Where Are We Headed?

When Scripture, Tradition, and Personal Preference Collide

Perhaps one of the most important questions we can ask today is, Where are we headed as a church? Yet the more I have considered that question, the more convinced I have become that another question must come first. Before we ask where the church is headed, we must ask, Where are we headed as individuals? The church is not separate from the people who comprise it. It is not merely a building, an organization, a denomination, or a collection of traditions passed from one generation to another. The church is made up of people, and the direction of those people will ultimately determine the direction of the church. Individuals shape families, families shape congregations, and congregations influence entire communities. If we want to understand where the church may be headed tomorrow, we must carefully examine what is shaping the convictions of believers today. What do we stand for? Why do we stand for it? What authority guides our decisions? Are our convictions genuinely rooted in Scripture, or are some of them more deeply rooted in our upbringing, culture, fears, experiences, or simply in what has always seemed familiar to us?

These are uncomfortable questions because none of us approaches life, faith, or Scripture without influence. Every one of us has been shaped by something. We have been shaped by parents, grandparents, churches, pastors, communities, traditions, disappointments, experiences, expectations, and sometimes even wounds. Many of those influences have been beneficial, and some have provided a foundation for which we should be deeply grateful. Paul told Timothy, “But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them” (2 Timothy 3:14). There is value in receiving truth from faithful generations who came before us. There is wisdom in listening to those who have walked with God longer than we have. There is something deeply meaningful about preserving convictions that have been tested over time. Yet there is an important difference between receiving truth through our upbringing and assuming that everything we received from our upbringing is automatically true. Every generation must eventually bring its beliefs, habits, traditions, and convictions back under the authority of Scripture. The question cannot simply be, “What have we always done?” It must become, “What has God actually said?”

Jesus confronted this very problem when religious tradition began to assume an authority that belonged only to God. He said, “Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition” (Matthew 15:6). That statement should prompt every serious believer to examine themselves. Tradition is not inherently wrong, but it becomes dangerous when we stop evaluating it. Something may be old without being biblical. Something may be familiar without being commanded. Something may be culturally respectable without being spiritually necessary. Something may even be wise without being universally binding upon every believer. One of the great dangers in religious life is that, over time, our application of a biblical principle can quietly become equal to the principle itself. Eventually, we may forget where Scripture ends and where our interpretation, culture, or preference begins. What began as a sincere attempt to protect holiness can gradually become a standard by which we judge the spirituality of everyone around us.

This is why it is important to understand that not everything found in Scripture functions in exactly the same way. Paul wrote, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). Yet affirming that all Scripture is inspired does not mean that every passage is an identical type of command directed to every believer in every generation. God commanded Noah to build an ark, but Christians today are not commanded to build one. Israel was commanded to offer animal sacrifices, yet the New Testament clearly teaches that Christ fulfilled the sacrificial system. Jesus told one particular man to sell what he had and follow Him, but the deeper issue in that encounter was the man’s attachment to wealth and the place it held in his heart. Faithful interpretation therefore requires more than simply asking whether something appears somewhere in the Bible. We must also ask who was being addressed, what was occurring in the passage, what covenantal context surrounded it, whether the teaching is repeated elsewhere in Scripture, and whether it represents a universal command, a historical description, a principle, or a particular application of a broader truth.

This matters because the Bible contains absolute truths, direct commands, principles requiring wisdom, and areas in which sincere believers may reach different conclusions regarding application. If we fail to recognize these distinctions, we generally fall into one of two errors. On one side is the danger of commanding what God has not commanded. On the other is the danger of treating what God has clearly commanded as though it were merely a matter of personal opinion. Faithfulness requires that we avoid both. We must never weaken what Scripture clearly teaches simply because obedience is uncomfortable, but neither should we take our personal application of a principle and assign it the same authority as a direct command of God.

There are truths in Scripture that do not change because culture changes. They do not depend upon geography, denomination, politics, personality, fashion, or generation. They are rooted in the very nature and character of God. Scripture declares, “For I am the LORD, I change not” (Malachi 3:6). Because God does not change, there are moral and theological truths that do not change either. The Lordship of Jesus Christ does not depend upon personal preference. The resurrection of Christ is not one interpretation among many. The call to holiness does not disappear because holiness becomes unpopular. Truthfulness does not cease to matter because dishonesty becomes common. Sexual purity does not become outdated because society changes its moral standards. Love, forgiveness, humility, justice, faithfulness, and righteousness remain deeply connected to the character of God. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). That is not presented as a suggestion; it is a declaration of truth. These are the kinds of truths upon which the church must stand firmly, not because they reflect our culture, but because they come from God.

