itself when done outside of religious service, may be very harmful when done in religious service. In the light of some specifications, the correctness of this principle will clearly appear.

1. Washing the hands. In this, there is nothing wrong in the mere act itself, as all can see, and yet it is one of the very acts which Jesus condemned in the strongest terms (Mark 7:3,7). But why did he condemn it? Look at the question from every possible point of view, and the only correct answer is it was condemned because they were doing, as religious service, something which, although right itself, had not been commanded.

2. Eating meat. Is it wrong to eat meat? You answer, no. Then suppose we place it on the Lord's table in place of the bread coupled with wine? You are ready to say, that would not be right. Why not? You can neither say, it is because the act is wrong in itself, nor because it is forbidden; for we not only know it is not wrong to eat meat, but that God has nowhere said we must not eat it on his table. As in the former case, so here, there is only one correct answer, and that is, the wrong consists in the fact that the Lord has not told us to do so.

3. Instrumental music. Is it wrong to play on musical instruments? Here again we must reply, there is nothing wrong in the act itself outside of religious service. The opposition to instrumental music in the worship is misunderstood by many good people. They often say: "Instrumental music is so attractive and entertaining in its effect that we cannot see why anyone should oppose it." If this were the criterion of judgment, the opposition would cease at once. Its use in the worship of God is not opposed on the ground that there is no taste for the music itself. The bewitching strains of the organ, piano, violin, etc., are equally as pleasing and attractive to many of the opponents as they are to any who advocate its use. Why, then, oppose it? Simply because God has not appointed it in his worship, but has appointed music of another kind. God has no more plainly said, eat bread on the Lord's table, than he has said, use vocal music in the worship. In Ephesians 5:19, Paul says: "Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord"; and in Colossians 3:16: "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts unto God"; and Jesus and disciples sang a hymn at the institution of the Lord's supper (Matt. 26:30). Hence, by both precept and example, vocal music is appointed in the worship of God. It is sometimes argued from Revelation 5:8 and 14:2 that there will be instrumental music in heaven. But what of it? There will be infant membership there, too; and the same passage speaks of "golden bowls of incense." If the Lord provides for infant membership and instrumental music in heaven, it will be right for them to be there; but if he excludes both from the church on earth, we should do the same. God's will should be man's guide.

But it is claimed that the Lord has not forbidden instrumental music. Neither has he forbidden meat on the Lord's table, except by telling us to eat something else; and in the same way he has forbidden instrumental music by telling us to use another kind. If not, why not? Here, then are three distinct acts—washing the hands, eating meat, and playing on musical instruments, all of which are sinless in themselves, but wrong when done as religious acts, because there is no divine authority for it. The worship of God was not appointed as an aesthetical performance to please and gratify man's taste, but to please and honor God by loyalty to his word. We are to walk by faith.