December 1998

Hypothetical
Situations
By Patrick Donahue

Mt 22:23-33 records the case of the Sadducees using a hypothetical situation to try to prove their incorrect theory that there was no resurrection. Their supposed case was of a woman who had had seven different husbands (due to the death of the first six) in this life. Their question in verse 28 was, "in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven?" They reasoned that since she couldn't be the wife of all seven in the afterlife, therefore there must not be an afterlife. Of course, Jesus answered the question by saying that there are no marriages in heaven, and that there is a resurrection.

The Sadducees' "difficult case" didn't prove anything did it? Only the scriptures prove doctrine (II Tim 3:16). Hard cases are nothing more than hard cases, they do not change the words of the Bible. In this case, even though the hypothetical was presented, the words of God in Ex 3:6 still read, "I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," and so Jesus quoted this verse to prove that there is a resurrection.

In spite of this bad example, many people (including Christians) today will use hypothetical situations to try to prove their false doctrines. Some ask, "what if a limb falls on a man, and kills him, on the way to the baptistry?" in order to prop up their false doctrine that one does not need to be baptized in order to be saved. This "hard" situation proves nothing. It does not change the words of Mark 16:16, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." These words teach conclusively that one must be baptized to be saved. Just as bad, are Christians who understand correctly what Mark 16:16 is teaching, but when presented with this "hard hypothetical," they bend and say that "Jesus might save someone who dies on the way to the baptistry." Either Mark 16:16 is teaching the necessity of baptism, or it is not! If it is (and it is), then these Christians are basically saying that Jesus said that one must be baptized to be saved, but that he might have lied about it!

Many Christians say that they agree with the Bible that a Christian must repent of (Acts 8:22), and confess (I Jn 1:9) his sins in order to be forgiven of his sins, but they are evidently only paying lip service to these verses, because they will bring up a hypothetical to try to prove that a Christian doesn't have to turn from his sins under some circumstances (ignorance and/or weakness). They ask, "what about the Christian who is driving one mile an hour above the speed limit, and doesn't know it? Will he be lost if he dies?" The questioner doesn't really want to know the Bible answer to this question; that is not why he is asking. What he is doing is trying to present a sympathetic case to try to get someone else to agree with his false theory that sins of ignorance are automatically taken care of, without repentance and confession. When someone asks me, "what about the Christian who ignorantly drives over the speed limit," I ask them, "is it a sin for a person to drive over the speed limit?" They respond, "yes." I then ask them, "what are the wages of sin according Rom 6:23?" They quickly see the Bible answer to their original question. Whether they completely accept it or not, is up to them. Of course, their main problem is in trying to use hypothetical situations instead of the scriptures to prove a doctrine. You can be sure that if they had a verse that proved their doctrine, they wouldn't be using a hypothetical to try to prove it.

On the subject of marriage, divorce, and remarriage, many Christians use the hard case of a husband beating his wife to teach that it is scriptural to divorce and/or separate for a reason other than fornication as long as remarriage does not follow. Of course, Mt 5:32 and I Cor 7:10 teach that this position is patently false. Have you ever noticed that the words of these two verses still read the same even after someone tells you the very sympathetic story of a wife being beaten? Certainly Jesus feels for a woman in such a terrible situation (and so should we), but he gave one, and only one exception (fornication) to his 'no divorce' law (Mt 5:32, 19:9).

Can we not see that hypothetical situations, as difficult as they may be, do not prove anything? Only revelation from God (scripture) proves anything (Acts 18:28). Let yourself be influenced by scriptures and not by hypotheticals. In addition, let all people everywhere, non-Christians and Christians alike, cease using these hypothetical situations in an attempt to prove religious positions. If you have a verse that proves your point, then use it! If you don't have a verse, then back off of your point, and quit teaching what cannot be proven by God's word.

[Editor’s Note: Thanks to Pat Donahue for the article! He may be reached at:Pat.Donahue@MSFC.NASA.GOV, 4607 Old Railroad Bed Road, Harvest, AL 35749, (256) 721-0726.]

Email the Editor at markjward@yahoo.com