I think well-meaning Christians imply that "we shouldn't overemphasizes doctrine" because "it causes division" and "that's wrong" -- and in the back of their minds they are mistakenly thinking of the following passage:
"I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. For your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, but I want you to be wise as to what is good and innocent as to what is evil. The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you." (Romans 16:17-20)
It is not sinful nor divisive to promote good doctrine, else Paul would have been scripture's biggest hypocrite: Romans is just that, a booklet of systematic theology! Read carefully -- "those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught." Paul isn't saying that we should "avoid doctrinal disputes" -- he is saying we should avoid those who dispute good doctrine! Logically, then, should we "not care much about doctrine," or rather, does this mean we should care even more about understanding everything the Bible teaches? In light of Romans 16:17, I would strongly suggest the latter; how can you avoid bad doctrine if you don't know what good doctrine is?
In context, the Romans had already been taught good doctrine -- "how much" wasn't even the issue! Yet in this age, many professing to be Christians care more about "unity" and "not offending" and "not judging" and it is considered being too "legalistic" or "pharisaic" for anyone to suggest that we ought to know -- and promote -- the finer points of scripture. It is now disregarded that despite the fact God Himself found it neccessary to inspire 66 books worth of history, instruction and doctrine, people are saying much of it isn't "important" because it doesn't pertain to salvation. (I would also disagree with that.)
It becomes an incredibly foolish kind of thinking ...
Yes, too much attention to doctrine causes division -- but it is not a "wrong" division. Those who promote bad doctrine also divide, for they confuse and lure true believers away from others for a time. This is why the Romans (and we) are told to avoid them that are "contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught." Consider this: how can truth divide except what is true from what is false? Did Christ Himself not say He came not to bring "peace, but a sword"?
It is my powerful advice to many of you, before you say to any particularily theologically minded person, "that's nice but it's not important" or "it's not worth being divided over" to consider what the Bible has to say about the matter, first.
Historical tidbit: It wasn't actually John Calvin who burned Servetus for denouncing the Trinity, as many like to say ... But I suggest that if he had in fact done so, he wouldn't have been incredibly unjustified ...
I fear we've lowered our standards greatly these days, as to what a "Christian" actually is.
"I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. For your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, but I want you to be wise as to what is good and innocent as to what is evil. The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you." (Romans 16:17-20)
It is not sinful nor divisive to promote good doctrine, else Paul would have been scripture's biggest hypocrite: Romans is just that, a booklet of systematic theology! Read carefully -- "those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught." Paul isn't saying that we should "avoid doctrinal disputes" -- he is saying we should avoid those who dispute good doctrine! Logically, then, should we "not care much about doctrine," or rather, does this mean we should care even more about understanding everything the Bible teaches? In light of Romans 16:17, I would strongly suggest the latter; how can you avoid bad doctrine if you don't know what good doctrine is?
In context, the Romans had already been taught good doctrine -- "how much" wasn't even the issue! Yet in this age, many professing to be Christians care more about "unity" and "not offending" and "not judging" and it is considered being too "legalistic" or "pharisaic" for anyone to suggest that we ought to know -- and promote -- the finer points of scripture. It is now disregarded that despite the fact God Himself found it neccessary to inspire 66 books worth of history, instruction and doctrine, people are saying much of it isn't "important" because it doesn't pertain to salvation. (I would also disagree with that.)
It becomes an incredibly foolish kind of thinking ...
Yes, too much attention to doctrine causes division -- but it is not a "wrong" division. Those who promote bad doctrine also divide, for they confuse and lure true believers away from others for a time. This is why the Romans (and we) are told to avoid them that are "contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught." Consider this: how can truth divide except what is true from what is false? Did Christ Himself not say He came not to bring "peace, but a sword"?
It is my powerful advice to many of you, before you say to any particularily theologically minded person, "that's nice but it's not important" or "it's not worth being divided over" to consider what the Bible has to say about the matter, first.
Historical tidbit: It wasn't actually John Calvin who burned Servetus for denouncing the Trinity, as many like to say ... But I suggest that if he had in fact done so, he wouldn't have been incredibly unjustified ...
I fear we've lowered our standards greatly these days, as to what a "Christian" actually is.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment