BIBLICAL TENSION VS. CONTRADICTION

There is actually a fairly fine line between these two concepts since a critic can point to two passages in Scripture and point out that they appear to express exactly opposite or incompatible ideas. At the same time, one who is committed to the truth of the Bible will delve into the matter a little deeper in order to see if both concepts can be held simultaneously without giving up any intellectual integrity. A former pastor once compared it to stretching a rubber band between your two hands. It forms a taut support as long as you don't let go of it with one hand. If you do, all the tension is gone and you are left with a limp rubber band in the other hand.

Generally speaking, there are several ways in which this desirable tension can be maintained. For example, the contexts in which passages 1 and 2 are given might represent entirely different situations. Then there is the possibility that the perspectives differ between the conflicting teachings (i.e. divine vs. human). Or each individual passage might only give half of the story, and both are needed to get the complete message. Finally, there are those rare cases where we must admit that God has not chosen to reveal enough of His secrets to us in order to logically resolve such differences.

Below are some sample cases, many taken from an article by my friend David George Moore (see Moore Engaging and Two Cities Ministries for more of his writings and videos).

Faith and Works

The relationship between these two diametrically opposed concepts related to the question of salvation has been worked to death over the centuries by many theologians, and so I won't bore you with rehearsing all the ins and outs of that subject. One simple-minded way of resolving this issue is to say that your works save you only if they are considered as evidence of a prior faith. Without works, there is the real question as to whether you in fact have that faith. However, those who think they can earn their way to heaven through their works alone are sadly mistaken.

There are similar discussions regarding whether our salvation is solely due to God's grace or to our faith. The best approach there appears to be treatment of God's grace being first extended to all and leaving it up to human beings to respond or not respond in faith. Some Calvinists would deny that there is any free will for man and in addition quote Scripture passages that can be made to say that even faith itself is not up to us but given only to certain pre-chosen persons. To me, that is a prime example of letting go of the rubber band with one hand.

Steps of Salvation

I was raised in the Restoration tradition which came up with the simple mnemonic preaching device of holding up one hand and showing how each of the five fingers represented one of the steps necessary for salvation. This was their approach, and in my mind a good one, to help their audience keep in mind all of the New Testament passages dealing with the this subject. These various passages, taken individually as if they were in a vacuum, might easily lead one to think that all was needed was either faith, repentance, confession of faith in front of others, baptism, or persistence in belief. Taking your pick of which one or ones you happen to feel are sufficient (as do most Christian denominations) and trying to explain away the others as not necessary, is again a case of letting go one end of the rubber band.

Getting down to much more specific examples, here are some which occur within the same passage. In these cases especially it is totally ludicrous to feel that the authors were so dense that they had no idea they were contradicting themselves. Any rational person would immediately attempt to see how harmonization could be arrived at rather than just labeling each as a bone-headed error.

Proverbs 26:4-5

In these adjacent verses, the author appears to waffle as to whether one should or should not answer a fool according to his folly. But if you read the whole thing, you can see that he gives the pros and cons of attempting to correct the fool while not becoming overly engaged with him to the point where you also appear foolish. Although I hate to label anyone a fool, I have had more than my share of attempting to answer questions from the class I was teaching, while keeping in mind that there are always “problem children” in the audience who either want all the attention on themselves, just don't seem to be able to grasp simple concepts, or have some pet theological concept in mind and consider a class period spent without emphasizing their particular point as almost heretical. It is quite easy to fall into either of the two extremes Proverbs is talking about – just agreeing with the other person or letting them drone on and on to the boredom of the whole class vs. alternatively actively engaging with them in a debate during which neither of you will emerge unscathed.

Genesis 50:20

After Jacob dies in Egypt, Joseph's brothers are afraid that he will then seek revenge on them for selling him into slavery. But Joseph replies, “Even though you intended to do harm to me, God intended it for good, in order to preserve a numerous people, as he is doing today. So have no fear.” Here we see that Joseph is able to overlook the sin against him because he can see events from God's viewpoint rather than from his own limited perspective. God was able to turn man's evil intent around and use it instead as a means of saving the Jewish people.

A close parallel to this type of tension is seen in the NT account of Christ's Passion in which He foretells Judas' betrayal with the words: “For the Son of Man is going as it has been determined, but woe to that one by whom he is betrayed.” (Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22) Thus, God is again seen to utilize an evil act to accomplish His purposes. But in addition, we see here that Judas was no mere puppet to carry out God's will; he was held totally responsible for his own actions.

Acts 2:23

This very same strange “cooperation” between man's actions and purposes and God's overall plan is seen in Peter's speech to the Jews on the Day of Pentecost reminding them of their part in Christ's crucifixion. When they are struck to the heart by this revelation, they ask what they are to do. His reply is to repent and be baptized. Again, their part in the crucifixion needed to be admitted and regretted before they could turn to God.

