“‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition. For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, “Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban’” (that is, given to God) then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.” Mark 7:6-13
While I am not currently at an SBC church, I grew up in SBC churches. We typically took the Lord’s Supper once a quarter. Being at Baptist churches, we did baby dedications, but infant baptism was not practiced. The first SBC church I was at had a choir and the only instrument was a piano. The worship songs we would sing were typically hymns. The second SBC church I was at had a choir and they also had contemporary music with a full band. Typically, the choir was saved for special events and the band played every Sunday. While it was a full band, they mixed new music with hymns as well. The first SBC church I was at dressed up. Everyone was dressed well. There was nothing casual in how we dressed. No long hair for men. No tattoos. The second SBC church was basically the exact opposite of that. What is the point in all of this? Every Christian has their own traditions and we bring our traditions with us to church every Sunday.
We all have ideas as to what worship should look like: what the appropriate attire is, what a sermon should look like, our views on end times, and so much more. The churches we attend all have their own traditions as well. Normally, if we are a member at a church it is because we line up with what the church teaches and believes and the church’s traditions, whether good or bad, for the most part, match our very own traditions. Something Dr. James White has said numerous times on his radio program, The Dividing Line, that I find to be true is that the person who denies that they have traditions oftentimes has the most traditions. It is also important to keep in mind that not all traditions we hold to are unbiblical, however, all traditions must be examined by Scripture. But if we hold to a tradition that does not line up with Scripture, then we must be willing to abandon that tradition to follow the precepts of God.
But Aren’t There Non-negotiables?
The answer to is, of course! There are non-negotiables that we cannot compromise on. The gospel is an area that we cannot compromise on. We must boldly proclaim that it is grace alone by faith alone through Jesus alone. You cannot add anything to faith in Christ, because once you add anything to faith, your salvation now rests upon a work you have to perform. When you add anything to Jesus, you lose Jesus. This is Paul’s main point in Galatians. If we compromise on the trinity and the deity of Christ, we now have a different God and a different Jesus. If we have a different God and different Jesus, we have a Jesus and God that cannot save. If Jesus is not the only way of salvation, we are proclaiming that there is more than one way for a person to be justified before God. Jesus himself said in John 15:6, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Jesus also said in Matthew 12:30, “Whoever is not with me is against me.”
Another area we must boldly stand on is God being the creator of everything in existence. Once again, if God is not the creator of everything, we have a different God than the God of scripture. Lastly, all of Scripture is God-breathed revelation that is infallible, inerrant, and sufficient. Every single verse is ultimately God’s word. If we pick and choose what we want from the bible, we are no longer orthodox Christians but have a different faith. These are all things that we must believe, hold to, and stand firmly on if we are to be considered orthodox Christians.
Distinguishing Between the Non-negotiables and the Secondary Issues
Now that we have briefly discussed some of the non-negotiables, we can talk about secondary issues. All the non-negotiables discussed above compromise the Gospel in some way. Secondary issues are important to have in-house discussions on. They are also important topics for us to know where we stand, but should never be raised to the level of the non-negotiables. These are issues such as infant baptism, (Paedobaptist) or only baptizing someone after they come to faith and repentance. (Credobaptism) This is an issue that I have been studying out recently but have not come to any conclusions. As previously discussed, I grew up Southern Baptist which practiced believer’s baptism. I recently realized that I held that view because it was tradition, and not necessarily because I believed it was what the Bible teaches. When I do reach a conclusion, I may very well end up with the same position I have always held to, but it will no longer be due to tradition, but it will be because I believe Scripture supports the position. This is a secondary issue because I can look at the Presbyterian who practices infant baptism but firmly stands on the Gospel as my brother or sister in Christ. I can also look at the Baptist who only practices believer’s baptism who is also firmly standing on the Gospel as my brother or sister in Christ.
It’s All Greek (and Hebrew) to Me
Other secondary issues include Bible translations. We should certainly have standards as to what classifies as an accurate translation of the text of Scripture, but we should also understand that the Old Testament and the New Testament were not written in English. Every English Bible we possess is a translation from either the Hebrew or Greek and occasionally the Aramaic. If I have a friend reading from the KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, or the NLT (to name a few translations), they will be able to come to a saving knowledge of Christ through these translations. Most of these translations, except for the NIV and NLT, are word-for-word translations (which I prefer). However, just because I prefer the other four translations, I should not demonize someone for using the other two. This is simply because they can come to a saving knowledge of Christ through those translations. If all I had was the NLT or NIV, then I would hold to the same exact theology that I currently have now. My theology would be no different. While I recognize that, under ordinary circumstances, there are some translations to completely stay away from; nevertheless, this is a secondary issue because the Gospel is not being compromised.
