Was It "Expedient"? Or Is It Optional
In the June 25th issue of The Gospel Guardian Brother Cecil B. Douthitt had an article on page 4 with the above heading. He endeavored to prove that everytime the word "expedient" is used within the pages of The New Testament it is an essential and compulsory as the commandments of God. This he did not prove when one investigate the BIBLE and definitions of words used.
All my BIBLE quotations are from the American Standard Version and the definitions of words I use are from Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary of The English Language unless otherwise indicated.
First reread his article before reading mine. Now let us begin to review his article. The definition of "expedient" used as an adjective is as follows: "1. Tending to promote the object proposed; fit or suitable for the purpose; proper under the circumstances; advantageous; as, many things may be lawful which are not expedient 2 Contributing or tending to contribute to present advantage or self-interest; utilitarian. 3. Quick; expeditious. (Obs.)" Let us now define "sumphero". Young's Analytical Concordance To The Bible which contains an Index-Lexicon To The New Testament on page 90 defines "sumphero" as follows: "bring together; be better; be expedient (be profitable); be good; be profitable; profit". Does these, the definitions, convey the idea of being essential and compulsory in reference to the meaning of the words just defined? Of course not.
John 11:50 tell us "nor do ye take account that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not". To get the complete thought conveyed to us in this passage our explanation will begin at verse 47. Read your Bible from verse 47 to verse 53. Verse 47 tells us that a council, in all probability it was the Sanhedrin, was called composed of the chief priests and Pharisees. They came together to meet the crisis Jesus was causing because unless something was done the nation would follow Jesus. John 12:19 states "the world is gone after him." Verse 48 the chief priest and the Pharisees had the idea that if the nation followed Jesus there would be a rebellion against the authority of Rome because they would make Jesus a King. As a result of this the Romans would come and destroy their ecclesiastical authority and the Jewish Nation. Verse 49 Caiaphas tells them they don't understand what the crisis requires. Now we come to word "expedient". Look at the definition. Verse 50 Caiaphas tells them, it is expedient — "advantageous; contributing or tending to contribute to present advantage or self-interest " — for us, the Jews, that Jesus should die for the people rather than have the Romans destroy the whole nation for making Jesus King. Since expedient occurs in verse 49 and 60 which makes a complete sentence and verse 51 tells us what nation Caiaphas spoke of. Then why was it expedient — "advantageous; contributing or tending to contribute to present advantage or self-interest" — for Jesus to die? The reason is so that their ecclesiastical authority and the Jewish Nation would not be destroyed. Verse 52 God steps into the picture and now uses Caiaphas as a means of prophecy. We find in this verse that the death of Jesus would not be for what the Jews wanted as in verse 49 and 50. But that the death of Jesus would be for a different reason. The reason being that "Children of God" scattered abroad and the Jews might be gathered together into one fold, the Church. Read also John 10:16. Verse 53 tells us from that day forth they took counsel to put Jesus to death.
When you read the Bible and this explanation did you notice that "expedient" occurs in verse 50 where Caiaphas spoke of Jesus dying for the Jewish Nation not in the next verses, which makes a complete sentence. This is where we find it necessary, the verb should die tells us this, for Jesus to die so that the Jews and "Children of God" scattered abroad might be brought into one fold, the Church. Does not Brother Cecil B. Douthitt know that you can't change the meaning of a word in one sentence to another meaning where the word does not even occur in the sentence. The word is expedient. Also you should look at the definition of the word before you state it is necessary, when the definition prohibit such. Did Brother Cecil B. Douthitt do this? It seem he didn't.
John 18:14 states "Now Caiaphas was he that gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people" "That it was expedient — "advantageous; contributing or tending to contribute to present advantage or self-interest" — that one man should die for the people". What man? Jesus was the man. Read John 18:12-14. What people. The Jews. Was it necessary for Jesus to die to keep the Romans from destroying the Jewish Nation? Of course not, they had Jesus mission twisted around. His mission was Spiritual not physical. Where in the world does Brother Cecil B. Douthitt get the idea from this passage that the death of Jesus was necessary for the salvation of souls.
In John 16:7 Jesus said, "Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I go, I will send Him unto you". "It is expedient — "advantageous; tending to promote the object proposed" — for you, His Disciples, that I go away". Why was it expedient — "advantageous" — for His Disciples? It was advantageous for them so that the Comforter would come. What is the Comforter. John 14:26 tells us it is the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit's mission was to teach His Disciples all things and bring to their remembrance all that He had said unto them (John 14:26). What was the object proposed? His going away was the object proposed so that the Holy Spirit would come. No one will deny the necessity of Jesus going away, not even I, so that The Holy Spirit would come. But, where does Brother Cecil B. Douthitt get the idea that "expedient" from this passage means essential and indispensable?
