Resources/Articles
What Constitutes A Commandment of Men?
During the 400 years between the Old and New Testaments, the Jews became divided into various sects. Two of these sects that we often read of in the gospels are the Pharisees and Sadducees. Jesus warned against their teaching (which he called “leaven”) because of a most crucial reason. It would cause all who believed in it to be lost. In Matthew 23.15, Jesus not only called the Pharisees “children of hell,” but he said that those who believed and practiced their teachings would become twice as much a “child of hell” as themselves. Jesus said in Matthew 16.6,11-12, to watch and beware of their teaching. In Matthew 15, Jesus taught that for the sake of these traditions, they broke the “commandment of God” (v. 3). This was because those traditions were contrary to the Law of Moses (vv. 4-6). Jesus said in v. 6 that they “made the void the word of God.” In v. 9, Jesus said that these traditions made their worship vain. They sought to bind these traditions upon the multitudes rather than the Law of Moses.
When the Pharisees and scribes observed Jesus’ disciples not keeping their traditions, they came and asked Jesus, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat” (v. 2). The “traditions of the elders” here mentioned consisted of laws and regulations orally transmitted from Moses and the prophets. Because of the supposition that these traditions originated with inspired men, they were regarded as equal in authority with the written word. Mark 7.3-4 lists some of these “traditions” herein referred.
We see, then, what constitutes a doctrine that is only a “commandment of men.” It is any doctrine that is based upon a supposition that it is inspired, and consequently regarded as equal in authority with the written word. The oral traditions of the elders were not a part of the written Law of Moses. Such “commandments of men” were not founded on the written word. They made void God’s word (Matthew 15.6), because they taught contrary to that which was written and inspired. Moses had commanded, “You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you” (Deuteronomy 4.2). This oral tradition of the elders “added to” the written word.
What if such were done today? Would not the commandment of God be broken, the written word made void, and worship be in vain? There are a host of supposed inspired doctrines that are in reality only commandments of men, yet they are likewise regarded as equal in authority with the written word by those who teach and practice them. Today, one cannot become a member of any existing denominational church without submitting to that denomination’s statement of faith. You will not be accepted into their fellowship without submitting to their particular ordinances, whether by vote, letter, or bye baptism, as their statement of faith stipulates.
Protestant denominations were founded on such writings. These statements of faith, or creeds, are not a part of the inspired word of God. However, they are the criteria for acceptance into their fellowship. They are held up as authoritative as the Bible. The strange thing about these creeds is that they don’t agree with one another.
An example of creed contradictions is seen the following language: “The Methodist Discipline,” on p. 410, states: “Let every adult person, and the parents of every child to be baptized, have the choice of sprinkling, pouring, or immersion. On the other hand, the “Hiscox Manual” for the Baptist denomination states on p. 20, Note 8: “Baptism is an immersion.” Are these statements not contradictory? Are both doctrines revealed in the Bible? Why do the Methodists believe there is a choice, yet the Baptists believe that baptism is by immersion? These creeds clearly define the differences of belief between each denomination. They are also indisputable evidence of division. At best, they can only serve to proselyte an individual, much as the scribes and Pharisees of Matthew 23. How can both human creeds be accurate, yet contradictory? This is a compromise of scriptural unity. Jesus and the Father never agreed to disagree on any matter (John 17.20-21).
God’s desire of salvation for all necessitates understanding his truth (1 Timothy 2.4). Truth never contradicts itself. Truth is God-breathed. This is not true of human creeds. A creed is not equal in authority with the written word. Creed language is simply a profession of what the leaders of a particular denomination have agreed upon, stating the criteria for acceptance into their membership. The contradictions abound. Revisions are made to appease the membership and address loss in numbers. Problems are not addressed with a “thus saith the Lord,” but rather by a relocating of the “pastor.” It is a repeated cycle of practice.
Truth consists only in what the Holy Spirit has revealed. It has been once for all time delivered and is now in written form (cf. Jude 1.3; Ephesians 3.3-5).
