Posted on 04/17/2008 11:43:27 AM PDT by alpha-8-25-02
By Sam Crabtree July 6, 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is of course a trick question, though not tricky. Paul's instructions are plain that we are to pursue both unity and doctrine. Further, pursuing both at the same time will be one indication that growth is occurring. "...till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men..." (Eph 4:13-14).
Some see doctrine as divisive, discordant, and disagreeable. Others see the avoidance of doctrinal clarity as the slippery slope to the church's undoing. So how can Christians grow in unity without compromising the church's foundations for unity, and yet simultaneously press for clarity in doctrine without becoming quarrelsome?
One way is by contending in love; that is, standing for truth in the face of error. "...but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head - Christ..." (Eph 4:15). People who grow in grace and in the knowledge of Christ are the same ones becoming increasingly ready apologists for God's truth in order to graciously benefit God's people, balancing courageous firmness with tender love. One need not be a busybody nor a burdensome crank in order to correct someone for their sake. This is what Paul did in corresponding with the Galatians and Ephesians. He contended, but without being contentious. He fought the canker of seductive deception but not cantankerously. His was an attitude of pastoral contention, battling for doctrinal essentials but for the sake of the people in beholding God's glory. There is a holy tenacity that defends truth, even at great personal risk.
Such contending for truth is pivotal if the aim of evangelism and missions is worship. Worship presupposes knowledge. To worship God in truth is to approach him on the basis of his self-disclosure. To get a wrong answer to the question "What is God like?" is to go down a path of ignorance or superstition or idolatry. Because "deficient worship displeases God" [J.I. Packer, Knowing Christianity, p. 142], worship must be rigorously informed by revelation. "Untruth pollutes and disqualifies worship" [Bruce Leafblad, in a seminar on worship renewal at the 1999 BGC annual meeting]. There will be little unity in corporate worship if we sweep away precision in understanding just which God it is we are worshipping.
"The increasing abandonment of truth and moral absolutes in our culture, as militant diversity threatens all firm conviction, has dramatically influenced the evangelical mindset. The political spin doctors who specialize in deflecting attention away from truth onto feelings and relationships and styles have their counterpart in the evangelical tendency to avoid doctrinal disputes by casting issues in terms of demeanor and method rather than truth. Serious disagreements are covered over, while vague language and pragmatic concerns preserve hollow unity at the expense of theological substance and Biblical clarity and power." (John Piper, God's Passion for His Glory, p.24)
The way to keep the second commandment (love your neighbor as yourself) is not by abandoning the first commandment (love God without reserve). Clarity on important things (i.e., God) is a means to unity. People who cherish the same truths find themselves unified, seemingly without effort. That's why we throw ourselves into things like Sunday School, small group Bible study, Fighter Verse scripture memory, courses offered as part of The Bethlehem Institute, biblical preaching, and rigorous personal Bible meditation - for unity and doctrine... and maturity.
Desiring truth and love with you,
Sam Crabtree
Executive Pastor, Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis
>> study-action-piety <<
Ah, the three-legged stool.
Huh? You don't see God and Christ according to what the Bible teaches? That doesn't make any sense.
Charismatic?
"what the Bible teaches" implies an objective revealed source.
Charismatic? No, but "evangelical" has lost it's meaning - perhaps my training history would be more indicative: Talbot Seminary and John MacArthur were my teachers.
“It’s rather like being awoken by the Jehovah Witnesses early on a Saturday morning and being unable to get them off your property until well into Sunday afternoon, long after The Rugby has kicked off.”
Daddy always told the JWs that we were nudists and if they’d like to disrobe they could come in.
Why is it "perfectly OK" to do something Christ doesn't intend us to do? What's "perfect" about that?
> Why is it “perfectly OK” to do something Christ doesn’t intend us to do? What’s “perfect” about that?
That’s easy. We are told to “Judge righteous judgment”, and that is perfectly OK to do. Indeed, it is expected whenever it is necessary so to do.
