
There are two sliding scales at work here. First, there is the relative importance of a given issue and second the relative clarity of the issue. I have no uncertainty about the orthodox doctrines of the trinity and the incarnation though one would be hard pressed to find something more challenging to understand. On the other hand, the doctrine of election is one that has divided believers for centuries, yet I haven’t the faintest doubt that God, from all eternity, determined who would be gifted with saving faith. Important doctrine, zero uncertainty for me.
Such is not the case with respect to the sign gifts. I have boodles of uncertainty. Some time ago I wrote on the very short journey I’ve taken on the issue. I went from being a leaky cessationist to a careful continuationist. That is, for decades I believed the sign gifts had ended with the apostolic age, but didn’t want to deny that God works in mysterious ways. Now I believe the sign gifts haven’t ended but that not everything that claims to be a sign gift actually is. One can, of course, be not only redeemed but a hero of the faith while embracing either view. In that sense it scores low on the relative importance scale. On the other hand, stifling the Spirit is not a good thing, nor is attributing something to the Spirit something He disavows.
Second, I have precious little confidence on the question of the proper recipients of baptism. That may surprise some as I have been in the past rather a strong proponent of paedobaptism. Now I’m not so sure. I take great comfort, however, in acknowledging that there are great thinkers on both sides of this issue. Not only that, I’ve seen people I respect move in both directions on the issue. I have ex-baptist friends and ex-paedobaptist friends alike.
Third, I am not confident in my views on the kind of church government we are called to have. I still believe in rule by a plurality of elders. What I’m less certain about is the necessity and/or virtue of connectionalism, of church governments beyond that of the local church.
Finally, for decades now I have had a short list of things I’d never want to publicly debate. The first is James White. The second is the Lord’s Day/Sabbath debate. I’ve had friends who were deeply committed to Seventh Day worship (which is embraced well beyond the Adventist church). I’ve spent hours and hours studying the issue. And haven’t reached a confident conclusion.
What these areas of uncertainty have in common is that for each one there is no definitive biblical statement one way or the other. God hasn’t left us, however, alone in the dark. We are commanded to not only believe all that the Bible says, but all that is teaches through good and necessary consequence. The question is, are any of these positions a necessary consequence of what the Bible teaches. They may be, but the journey through the syllogisms doesn’t leave me overpowered with confidence. As noted, there are redeemed and plenty smart people on all sides of all these issues. Some of them are right, and others wrong. I, I suspect, am sometimes right and sometimes wrong. And so are you.








