A corner of the Christian blogosphere has recently been convulsed by the subject of resolutions. The resolutions in question are an Ohio Bible Fellowship statement against the peril of reading New Evangelical authors (Remonstrants and subsequent posts), and a proposed Southern Baptist Convention resolution regarding the disciplined maintenance of church membership roles (Founders and Immoderate). Many questions have been raised, and some answers offered. One question I have not seen is, “Why does a group that holds to the authority of Scripture alone for matters of faith and practice need such statements?”
In the case of the OBF resolution, I wonder why not just quote verses like Philippians 4:8; 2 Corinthians 10:5, and, as apparently deemed necessary, 2 Thess. 3:6; Romans 16:17 etc.?
In the case of the SBC resolution, I wonder why not simply quote Heb. 10:24-27; 1 Cor. 5; Matt. 18:15-17 etc.? Or, in the case of the ill-fated resolution on home schooling a couple years ago, why not simply proclaim Deuteronomy 6?
Either the Bible is sufficient, or the Orthodox and Romanists are correct: we need tradition too. Resolutions along these lines sound like that frazzled parent begging/pleading/scolding his child, “I’m going to count to three…this time I really mean it!” Or, perhaps worse yet, the constantly rebellious child who promises, “This time I’ll obey… I really mean it.” If the problems in the OBF and SBC a so severe that such resolutions are needed, what causes anyone to believe the words of man will be of any influence if the clear statements of Scripture have proven impotent?