There are also commandments in Scripture that are direct and remarkably clear. “Thou shalt not steal.” “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” “Flee fornication.” “Love your enemies.” “Pray for them which despitefully use you.” “Be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another.” These commands may challenge us deeply, but they are not difficult to understand. At times, I wonder whether the church has devoted too much energy to debating areas where Scripture allows room for judgment while quietly neglecting areas where Scripture speaks with unmistakable clarity. We can become extremely concerned about outward matters while tolerating pride. We can debate styles of dress while overlooking gossip. We can carefully regulate outward appearance while remaining unwilling to forgive someone. We can strongly defend denominational customs while showing little grace toward those who do not share them. Jesus warned the Pharisees about this when He said, “Ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith” (Matthew 23:23). Their problem was not that they cared about detail. Their problem was that their attention to detail had become disconnected from the deeper matters of the heart.

At the same time, Scripture provides many principles that are unquestionably binding, while their precise application may require wisdom. Modesty is one example. Scripture clearly teaches modesty, so modesty is not merely a personal preference. Yet Scripture does not provide believers with a universal catalogue specifying the exact style, color, fabric, length, or design of every garment Christians must wear in every culture and generation. The biblical principle is clear, but certain aspects of its application require wisdom, discernment, and conscience. The same is true of stewardship. Scripture clearly teaches that what we possess belongs to God and that we are responsible to use it wisely. Yet the Bible does not tell every Christian which vehicle to purchase, how large a home to own, or exactly how much to spend beyond necessities. The principle is clear, but its application involves judgment. Entertainment is another example. Scripture provides strong principles concerning purity, influence, thought life, holiness, and what we allow to shape our hearts and minds. Philippians 4:8 offers a clear spiritual framework for what should occupy our thinking, but Paul obviously did not list every movie, song, website, book, or form of entertainment that Christians would encounter throughout history. The believer’s responsibility is to take an unchanging biblical principle and apply it faithfully in a changing world.

This is where interpretation becomes important, but interpretation should never become an excuse to make Scripture say whatever we want it to say. The fact that a passage must be interpreted does not mean that truth becomes subjective. Responsible interpretation seeks to understand the author’s meaning, the historical setting, the surrounding context, the intended audience, and the way the passage fits with the rest of Scripture. Peter warned that some people were twisting Scripture to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16). That warning reminds us that interpretation carries responsibility. Two sincere Christians may sometimes disagree about the precise application of a biblical principle while both submitting themselves to the authority of Scripture. That does not necessarily mean every interpretation is equally strong, but it does mean we must distinguish between saying, “The Bible teaches this principle,” and saying, “My particular application of this principle is the only faithful application possible.” Those statements are not always equivalent.

Romans 14 provides one of the clearest biblical examples of this. Some believers held strong convictions regarding food, while others held different convictions. Some esteemed particular days, while others did not. Paul did not force every believer into one identical practice. Instead, he wrote, “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind” (Romans 14:5), and later reminded them, “So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God” (Romans 14:12). This introduces the important biblical category of conscience. There are areas in which believers may sincerely desire to honor God and still arrive at different applications. Yet Christian liberty is never permission for careless living. Paul also teaches that love may sometimes require us to restrain our liberty for the sake of another person. At the same time, one person’s sincere conviction does not automatically become God’s universal command for every believer. A personal conviction may be deeply sincere, spiritually beneficial, and worthy of respect without being universally binding. We may establish boundaries for ourselves or our families because we believe those boundaries protect our hearts. We may continue certain traditions because we see wisdom in them. We may abstain from certain things because our conscience before God leads us to do so. All of that can be honorable. But before we say that every faithful Christian must practice exactly what we practice, we should be certain that the authority for that requirement comes from Scripture and not merely from ourselves.

Another distinction that is often overlooked is the difference between what Scripture describes and what Scripture prescribes. The Bible records many things that happened without commanding every believer to repeat them. The book of Acts describes believers selling possessions and sharing generously with one another. That reveals something beautiful about their unity and generosity, but the same book also shows believers owning homes in which churches gathered. David played instruments. Paul sometimes taught in synagogues. Jesus attended a wedding. The disciples traveled by boat. These are all things Scripture records, but their presence in the biblical narrative does not automatically make them universal requirements. Sound interpretation asks whether the passage is telling us what happened or instructing us in what must happen. If we fail to make that distinction, we can easily build doctrines out of details that the biblical writer never intended to establish as universal rules.

This is also why our choices should be shaped by theology rather than by isolated habits or inherited customs. Theology is simply our understanding of God, His nature, His holiness, His grace, His purposes, humanity, sin, salvation, the church, and the Christian life. What we believe about God should ultimately shape how we live. If we truly believe that people are created in the image of God, that belief should affect how we treat employees, children, strangers, the poor, the elderly, people from different backgrounds, and even those who disagree with us. If we believe God is holy, holiness should influence our understanding of purity. If we believe God is truthful, honesty becomes more than a useful habit; it becomes an expression of His character. If we believe Christ humbled Himself, Christian leadership cannot be reduced to control, power, or status. If we believe salvation is by grace, there should be little room for spiritual superiority. Theology provides the foundation, biblical principles grow from that foundation, and our everyday choices should grow from those principles. Our first question should not be, “What do I prefer?” It should be, “What does what I believe about God require of me?”

