Generic and Specific Commands
by Dave Brown
Return to the Bible Authority landing page
Another article showed that necessary implications within the bible can be just as binding as are commands or approved apostolic examples. And, in fact, when we really think about it, no command or example is so spelled out in every detail that we do not have to make some inferences in actually accomplishing the command or following the example. Think through any positive command or example and it should be obvious to you that this is the case. The inferences required might be quite trivial, but they are always there to some extent. In most cases they are handled by the common sense commands of the New Testament to do things decently, in order and in the most expedient way as stewards of God's gifts to us.
The subject of this article overlaps that of necessary implication. However, we felt compelled to write a separate article because of some of the objections that we hear at times regarding the methods for obtaining biblical authority. The New Testament is clear in such passages as 1 Cor. 4:6 and 2 John 9 that we should not go beyond what has been given to us; in short: We should never do anything in organized religion (i.e., in the church) without scriptural authority.
Some do not want to accept this principle, and so they make the argument: “We do a lot of tings without authority.” When questioned for an example of such, one of the most common given is that of songbooks. It is true that songbooks did not exist in the first century, and they are not mentioned anywhere in the bible, so we do not have a command or an example for their use. But does that mean that we do not have any authority for a local church to purchase and use them? Let us think through this example, recognizing that there are probably hundreds of other things that could fall into this very the same category.
Before addressing this question, it is important to consider another: What if the statement: "that songbooks are not authorized" is true? Would this negate the validity of the statement that we should never do anything in the church without authority? Of course not. It would merely mean that we have been wrong in using songbooks and so should discontinue their use. The fact that we err in one area does not justify error in all areas, or the disregard for clear biblical principles. Unfortunately, the justification of one error by citing another has become one of the most common debating techniques in the political realm today, but it is altogether fallacious and illogical. Any intelligent person should recognize this, and see the error of applying this (or any other illogical argument) to lead people away from the truth. What is the conclusion of those who say: "we do many things without authority?" Are they arguing that the church need not seek authority for the things it proposes to do? Can we not see that this is a step either toward complete anarchy or the rule of men? Indeed the motives of those making such statements should be questioned -- what conclusions do they draw from their statements. At the same time we should never discourage someone from questioning by what authority a given practice is adopted. Such shows a desire to serve God in His way, and we should encourage such questions. In fact, we should all be assuring that all of the things done are in accordance with the New Testament, and this is an important part of that process.
The biblical principle that authorizes the use of song books (and other aids) has to do with generic and specific authority. This is not a difficult concept to understand. Consider the command that God gave to Noah: Build an ark. At that point Noah had the discretion as to size, shape, materials, tools, etc. to accomplish this command. However, God did not stop there. He gave Noah further specifics. He told Noah to make it of gopher wood, he also gave dimensions and several other specifications. Noah was not at all authorized to go against these specifications and arbitrarily do things the way he wanted to (as if he thought God was making a mistake).
On the other hand, God did not specify the tools. Clearly, tools were necessary. Noah could not just use any tools. It was still contingent upon Noah to use the best possible tools at his disposal. This is an important concept. Nothing that we do is without law. There are general laws for everything we do. One of them is to not be wasteful of the resources that God has given us, and the most precious of these resources is our time. Thus, Noah should choose tools that would get the job done in a most effective and efficient manner. But this was left Noah’s decision and judgment, since God had given not specifications in this regard. Would anyone say that God did not authorize Noah to use a saw or a hammer just because they were not mentioned. No, because we can see that they were necessarily inferred from the generic command to build the ark, and they did not contradict any other of the specifications that God gave in that regard.
So now to the example at hand: songbooks. True, we do not have specific authority for songbooks, but does that mean we have no authority? Where do we derive the authority to use them. We have the generic authority to sing (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Further, we are commanded to “let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40). But we do not have any specification as to how the words and musical parts for the singing is to be communicated to the congregation. Let us consider some alternatives; we could:
Any of the above alternatives are authorized by necessary implication -- if we are going to obey the command to sing, we have to have some way to facilitate getting the words and music the congregation. Recognize, it is not that we have no constraints here at all – we still have to use our judgment as to which is the best way in this day and age to do things decently and in order. Most churches have decided that songbooks are the most practical of all of the methods considered above. But that would not exclude any other method that might be proposed if it could be shown to be more expedient.