John Calvin or Jacobus Arminius
Free will or predestination? This is a secondary issue that can be a huge tradition on both sides whether you consider yourself a Calvinist, an Arminian, or attempt to play the middle in some form. While this topic can impact our views on other aspects of our theology, it should still remain a secondary issue. This can be another fun in-house debate to have if our hearts are correct. This is an area I love talking about with different people in my church especially since I find myself to be alone on this issue. When we have discussions on this topic, like any other secondary issue, we need to recognize that we have brothers and sisters that are on both sides of the debate. We should still be able to find unity with them no matter where we find ourselves. Ephesians 4:4-6 says, “There is one body and one Spirit- just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call- one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”
The Calvinist and the Arminian both have the Gospel correct as well as the person who does not hold to either side but finds themselves in the middle. Essentially, the difference between both sides is the order of salvation. In this debate, if we are not careful our theology in this area can become the tradition where we are so blinded, we have to twist Scripture, read Scripture out of context, or read Scripture inverted to come to our theology. We must be willing to take Scripture alone – all of Scripture – to be our reason for holding the view that we hold in this area.
Kirk Cameron or Nicolas Cage
The last secondary issue I want to explore is our view on end times. (Eschatology) This is another in-house topic people have extremely strong views on that can get fiery. Many conversations I hear revolve around debating when the rapture will take place. Some of them would be pre-trib, others mid-trib, and some post-trib. Sometimes these conversations turn harsh, rather than edifying for all participants in the conversation. I do not hold to any of the views listed above, even though I grew up pre-trib. Eschatology is important but cannot be raised to the same level as the Gospel. In conversations I have had, too many times, this issue will be made into a Gospel issue. It is no longer faith in Jesus that saves, but you also have to be pre-trib or believe in the rapture in some form. So often, the view we hold on end times comes from how we were raised or from watching Left Behind, rather than being derived from the Bible.
I can say this because, at a time, both were true of me. I could not defend my position biblically. I knew that the churches I went to taught the rapture in some form, but I did not know exactly what view they were teaching. I just knew the churches I attended taught the rapture and my friends from church believed in the rapture so it must be right. I did not realize until much later that I could not biblically defend the rapture. My point is not to throw stones at anyone who does believe in the rapture, but it is just to challenge everyone reading this to make sure you can biblically defend your end-times position. I could not do that without destroying other passages of Scripture which is why I chose to change.
Conclusion
The goal of this article is twofold. First, it is to drive you into Scripture. Second, it is to center your attention on the essentials, and not let the secondary become traditions that blind you from what is essential. We must be willing to examine our traditions, even ones we hold dearly, and abandon them if they conflict Scripture. Any tradition we hold to must be directly from Scripture. We should be consistently checking ourselves for traditions. Scripture is the only infallible source we have. This is why we must go directly to Scripture. Every secondary issue I listed above is important to an extent, but cannot be more passionate about the secondary issues than we are about the Gospel. We should be able to defend and accurately present the Gospel at any given time. We cannot be so enthralled with the secondary to the point that we lose sight of what is important.
We should know the Gospel, the Trinity, and the deity of Christ better than we know the secondary issues. We should be able to defend why we believe Scripture is God’s word and nothing less – which also includes knowing how the text of Scripture has been transmitted over time. These are the issues we must be willing to stand on and never back down from. These are the issues we must be able to teach to our children. These are the issues we must be able to teach our churches. These are the issues we must be able to defend when we encounter someone of a different faith. These are the issues we must know like the back of our hands. So often we put the magnifying glass on the minor issues and then forget we are holding the magnifying glass. We must be willing to put the magnifying glass down and focus on the gigantic essentials right in front of our faces that are being attacked every day.
Passages to Consider
Galatians
Matthew 5-7
Matthew 12:1-32 and Luke 11:23
About the Author
Heath Bowles
Heath is a dear friend of Cory Woodard and a guest contributor to the Stick. He is a Church History buff and a coffee connoisseur.