Reasonable Worship…part 2

by Arron Bergeron

Building upon my last column, the following is an example of meditating upon and testing what we hear during our Sunday worship…

Not too long ago I heard some teaching by a guest speaker which confused and concerned me. The attempt was made to think deeply about creation and the fall of man from Genesis 2 and 3. It was recognized that there exists two different ages of time accounted for in these chapters. The first was labeled the age of innocence, and the next was called the age of conscience. I would agree that there are two different world systems, or ages, which can be drawn out of the text. How it is applied is where I'm sure the thinking Bible-reading Christian would have a problem.

Dictionary.com¹ defines innocence as...

• the quality or state of being innocent; freedom from sin or moral wrong.
• freedom from legal or specific wrong; guiltlessness
• simplicity; absence of guile or cunning; naiveté.

Similarly, Merriam-Webster.com defines it as...

• freedom from guilt or sin through being unacquainted with evil : blamelessness
• freedom from legal guilt of a particular crime or offense

Before man sinned, it was surely an age of innocence. Mankind was free from acquaintance with sin; man had freedom from moral wrongdoing and guilt. Innocence, however, can also be taken to mean lacking in knowledge, or ignorant. This I would have to say is where the thinking, Biblical Christian has to draw a line not to be crossed.

Those same dictionaries also define conscience as follows;

• the inner sense of what is right or wrong in one's conduct or motives, impelling one toward right action: to follow the dictates of conscience.
• the complex of ethical and moral principles that controls or inhibits the actions or thoughts of an individual.
• an inhibiting sense of what is prudent: I'd eat another piece of pie but my conscience would bother me.

and

• the sense or consciousness of the moral goodness or blameworthiness of one's own conduct, intentions, or character together with a feeling of obligation to do right or be good
• a faculty, power, or principle enjoining good acts

It was actually stated that man prior to sinning didn't have a conscience, because in the age of innocence, he was innocent. After sin entered the world, the conscience was manifested as a byproduct of that sin. In other words, Adam had no idea what he was doing, and he had no sense he was doing anything wrong in disobeying the command of God. He had no inner compulsion to obey. How could he? He was in the age of innocence. Here is where I must draw a line.

Paul wrote to Timothy... “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression” (1Tim2:14²). This to me seems pretty clear; if Adam was not deceived, or misled, or tricked in any way. If we are to couple this passage with the indictment of God, mainly that Adam took Eve’s lead instead of God’s command (Gen 3:17), then the most logical conclusion is Adam willingly disobeyed, or rebelled, against God. He was cognitive of his actions. That he was innocent to this point in human history is certain. To suggest he was ignorant is dubious.

Furthermore, God clearly outlined the consequences of this action before it could be actualized. God issued a clear warning, pure and simple. To suggest Adam didn’t know what he was doing was deliberate disobedience not only downgrades our first parent’s intelligence, it also calls into question the nature and character of God. It implies some destructive theology…chiefly, God communicated unintelligibly to Adam in issuing the warning against partaking of the fruit. What would be the impact of this if it’s true?

1. If the omniscient God spoke these words knowing Adam couldn’t understand them, this would call into question the grace of God, and the love of God.
2. God likes to confuse his creation by speaking over their heads, and then holds them accountable for not acting accordingly.
3. Perhaps God is not omnipotent or omniscient in that He could not communicate effectively. If extrapolated, this would weigh heavily upon our entire doctrine of divine revelation.
4. Adam could potentially be with good excuse before God. Such ignorance, this kind of “innocence” wrongly implied into the text, would render all actions morally neutral in his understanding. If extrapolated, Adam might even be argued to have been set up to fall.
5. If the previous assumption were true, God would be considered the author of sin.

I don’t believe I need to extrapolate further. The Bible believing, thinking Christian should find these conclusions detestable heresy.

Getting back to reasoning as an integral part and act of Christian worship, it’s clear to me from this simple exercise the dangers of neglecting so great a gift in our congregations and assemblies. All believers in Christ have been given the command to test all things, to cling to what is good; we have been exhorted to love the Lord with all our faculties, which includes the mind; we have been left with the noble example of those before us who search the scriptures daily. It’s crucial we start living up to the challenge.

In conclusion, a stern warning needs to be issued. Pastors, teachers, elders, and any other leaders in the church need to think critically and guard the pulpit from stupidity. I take this mandate seriously, as one who has been given the task of a teacher, we will all be held accountable before God for what we teach, what we allow to be taught, and what we allow to get by uncorrected.

1. All internet references were taken on January 12, 2011.

2. All Scripture quotations taken from the New King James Version.