Please recognize that the purpose of this example has nothing to do with singing or songbooks. It has to do with the method by which specific actions are authorized by general commands. Song books are authorized as an expedient to the generic command to sing. This very same thought process should be applied to all of the judgments that we are forced to make when carrying out God’s commands. To say that there is no authority for these specifics is erroneous -- they are authorized by the generic command or example.
A generic command authorizes all specifics that are necessary for its obedience. A more specific command that further qualifies the general command is restrictive and will eliminate all other alternatives for that specific action. For example, the command to make the ark of gopher wood eliminated all other types of wood. We would recognize that it would not eliminate such things as nails or other fasteners, since it would be understood that the ark was not being made of these devices.
The following might sound strange, but it is a truism: obedience to any of God’s positive commands requires some human judgment in their accomplishment. Try to think of an exception. Noah had to choose the tools, the time, perhaps his helpers, and on and on and on. Songbooks are just one of the judgments we have to make with regard to singing. There is also the particular song, which verses to sing, how to pitch it, how fast to sing it, and on and on and on. All of those are authorized by the command "to sing."
Sometimes we wonder about the necessity for articles like these. Whatever happened to common sense? But sometimes it is the truisms that we have the hardest time in accepting as reality. The fact that we have to make these judgments does not mean that they are not authorized; else nothing that we do would be authorized. On the other hand, the making of the judgments is not always simple, and it should not be trivialized. Rather, we should work though each of God’s commands, consider the alternatives for its accomplishment, and pick the alternative that we see to be most expedient and to God’s glory. God made us capable of making these decisions, and when we make them effectively, we glorify God.
The subject of this article overlaps that of necessary implication. However, we felt compelled to write a separate article because of some of the objections that we hear at times regarding the methods for obtaining biblical authority. The New Testament is clear in such passages as 1 Cor. 4:6 and 2 John 9 that we should not go beyond what has been given to us; in short: We should never do anything in organized religion (i.e., in the church) without scriptural authority.
Some do not want to accept this principle, and so they make the argument: “We do a lot of tings without authority.” When questioned for an example of such, one of the most common given is that of songbooks. It is true that songbooks did not exist in the first century, and they are not mentioned anywhere in the bible, so we do not have a command or an example for their use. But does that mean that we do not have any authority for a local church to purchase and use them? Let us think through this example, recognizing that there are probably hundreds of other things that could fall into this very the same category.
Before addressing this question, it is important to consider another: What if the statement: "that songbooks are not authorized" is true? Would this negate the validity of the statement that we should never do anything in the church without authority? Of course not. It would merely mean that we have been wrong in using songbooks and so should discontinue their use. The fact that we err in one area does not justify error in all areas, or the disregard for clear biblical principles. Unfortunately, the justification of one error by citing another has become one of the most common debating techniques in the political realm today, but it is altogether fallacious and illogical. Any intelligent person should recognize this, and see the error of applying this (or any other illogical argument) to lead people away from the truth. What is the conclusion of those who say: "we do many things without authority?" Are they arguing that the church need not seek authority for the things it proposes to do? Can we not see that this is a step either toward complete anarchy or the rule of men? Indeed the motives of those making such statements should be questioned -- what conclusions do they draw from their statements. At the same time we should never discourage someone from questioning by what authority a given practice is adopted. Such shows a desire to serve God in His way, and we should encourage such questions. In fact, we should all be assuring that all of the things done are in accordance with the New Testament, and this is an important part of that process.
