CENICENI

• CC: command

• EE: example

• NINI: necessary inference (or implication)

II The PositionThe Position

• “The problem with those who embrace the CENI hermeneutic is they too frequently believe that what some mere man assumesassumes or infers is EQUAL to what God Himself has commanded. AssumptionsAssumptions, then, very often become the basis for establishing authority with regard to the practice of the church.

The PositionThe Position, cont’d.• It matters not that God never God never

commandedcommanded such a practice; it matters not that God never even mentionedmentioned such a practice, or spoke either for or against it; if I have assumedassumed or inferred something from my study of the Scripture, then that is now perceived to be universal LAWLAW binding upon all people everywhere, and if any dare to transgress these decrees they will forfeit everlasting life!”

Aristotle, Locke, and LawAristotle, Locke, and Law

• Some claim that AristotleAristotle invented such reasoning, and that John LockeLocke (reformation theologian) perfected it

• A lawyer: “The CENI concept comes in part from the common law of British-American jurisprudencejurisprudence. I was somewhat startled, while reading some old cases in law school nearly 20 years ago, to find an appeal for authority based either on express ‘statutestatute,’ approved ‘precedentprecedent,’ or ‘necessary necessary inferenceinference’

IIII The PurposeThe Purpose

• PreacherPreacher: 1 Co. 16 is a command to the churches of Corinth and Galatia; there is no evidence that it applies to all churches…

• LawyerLawyer: “There are today a considerable number of lawyer-preachers among us who detest legalism and proclaim the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ”

IIIIII The ProblemThe Problem

1. Misrepresentation: It’s not CENI, but 1. Misrepresentation: It’s not CENI, but SCENI (they omit “statement”)SCENI (they omit “statement”)

– SStatement or CCommand, Approved

EExample, NNecessary IInference

– Mk.16:16, a statementstatement

– If I mention CENI, I mean SCENI

2. There is no substitute for SCENI2. There is no substitute for SCENI

– Someone proposed: “R.E.A.D.”

– How did he reach that conclusion (that the text applies to him? What passage says so?)

– Mt.19:4-6 (“read”) –

• SStatement (4)

• CCommand (5)

• EExample (4)

• NNecessary IImplication (5-6)

A note from mom

• ““To the manager of the grocery store: To the manager of the grocery store: I have sent my son to purchase your I have sent my son to purchase your smallest box of Tide detergent. Please smallest box of Tide detergent. Please see that he leaves the store with the see that he leaves the store with the correct change”correct change” – Mrs. Baker

– May the manager add water softener May the manager add water softener and cool-aid?and cool-aid?

– Does the design on the box change Does the design on the box change the order?the order?

3. SCENI is taught throughout the 3. SCENI is taught throughout the BibleBible

• Dt.4:2 Dt.4:2 – Any addition or subtraction from the

Word changes it and results in disobedience

– Did this principle affect Jews of Jesus’ day and disciples of Jesus?

• Mt.15:…3-9, Jews

• Ga.3:15, Christians (6:2; 1:6-9)

1 Chron. 13, 151 Chron. 13, 15

• 1 Chr.13:14, David had three months to study the issue

• David learned something about CENI

Nu.4:15; 7:7-9

• CommandCommand; P; Prohibitionrohibition

• EExamplexample

– Entire Pentateuch is an exampleexample of God giving law to Israel

• Necessary implicationNecessary implication (also 7:7-9)

– Not one part of it had David’s name

– This was 1000+ years before Aristotle!

What the passages do not say

• Nu.4 & 7 do not say “sons of Kohath onlyonly”; KohathKohath excludesexcludes everyone else

• Nu.4 and 7 do not say “shoulder carrying onlyonly”; shouldersshoulders excludesexcludes every other method

• 1 Chr.15:2, David’s conclusion, based on study of Nu.4 & 7!

– 1 Chr.15:5, sons of KohathKohath (121 of them!)

1 Chron. 15:13 –

• because youyou did not do it the first time (NKJV); because youyou did not carry it the first time (ESV)

– The The wrongwrong personnel personnel• because we did not consult Him about

the proper orderproper order (NKJV); according to the ordinanceordinance (NASB); according to the rulerule (ESV)

– The The wrongwrong procedure procedure

Ac.10:19, 28, 34Ac.10:19, 28, 34

• 19, “thought aboutthought about”: give serious thought to something; ponder

• 28, “shownshown”: to prove or make clear by evidence or reasoning

– God gave the capacity for reasoning w/in human thought just as He gave powers of communication

• 34, “perceiveperceive”: to process information . . . learn about something through process of inquiry

Ac. 10 & 11

• Ac.10:47-48, Peter already knew about baptism for forgiveness, 2:38; now he knew about baptism for forgiveness of Gentiles, 2:39

– He correctly inferredinferred what God impliedimplied, and bound itbound it on others

• Ac.11:1-18, Peter related these events and conclusions

Ac.11:1-18• 1-3, “Gentiles” and “uncircumcised”

– Peter’s audience “takes issue” w. him, “criticizes” him

– Today: “too much reliance on Aristotle” or “human logic”

• 4-6, example

• 7-10, command / example

• 11-12, command / example

• 13-14, example / command

Ac.11:1-18, cont’d.

• 15-16, example/ necessary implication / statement

• 17, necessary implication (Peter’s)

• 18, necessary implication (audience’s)

• Ac.15 uses same SCENI format to convince Pharisees

Ph. 4:9Ph. 4:9• A command to follow examples

• Paul does not turn from precept to example, but makes his example a makes his example a preceptprecept!

• “DoDo” (imperative)

• Ph.3:17, his example…aexample…a patternpattern

– 1 Co.4:17

4. Those who deny CENI are 4. Those who deny CENI are agenda drivenagenda driven• Work of churchWork of church

– Milo Hadwin – examplesexamples not binding

– Now, neither are commandmentscommandments!

• Apostasy is never static

• Next generation took Hadwin’s conclusions to the next level

• 1906 Christian Church

• Worship of churchWorship of church

– Ac.5, women leaders (LS; announcements; teaching over men, preaching, elders)

– Ac.20:7, LS (Sat. nights; annually; w. (or as) common meal)

– 1 Co.16, giving not required weekly; Ep.5:19, mechanical music, etc.

• Plan of salvationPlan of salvation – If other examples not binding, why are

these? E.g.: Ac.8:26-39

• MoralsMorals

– W’Vue today (SCENI) – W’Vue tomorrow (w/o SCENI):

• Social gospel, political causesSocial gospel, political causes• Women elders and preachersWomen elders and preachers • LS composed of different elements, LS composed of different elements,

partaken once a year, on Sat. night?partaken once a year, on Sat. night?• Raffles, rentRaffles, rent• Musicals, choruses, plays, etc.Musicals, choruses, plays, etc.• Adulterers, homosexuals et al. Adulterers, homosexuals et al.

welcomedwelcomed

Conclusion

1. Whatever God implies is HisHis implication; it has been there all it has been there all alongalong, though I may have discovereddiscovered it only todaytoday

– My reasoning merely discoversdiscovers it; my reasoning does not produceproduce it

2. The thing that bindsbinds us is God’s wordGod’s word, not my reading of it

– Law of gravityLaw of gravity