Christ’s intention, however, is for all His servants to serve Him — even doctrine-waving bigots. If doctrine-waving bigots were instead serving Him in the manner He intends, then it would be unnecessary for His other Servants to “judge righteous judgment” upon them.
You appear to be saying it's okay for you to be judgmental but not for others with whom you disagree.
That's not a new approach, but longevity doesn't make it any more reasonable.
What is a "doctrine-waving bigot?" Why the word "bigot?"
I agree. I think a lot of people here are assuming the doctrines in question must be things like election, limited atonement, etc. In many churches, the congregants cannot even agree that Christ was bodily resurrected. I personally cannot worship in a church that cannot state that it believes in Christ's (bodily)resurrection and that His death was for the remission of sins.
If people want to attend the "Church of Whatever" they are free to do so. But one must be on guard for the signs that one's church is going down that road.
> What is a “doctrine-waving bigot?” Why the word “bigot?”
You have surely seen “doctrine-waving bigots” before, so the concept is hardly new. However, on the assumption that your questions are in earnest, I’ll ping you the next time I encounter one. Deal?
Nope, never saw one.
And don't call me Shirley.
However, on the assumption that your questions are in earnest, I'll ping you the next time I encounter one. Deal?
Deal.
If you don’t have doctrine, you don’t really have unity.
With out doctrine you have at best a social club that meets on Sunday.
I, too, try to avoid those threads, although I am not always successful. I really don’t see shouting and name calling to be good evangelistic or apologetic tools.
I’d say that there are a dozen or fewer RCs on FR that can be counted on to be unpleasant. A few I have had very good posting relationships with (although I’ve noticed that they avoid those threads as well.)
Let us learn from each other.
Not at all
Indeed Doctrine divides, and this is good.
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
The real key is to begin to study and understand the meaning of the Greek word PISTIS and how it is used in the New Testament.
Orthodox doctrine handed down to the church is called PISTIS in 2Peter 1:1 and in Jude 1:3, giving the justification for translating PISTIS in some cases as ‘doctrine’.
In the Koine Greek, there are three meanings of PISTIS.
1) as an attribute, or what causes faith, it is translated as reliability or faithfulness.
2) As a non-meritorious system of perception, which emphasizes the object of faith, such as Christ in salvation, it is translated as “faith”.
3) It also means that which is believed, the content of faith, the body of belief, and is so translated as “doctrine”. It is used for doctrine in 1Tim 4:6 and possibly in Gal 2:20 and Hebrews 11:1.
In Eph 4:4-6
(4) There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
(5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
(6) One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Eph 3:17
Eph 3:16-19
(16) That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;
(17) That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith (PISTIS also known as ‘doctrine’); that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,
(18) May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;
(19) And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God.
All faith is provided to us from God.
In Romans 10:17 we see that faith comes from Him by hearing and hearing by the Word.
Rom 10:17
(17) So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
The “Word” is an interesting word study in itself. Known in the Hebrew Targums as MEMRA it is specifically referenced in John 1:1 to a Jewish audience which was well cognizant of the MEMRA in Jewish tradition, discerned from the Shechinah or direct presence of the Lord. Whereas we today quickly might identify the Word with the second person of the God head, it also reveals a great deal to us about the discernment of different persons in the Godhead and how they relate to one another, still one God but revealed in three persons so that we might understand Him.
I have specifically left the relationships between faith, the Word, Christ, and the heart out of these conclusions, because in order to understand them, they need to first come from being in fellowship with God through faith in Christ, so that they may be introduced to the reader’s spirit by the Holy Spirit, then worked upon in the soul and mind through faith in Him, then processed into the heart again by the Holy Spirit, then applicable for works by the believer while walking through faith in Him.
There is only one faith from Him, though each believer given some according to His measure. Where arguments arise, it is not due to differing faiths, but by one or both thinking processes not being from Him or missing the mark of what He provides.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.