The biblical principle that authorizes the use of song books (and other aids) has to do with generic and specific authority. This is not a difficult concept to understand. Consider the command that God gave to Noah: Build an ark. At that point Noah had the discretion as to size, shape, materials, tools, etc. to accomplish this command. However, God did not stop there. He gave Noah further specifics. He told Noah to make it of gopher wood, he also gave dimensions and several other specifications. Noah was not at all authorized to go against these specifications and arbitrarily do things the way he wanted to (as if he thought God was making a mistake).
On the other hand, God did not specify the tools. Clearly, tools were necessary. Noah could not just use any tools. It was still contingent upon Noah to use the best possible tools at his disposal. This is an important concept. Nothing that we do is without law. There are general laws for everything we do. One of them is to not be wasteful of the resources that God has given us, and the most precious of these resources is our time. Thus, Noah should choose tools that would get the job done in a most effective and efficient manner. But this was left Noah’s decision and judgment, since God had given not specifications in this regard. Would anyone say that God did not authorize Noah to use a saw or a hammer just because they were not mentioned. No, because we can see that they were necessarily inferred from the generic command to build the ark, and they did not contradict any other of the specifications that God gave in that regard.
So now to the example at hand: songbooks. True, we do not have specific authority for songbooks, but does that mean we have no authority? Where do we derive the authority to use them. We have the generic authority to sing (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Further, we are commanded to “let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40). But we do not have any specification as to how the words and musical parts for the singing is to be communicated to the congregation. Let us consider some alternatives; we could:
- Commit all songs to memory (we feel that this is probably what was done in the first century, but that cannot be proven, and it is not specified as a biblical requirement; but it is certainly an alternative);
- Have some common way that the worshipers can view the words and/or the music – there are probably dozens of ways this could be accomplished: charts, overhead projection, Power Point, etc. We know of two local churches that are using Power Point to this purpose.
- Provide individuals with the words and music – this could be done by giving them individual handouts or providing a songbook, or both.
- Something else we have not thought of or that has not been invented. We should consider all alternatives, and we are not sure that the above three necessarily covers them all, so we should be open to other suggestions from those who might have better ideas.
Any of the above alternatives are authorized by necessary implication -- if we are going to obey the command to sing, we have to have some way to facilitate getting the words and music the congregation. Recognize, it is not that we have no constraints here at all – we still have to use our judgment as to which is the best way in this day and age to do things decently and in order. Most churches have decided that songbooks are the most practical of all of the methods considered above. But that would not exclude any other method that might be proposed if it could be shown to be more expedient.
Please recognize that the purpose of this example has nothing to do with singing or songbooks. It has to do with the method by which specific actions are authorized by general commands. Song books are authorized as an expedient to the generic command to sing. This very same thought process should be applied to all of the judgments that we are forced to make when carrying out God’s commands. To say that there is no authority for these specifics is erroneous -- they are authorized by the generic command or example.
A generic command authorizes all specifics that are necessary for its obedience. A more specific command that further qualifies the general command is restrictive and will eliminate all other alternatives for that specific action. For example, the command to make the ark of gopher wood eliminated all other types of wood. We would recognize that it would not eliminate such things as nails or other fasteners, since it would be understood that the ark was not being made of these devices.
The following might sound strange, but it is a truism: obedience to any of God’s positive commands requires some human judgment in their accomplishment. Try to think of an exception. Noah had to choose the tools, the time, perhaps his helpers, and on and on and on. Songbooks are just one of the judgments we have to make with regard to singing. There is also the particular song, which verses to sing, how to pitch it, how fast to sing it, and on and on and on. All of those are authorized by the command "to sing."
Sometimes we wonder about the necessity for articles like these. Whatever happened to common sense? But sometimes it is the truisms that we have the hardest time in accepting as reality. The fact that we have to make these judgments does not mean that they are not authorized; else nothing that we do would be authorized. On the other hand, the making of the judgments is not always simple, and it should not be trivialized. Rather, we should work though each of God’s commands, consider the alternatives for its accomplishment, and pick the alternative that we see to be most expedient and to God’s glory. God made us capable of making these decisions, and when we make them effectively, we glorify God.