Clarifications & Pharisee-ism

I thought I ought to clarify some things that have popped up as a result of my original Shack article.  The first is what the deal is with "The Reverend Matt Timmons."  That has quite a snob appeal sound to it.  I just want everyone to know that I didn't sign my name that way on the submitted article.  The opinion page editor changed it.  I simply signed it, "Rev. Matt Timmons."  I think that was much more tame in its tone.

The other item that has arisen is the notion of Pharisee-ism (if I can coin a word).  You may remember that an earlier Shack response compared me to one of the teachers of the law.  Another Shack article, which appeared in today's TG, said something along these same lines.  While not mentioning me specifically, the author does communicate the idea that being studiously concerned about right doctrine is Pharisaical.  He said,

Jesus continually thwarted the hard-studied doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees, trying to get them to seek a personal relationship with God, and not just know about Him and being more concerned with rules.

It is true that the religious leaders lacked the intimacy of a personal relationship with God and got overly concerned with certain rules.  There is no doubt about that.  However, we need to distinguish.  First, Jesus condemned the Pharisees for their human traditions (or what we may call man-made rules).  Secondly, He did not slight them for their scrupulous study of Scripture and adherence to the minutest applications of the inspired Word. 

The incident in Mark 7 is a good example regarding the former.  In this passage Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for neglecting the care of their parents, while giving money to the temple for God (i.e. the Corban).  The Pharisee's human rule was thought to be good.  Jesus pointed out that it wasn't because it came to override the Scriptural principle of honoring one's parents.

What is recorded in Mathew 23:23 provides a good illustration of the second matter.  In that passage Jesus said,

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.

Jesus' words here are scalding hot, but note well what is said.  Some say that Jesus is condemning them because they are too particular in their adherence to Scripture (tithing their herbs).  This is not altogether true though.  He condemns them because they ignore the "weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness."  You will notice that Jesus actually affirms their scrupulous tithing of the herbs when he says, "you should have done these (i.e. weightier matters), without neglecting the others (i.e. herb offerings)."

Looking at the rest of Scripture will show more evidence that God commands us to scrupulously develop our doctrine and strictly adhere to every command.  My friend Jon Mould did a great job pointing a few instances in his TG article today.  I would like to expand his by noting a few other instances.  First of all, in the Great Commission Jesus commands us to teach "all that he has commanded."  Since He, as God, is the author of the Old Testament as well as the New Testament, that means every word is to be mulled over and appropriated.  To say then, that Jesus put a high value on right doctrine would be an understatement.

We remember also that the first commandment is "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."  The opposite is, "Have me as your only God."  Of course, if we are to have him, it means that we must seek to get to know as much as we can about him.  To put it in terms of a human example:  If we are going to have our wife in marriage, then we are obligated to get to know as much about her as possible and continue studying her as our relationship develops. 

At this point I would like to point out a false notion that was stated in today's pro-Shack article.  The author said, "Knowing God from our heart takes away the pressure of developing a perfect doctrine."  This statement couldn't be more false.  The exact opposite of what he says is true.  Knowing God from the heart provides the impetus that urges us to develop as perfect a doctrine as we can!

I cannot say, "I love my wife.  Her beautiful blond hair captivates me."  If I did, I would probably be slapped.  My wife is a brunette!  As I mentioned above: if I love my wife, I am going to make it my aim to know everything I can about her.  What is also true is that it would be a grievious thing for me to think of her in a way that is not in accord with her true self.

What is also notable is that sound doctrine stirs one's heart to love God more and is the means God uses to develop our relationship with him.  For instance, a study of the names of God helps us to understand more about the different dimensions of his glorious character.  In such a study, one comes to be filled with awe and love for God because his glory becomes all the more radiant.  The heart cannot but pump with greater tenacity and fervor for God after meditating on these names and incorporating them into one's prayer life.

In essence, doctrine is the life blood of a Christian.  Without it, there is no relationship with God.

All of this reminds me of the famous words of Charles Spurgeon, which J.I. Packer quoted in the opening of his book, Knowing God,

The proper study of God's elect is God; the proper study of a Christian is the Godhead. The highest science, the loftiest speculation, the mightiest philosophy, which can ever engage the attention of a child God, is the name, the nature, the person, the work, the doings, and the existence of the great God whom he calls his Father.

As I believe Spurgeon eloquently points out, we should not equate Pharisee-ism with holy (and scrupulous!) reflection on God and his Scripture.  Faith seeks understanding.  It seeks to understand who it trusts and how that trust is to be expressed in every detail of ever day.