Since 2008, Tyler Sams has worked with the Judson Road church of Christ in Longview, TX. He and his wife, Audrey, have a young daughter named Brie. You may contact him through the following website: judsonroadchurch.com.
ESTABLISHING BIBLE AUTHORITY
An expedient is an advantageous means or method used to accomplish a goal or achieve a certain end. What Biblical guidelines should be followed in dealing with matters of expediency?
The God who created mankind instilled within us the ability to listen, communicate, and reason. It stands to reason, if the entirety of self is to be given to God (Rom. 12:1), that our listening, communicative, and reasoning abilities should be employed in our service toward Him. Indeed, Paul emphasizes this very thought when he calls us to do all with the Lord’s approval and authority, whether “in word or deed” (Col. 3:17).
At times, discerning the will of God is quite simple—the call to holiness, found in 1 Peter 1:15, is such an example. At other times, discerning the will of God can be more difficult—not because our God is a poor communicator, but because we may fall prey to background noise and fail to properly hear the directives from the Most High. In Acts 15, it took steady reasoning from the apostles, drawn from divine revelation, to overcome the many prejudices against Gentile converts in the early days of the church. We will be equipped to discern the will of God when we listen to His revelation.
There are times, in His revelation, when God is specific in His instruction toward humanity. The command to be holy, cited above, plainly suggests the type lifestyle that is appropriate for Christians. At other times, the Lord is rather general in His instructions toward humanity.
Paul called on Timothy to instill within others the Gospel message from Paul, so that those others “[would] be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). Through the inspired apostle, the Holy Spirit called on Timothy, and other faithful Christians, to teach. But how? God’s instruction in this moment was alternately specific and general—specific with regard to the message, general with regard to the sharing of that message. Without a method of teaching specified, it was left to Timothy’s good, revelation-based reasoning to determine the most beneficial (i.e., edifying) method of teaching. A quick examination of Scripture reveals Timothy accomplishing his responsibility to teach in at least two different ways: through public discourse (2 Tim. 4:2) and through written correspondence (Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1). Without a method of teaching being specified by God, Timothy was free to choose whichever method of teaching would be most beneficial, most helpful, and most expedient.
Expedients and Scripture
That concept, expedience, has become a source of contention among Bible students in general, and even among brethren in Christ. Often, the concept of expediency is rejected, buffered by claims that it is foreign to the Gospel.
While the word expedient may be absent from modern translations (found only in John’s Gospel account in the English Standard Version (ESV) and New American Standard Bible (NASB), but absent in other versions), the concept is certainly present. In writing to the Corinthian church (10:23), Paul noted that, while eating meat sacrificed to idols might be lawful, such might not be expedient (profitable [NASB] or helpful [ESV]). By introducing the concept of expediency, Paul reveals a crucial component relating to the Gospel and expediency—expedience is not a means of determining the will of God, but rather is a reasonable response to God’s revelation.
In private correspondence, a brother spoke against the concept of expediency, noting that appeals to expediency “created a fourth means of establishing biblical authority.” It does no such thing! As Paul clearly reveals in 1 Corinthians 10:23, expediency does not determine the will of God, but rather is subservient to that selfsame will. Rather than creating law, the first criteria for judging an expedient is with regard to law; in other words, if a practice cannot be justified by law, then it fails the test of expediency! If a practice is not lawful, it certainly cannot be helpful or profitable.
Misapplication
Teachers such as Cecil Hook err when they state, “Those who… hire ministers because of expediency have no just ground for condemning those who retain… tongue speaking because of example.” A local church’s fellowship with a local preacher may be helpful for that church—Paul’s lengthy stays at both Corinth and Ephesus dismiss any requirement for permanently itinerant evangelists, while his writings to the churches in Corinth and Philippi affirm the right of a church to financially support a preacher, as well as the right of a preacher to accept such fellowship (1 Cor. 9:14; Phil. 4:15ff). Tongue speaking is rightly rejected as an expedient, because it is not in conformity with law—since the age of miraculous spiritual gifts has ceased (1 Cor. 13), not to mention that the so-called modern practice of tongue speaking fails to conform to the divine standard mandated in 1 Corinthians 14:26-33.
The concept of expediency is not merely a mental exercise, vaguely referenced in the Gospel. Rather, expedients are readily observable throughout the pages of Scripture. Jesus’ command to His apostles involved them taking the Gospel to all of the world: they were to “Go” (Mark 16:15). Yet, Jesus never specified the method of going: camel, donkey, ship, or chariot. While the message was specified, the manner of going was not, thus leaving the choice of transportation in the realm of expediency. Peter traveled on foot (Acts 12:8), while Paul traveled by boat (Acts 21:1ff) and by land (Acts 20:13ff). In fulfilling Christ’s command to “go,” we see Paul and Peter both employing expedients, with the obvious approval of God. In neither case did the expedient alter Christ’s directive, thus according the practice with Paul’s revelation in 1 Corinthians 10.
Think also about the assemblies of disciples throughout the New Testament. Through the books of Acts, 1 Corinthians, and Hebrews, it is readily apparent that disciples were to assemble together on the first day of the week. While it can be determined that God’s will was (and is) for Christians to assemble together as the church (1 Cor. 11:18), God never specified the venue for such assemblies. As such, we see different groups of disciples employing different venues to suit their respective needs—some assembled at the temple complex (Acts 2-4), some assembled in a schoolhouse (Acts 19:9ff), some assembled in an upper room (Acts 20:7ff), some assembled in a house (1 Cor. 16:19). God’s pattern is for Christians to assemble together, but He never specified the location or venue for such assemblies; thus, Christians were (and are) to employ lawful, edification-driven reason to identify the most expedient location or venue for assembling.
Conclusion
The concept of expediency is not an injection of human reasoning or “church of Christ” doctrine (whatever evil that might be) into the biblical text. Neither is the concept of expediency some sort of catch-all concept that authorizes, in a general way, whatever we want to do, lawful or not. Rather, the concept of expediency is a spiritual necessity, allowing directives from God to be practiced across different cultures and circumstances. Born from lawfulness, the call of expediency is to fulfill the directives of God in the most beneficial and edifying manner.
Source
Hook, Cecil. “According To The Pattern,” Cecil Hook's Essays. Accessed April 10, 2017.
http://cecilhook.net/pdf/fr_360.pdf.