"All things are lawful for me; but not all things are expedient" (I Cor. 6:12). This simply means everything that is authorized by the Law of Christ was scriptural for Paul to do but some were not expedient — " proper under the circumstances" — for Paul to do. Such as the eating of meat in Corinth. "All things are lawful for me; but I will not be brought under the power of any" (I Cor. 6:12). Though eating meat was scriptural (Romans 14:20) when a brother's conscience was weak, it was proper under the circumstances to abstain from eating meat lest we make our brother stumble (I Cor. 8:11-13 and Romans 14:21). When Paul abstained from eating meat, he didn't want anyone to think he was becoming the servant or slave of it such as the brother with a weak conscience. That is the reason the one with a weak conscience should be taught the truth concerning the matter lest he be brought under the power of any.
I Cor. 10:23 Paul said, "All things are lawful; but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful; but not all things edify". Since we have the first sentence of this explained in I Cor. 6:12 let us proceed with the second sentence. Why did Paul say "not all things edify"? Because not all things are expedient" — proper under the circumstances" — when everything that is authorized by the Law of Christ is scriptural. So we see again that when a brother's conscience is weak we that are strong need to strengthen him, so that all things that are lawful will be all things that edify.
The 2 above paragraphs are the only times "expedient" is used even in a sense as essential and compulsory as the commandments of God. The reason being because of the circumstances and wherein we have liberty. Whereas the commandments of God are essential and compulsory no matter what the circumstances may be. Name 1 commandment of God that is not essential and compulsory no matter what may the circumstances be. Providing the individual is in good health.
II Cor. 8:10 Paul said, "And herein I give my judgment: for this is expedient for you, who were the first to make a beginning a year ago, not only to do, but also to will". This is not a commandment because Paul gives his judgment that it is expedient — "advantageous" — to the Corinthians to complete the work, finish the work, they had started. It was expedient — "advantageous" — for them because if they were not prepared. Paul and the Corinthians would be put to shame in this confidence (II Cor. 9:4). Is this as essential and compulsory as the commandments of God. Of course not.
Read paragraph 9 of Brother Cecil B. Douthitt article. He uses the word "expediencies", plural of expediency and expedience. First we will define the word.
"1. Fitness or suitable to effect some desired end or the purpose intended; advisability under the particular circumstances of the case. 2. That which is the most practical or expedient, taking all the circumstances into account" The definition of the word proves his usages of the word in reference "to the command to go" and for "the Church to assemble on The Lord's Day is wrong. The reason being we have liberty in "the command to go" as how we will go and what time we will assemble on The Lord's Day.
"The disciples say unto him, if the case of the man is so with his wife, it is not expedient to marry" (Matt. 19:10). The Disciples made this statement after Jesus answered the Pharisees question about divorce "It is not expedient — "advantageous; proper under the circumstances" — to marry. Why? Because such a precise and accurate marriage law was too high for their loose Jewish ideas. It seems to His Disciples as if it would be impossible to live up to so high an idea. Does this sound as essential and compulsory as the commandments of God? Of course not. Read Genesis 2:18.
Let us now summarize what we have learned in this study.
1. The dictionary definition of "expedient" does harmonize with the New Testament meaning of the word.
2. When a thing is "expedient" it is not always as essential and compulsory as the commandments of God. The reason being the circumstances and the liberty we have. Even in the sense when it is as essential as compulsory as the commandments of God the brother with a weak conscience should be taught the truth concerning the matter so all things that are lawful will be all things that edify.
We can reasonable expect from Brother Cecil B. Douthitt. Let him take heed to II Tim 2:15 and I Peter 4:11.
I hope that this review and study has been of profit to you. I did not intend for my review and study to be so lengthy because all I needed was to prove 1 instance where "expedient was not essential and compulsory as the commandments of God and Brother Cecil B. Douthitt statement in Paragraph 2 "according to New Testament usage if a thing is expedient, it is as binding and compulsory as a divine command or a direct order" would have been proven false. This I have shown. But when I saw the way explanations was given to the passages under consideration I was compelled to discuss them more thoroughly. Remember the words of II Peter 3:18, "But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and for ever".