By Ray Roennfeldt — How can we know what the will of God is for us; or, to put it more personally, how can I know what the will of God is for me? To sharpen the issue just a bit, what am I to do when I face a personal dilemma where both of the options are less than ideal? Not only have I found that there are no easy answers to discerning God’s will for my own life, but also in knowing the will of God for the church and church institutions. Having had the responsibility of leading a Christian higher education provider for more than a de- cade, I’ve not always found it easy to determine either the optimal strategic direction or how to deal with personnel issues from a Christian perspective.
I’ve observed that Christian believers have followed a number of strategies in order to find answers to these questions. The most common—especially for conservative Christians like Seventh-day Adventists—is to ask, “What does the Bible say?” This is a good place to start, but it can also be confusing. For instance, the Bible does not always speak with one voice on a particular issue. Why? The short answer is that while I very firmly believe that the Scriptures are God’s Word for all of us for all time, the Biblical writers are clearly speaking to particular circumstances at specific times.
Added to this is the fact that God, in his grace, appears to accommodate his revelation to the situation in which he finds his people.
The most extreme version of the “What does the Bible say?” approach involves the individual praying, opening the Bible randomly, and pointing to a particular text which will provide the necessary information. For me, the odds of getting the right information are probably less than my chances of winning with a single ticket in Australia’s $80 million Powerball lottery!
Just to underline the fact that the Bible is not always unambiguous in regard to the path that we should take, even in a church community sincere and well-meaning Christians do not see eye to eye on the interpretation of Scripture. A “simple” illustration of this is seen in well-educated Adventist church members, pastors, and theologians seemingly unable to agree on the matter of the ordination of women to gospel ministry. Even our church leaders are not able to agree. Why? It is probably partly because we all come to the text of Scripture from different backgrounds,1 and also maybe because we have divergent views of what the Bible is and what it is designed to reveal to us.2 Of course, there is also the inclination to be selective in regard to what we see in Scripture. For example, I have to confess that I am somewhat fascinated by the preaching of some televangelists who assure their followers that God wants them to prosper financially and all one has to do is to “claim” God’s promises. Have these preachers not read of Job’s troubles?
This brings me to an alternative approach that I’ve found helpful for both personal and Christian community life and theology.
The “Wesleyan Quadrilateral” of Scripture, tradition, reason, and Christian experience describes the approach3 that John Wesley took to religious authority. The term, although never used by Wesley himself, was coined by Wesleyan historians as they examined Wesley’s thought. The question that immediately comes to mind is in regard to how this relates to the classical Reformation formulation of sola scriptura (the Bible alone) which was espoused by no less that Martin Luther. The same Bible only ideology is found in Adventism’s affirmation in the preamble to our 28 Fundamental Beliefs: “Seventh-day Adventists accept the Bible as their only creed . . . .” 4 It is instructive to ex- amine what sola scriptura meant for Martin Luther. While Luther wanted his theological framework to be based firmly in Scripture, he also highly valued the insights of the early church fathers, particularly those of Augustine (i.e., tradition) and the thinking of his Wittenberg colleagues (i.e., Christian experience and reason).5
The majority of our Adventist pioneers came from a Wesleyan/Methodist background, so what might the Wesleyan Quadrilateral look like for us today?
Scripture: For conservative Christians, it is obvious that the Bible holds the primary place in doctrinal and religious authority; perhaps best expressed as prima Scriptura. Passages such as 2 Timothy 3:15-17 immediately come to mind. “All Scripture is God- breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (v. 16).
Tradition: Adventists have generally been leery of allowing tradition any place of authority: however, we seem to have real difficulty in moving beyond Ellen White’s insights even in different times and situations.6 Surely, it would be beneficial to consider if we are “on our own” in terms of biblical interpretation.
Reason: It is certainly helpful for us to ask, “Does this actually make sense?” For example, does it really make sense that women can lead countries and corporations and yet their leadership cannot be acknowledged in the Christian community?7 Our reason cannot be the final arbiter of authority, but its voice is ignored to our detriment.
Experience: Place must be given to the leading of the Holy Spirit in both individual and corporate Christian life. Jesus promised that the Spirit would “guide you into all the truth” (John 16:12). To illustrate, surely the growth of the church in China through the ministry of ordained women pastors should cause us to think new thoughts regarding ordination!