Matthew 10:16

Here is another seemingly contradictory passage in which Jesus sends out the Twelve to preach the word, saying: “See, I am sending you out like sheep into the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” Is it really possible to be both of these at the same time? You only have to look at Christ's own example to see that it is.

Here is how Hill resolves this issue: “Serpents represent the idea of prudence, cleverness and shrewdness...The adjective innocent indicates purity of intention, simplicity of purpose.” He cites a rabbinical source which says, “God saith of the Israelites, 'Towards me they are as sincere as doves, but toward the Gentiles they are prudent as serpents.'” That was exactly the situation the apostles faced as they interacted with those who might be hostile to the Word. They needed to keep their eyes open to any possible danger while at the same time relying entirely on God to protect them.

Next we turn to a few cases where the passages under comparison do not occur within the same book of the Bible. And here is where we must be especially on our guard in trying to treat them as if they were anything but apples and oranges comparisons. The reasons for caution here are many, but include different time frames, different situations, and different ways authors use the same words.

Proverbs 6:6-8 and Matthew 6:26

We have added complications with this pair in that they represent two entirely different dispensations (OT and NT) as well as two different genres (wisdom literature vs. history), with the first written in poetry and the second in prose. With that in mind, here is how these two passages read:

“Go to the ant, you lazybones; consider its ways, and be wise. Without having any chief or officer or ruler; it prepares its food in summer, and gathers its sustenance in harvest.” (Prov. 6:6-8)

“Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap not gather into barns and yet your heavenly Father feds them. Are you not of more value than they?” (Matt. 6:26)

The main way to resolve the apparent discrepancy between these two teachings is to consider their respective audiences. In the first case, it is addressed to those who refuse to work at all even though God has already equipped these people with all they need in terms of personal resources to support themselves. They need a kick in the rear to get them jump-started. However, the teaching in Matthew is more appropriate to those who go about fearfully, wondering where their next meal will come from even if they do work hard. That particular audience obviously needs to be reassured of God's love and provision for them. I find it interesting that, with a little bit of rewording, it would have been just as feasible for the tiny ant to have been held up as a prime example of God's wonderful provision for even His smallest creation, and for the birds to be used as examples of the constant activity they employ just to keep themselves and their family fed.

Matthew 11:28-30 and I Corinthians 9:24-27

Here at least we are squarely within the NT even if one passage comes from a historical section and the other from the epistles. NRSV renders the first verse as follows:

“Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your soul. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matthew 11:28-30)

I won't quote the I Corinthians passage in whole, but in it Paul talks about how he treats the Christian life like that of an athlete training for a contest, punishing his own body and enslaving it “so that after proclaiming to others I myself should not be disqualified.” This hardly appears to be the easy life.

David Moore resolves this issue by citing I John 5:3 – “For the love of God is this, that we obey his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome...”

Note that in none of these cases does it state that we are just to lie back and relax. Even Matthew 11 stresses that we will still have burdens to carry as Christians despite the fact that Jesus will share the load with us and make our road easier to walk. In addition, it is foolhardy to take Paul's life as an exact template for what God requires of us. Remember that (1) he had a terrible load of guilt to carry for his past treatment of Christians and (2) he was singled out for a unique ministry that was bound to lead to terrible persecution for him and his eventual death. Few of us are ever called to such an extreme ministry although we are certainly indebted to those who do take that path.

Romans 10:17 and Hebrews 4:2

Paul says in Romans, “So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the word of Christ.” But the anonymous author of Hebrews states, “For indeed the good news came to us just as to them; but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened.” (RSV) Other ancient manuscripts render that last clause as “it did not meet with faith in those who listened.” And there also two other variations on this phrase.

The problem here seems to be that Paul feels faith comes from hearing the Gospel while the author of Hebrews says that people will not accept what they hear unless they already have faith. I am going to cite some commentators at this point since I am somewhat at a loss to resolve this tension.

It turns out that the major problem in understanding Hebrews 4:2 stems from what Metzger calls “the bewildering variety of readings preserved among the manuscripts.” Buchanan opts for the variant reading given above in his Anchor Bible translation while Ellingworth discusses this textual issue at length without reaching any firm conclusion.

F.F. Bruce says, “We conclude that faith is awakened by the message, and the message that awakens it comes through the word of Christ...The practical implication is clear: it is not the hearing of the gospel by itself that brings final salvation, but its appropriation by faith...” In other words, one does not need to have faith to begin with, and thus there is no contradiction with Romans 10:17.

Philip Comfort makes the same point clearly when he states, “The idea is not that faith wasn't combined with the hearing of the message, but that the people did not join in the faith of those who heard God's good message...In other words, the Israelites, who heard the word through these men, did not share their faith.”