Every church culture develops preferences, and preference itself is not sinful. We all have preferences concerning music, clothing, schedules, buildings, preaching styles, programs, traditions, and countless other matters. The danger begins when preference gradually becomes sacred. Once preference is given divine authority, disagreement begins to feel like rebellion. We stop saying, “We believe this is wise,” and begin saying, “This is what faithful Christians do.” Eventually, we may even question the spirituality of anyone who does not share our application. At that point, our standard is no longer simply Scripture; it has become ourselves. Paul warned against this when he wrote about people “measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves” (2 Corinthians 10:12). The standard cannot simply be what our group has always believed, what our family has always practiced, or what our community has always considered acceptable. The standard must remain Christ and His Word.

Yet we must be equally careful not to make the opposite mistake. Something is not wrong simply because it is traditional. It would be foolish to discard practices merely because they are old. Many traditions were born from legitimate concerns. Earlier generations may have recognized dangers and established practical safeguards around their families and churches. Their exact applications may need to be examined, but the biblical principle they were attempting to protect may remain extremely important. Before rejecting a tradition, we should ask, What was this tradition intended to protect? Perhaps the application needs adjustment while the principle remains sound. Perhaps the practice still expresses that principle faithfully. Wisdom neither blindly preserves everything from the past nor blindly destroys it. Scripture gives us a better approach: “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Examine everything, then retain what is good.

This is the kind of careful thinking we need when evaluating our convictions. Before declaring something a biblical requirement, we should ask whether Scripture gives a direct command, whether there is a clear prohibition, whether the principle is rooted in God’s unchanging character, whether the teaching is reinforced throughout Scripture, and whether we are dealing with an absolute truth or an application that requires wisdom. We should ask whether our conviction comes directly from Scripture or whether it has been influenced by our upbringing. We should ask whether we are confusing wisdom with command or personal conviction with universal doctrine. We should ask whether our position reflects both the truth and the character of Christ. Truth without love can become harsh and self-righteous. Love without truth can become sentimental and weak. Christ embodied both perfectly.

So where are we headed as a church? I believe the answer will ultimately be found in where we are headed as individuals. Churches rarely change direction in a single moment. They change because the people within them gradually change. They change as convictions become stronger or weaker, as Scripture becomes more central or less central, as traditions are either examined or unquestioningly preserved, and as believers either grow in humility or become increasingly convinced that their own way of thinking is the only faithful way. This is why the questions we ask ourselves matter so much. Am I teachable? Can Scripture correct me? Am I willing to admit that something I have believed for years may have been influenced as much by culture as by Scripture? Am I also courageous enough to stand firmly when Scripture clearly speaks, even when society moves in another direction? Can I distinguish between eternal truth and my preferred way of applying that truth? Can I disagree with another believer without immediately questioning their sincerity? Can I hold conviction without becoming proud? Can I exercise liberty without becoming careless? Can I preserve tradition without worshiping it? Can I embrace necessary change without abandoning truth?

These questions will shape the future of the church more than we may realize. The next generation does not simply need churches that know what they oppose. They need Christians who understand why they believe what they believe. If our children ask why we practice something, eventually “because this is how we have always done it” will not be sufficient. We must be able to open Scripture, explain the context, identify the principle, and show how our theology shapes the application. When Scripture gives liberty, we should be honest enough to acknowledge it. When Scripture speaks clearly, we should be courageous enough to stand upon it. When a principle requires wisdom, we should be humble enough to admit that sincere believers may sometimes apply it differently. When traditions are biblical, wise, and helpful, we should preserve them without apology. Yet everything must remain beneath the authority of Christ, not culture, denomination, family tradition, personal experience, preference, or even the opinions of respected spiritual leaders. Christ must remain Lord, and Scripture must remain the final authority.

Perhaps, then, the deepest question is not simply, Where is the church headed? Perhaps the deeper question is, Who am I becoming, and what authority is shaping the person I am becoming? The church of tomorrow is already being formed through the convictions of believers today. If our convictions are built primarily upon preference, the church will eventually divide over preference. If they are built primarily upon tradition, the church may become resistant to honest examination. If they are built upon culture, the church will move whenever culture moves. But if our convictions are rooted in Scripture, shaped by sound theology, exercised with wisdom, tempered by humility, and expressed through the character of Christ, then we can move forward without fearing truth or necessary change.