The early church faced a huge dilemma as Barnabas and Paul began to take the good news of Jesus across the cultural and religious divide that separated Judaism from the Gentile world. Was it necessary for Gentile Christians to become Jews through circumcision before they could become Christians? This issue had the potential to divide the church or even to stall the spread of the Christian message and the solution could not be found in just a few selected OT passages or even in the explicit teachings of Jesus.
The fact is that the case for circumcision appeared to have more than adequate biblical warrant. After all, it had been declared by God to father Abraham as an “everlasting covenant” for both his natural descendants and foreigners entering his household (Gen 17:12-14). It is instructive to observe the interplay between Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience as the issue was argued out at the first church council in Jerusalem.
This is how it is narrated in Acts 15:
Experience: God has already made a choice to accept Gentiles into the Christian community by giving his Spirit to them (vv. 7-9)
Reason and Tradition: Why should the yoke of circumcision be placed on the necks of the Gentiles when even the ancestors could not bear it (v. 10)
Experience: The assembly were silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul describe the “signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them” (v. 13).
Scripture: James assured the council attendees that the “words of the prophets are in agreement with this” (v. 15); citing Amos 9:11-12 as general support.
Reason: James concludes his speech with these words, “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God” (v. 19).
Tradition, Reason, Experience, and Scripture: The conclusions of the council were summed up in a letter to the Gentile Christians, explaining that ‘It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements” (v. 28). Why the specific prohibitions of vv. 20-21 and v. 29)? The reason offered in v. 21 is that the requirements are consistent with the Mosaic scriptural tradition.
In practice, we sometimes go to Scripture first, but often science or psychology prod us with difficult questions; life experiences push us to reflect on the leading of God through his Spirit; and society and religion challenge us to rethink our traditional perspectives. Some of the questions we face as individuals do not find explicit answers in Scripture. Questions like: What vocation should I choose for myself? Who should I marry? Should I have children? And, the contemporary one: should I get vaccinated? Perhaps even more complex, are some of the questions facing the church community today: How can we foster unity while also valuing diversity? How do we truly enfold the marginalized of society into our congregations? Must we define precisely every doctrinal position and lifestyle concern? Is our identity to be found in Jesus or in Adventism?
There are no simple biblical answers to questions such as these. However, we have the framework of inspired Scripture, the tradition of those who have gone before to guide, individual and collective reason to help us sort through the options, and the leading of the Spirit as we face the future creatively.
–Professor Ray Roennfeldt, PhD, has served the church in Australia and Papua New Guinea as a nurse, pastor, ministry educator, theologian, and university administrator. He recently retired as Vice-Chancellor and President of Avondale University College (now Avondale University). He and his wife, Carmel, live in Australia. Email him at: [email protected].
1. For details of what we bring to the reading of Scripture, see my chapter “Our Story as Text,” in R. Cole and P. Peterson, eds., Hermeneutics, Intertextuality and the Contemporary Meaning of Scripture (Hindmarsh, South Australia: ATF Press, 2014), 81-88. Note that my articles are available at [email protected].
2 For a brief portrayal of the character and purpose of Scripture, see my chapter “The Bible as Text,” in Cole and Peterson, 17-25.
3 For a convenient summary of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral see Robert K. McIver and Ray Roennfeldt, “Test and Interpretation: Christian Understandings of Authoritative Texts in the Light of Social Change,” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 20/3 (2009): 268-71.
4 Available at www.adventist.org/beliefs/.
5 See Egil Grislis, “Martin Luther—Cause or Cure of the Problem of Authority,” Consensus: A Canadian Lutheran Journal of Theology 14 (1988): 37.
6 This, in spite of Ellen White’s counsel: “We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change and opinion, will be disappointed.” Ellen G. White, “Search the Scripture,” Review and Herald 69/30 (26 July 1892): 465.
7 For my perspective on the issue of women’s ordination and an application of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral to this topic, see my chapter “Women’s Ordination: Why Not!?”in G. J. Humble and R. K. McIver, eds., South Pacific Perspectives on Ordination: Biblical, Theological and Historical Studies in an Adventist Context (Cooranbong, NSW: Avondale Academic Press, 2015), 13-25.