Ecclesiology

The Importance of Bible Doctrine

Lesson XXVI

May 24, 2007

A reply to a question last week

(Written, September 1992)

In re-reading a copy of Eternity, March 1974, we found an Editorial written by Bernard Ramm entitled: “Welcome Green-Grass-Evangelicals.” Mr. Ramm describes this ‘new-breed’ under eight headings of which we quote only in part. “Green-Grass Evangelicals are not interested in doctrinal questions like ‘eternal security’. To them such issues are too academic.” As it will be our purpose to deal with each point in separate articles, we will not quote the other seven points here.

It was interesting to find a letter to the Editor in the May edition of Eternity commenting on the editorial. The letter states: “Ramm’s editorial is a word-portrait of the late Harry Emerson Fosdick.” For those who may not remember, Mr. Fosdick was a leading modernist. It is evident that when the aforementioned editorial was written; this new class of Evangelicals was but coming into blossom. Now they are in full bloom. At this time we cannot call them ‘modernists’ but in our opinion, they are well on their way to becoming ‘modernists’ or as an earlier generation called their kin, ‘moderates’.

Our parents came out of the dead orthodoxy of denominations, which had departed from their evangelical roots. And in our opinion, these words, describing ‘Green Grass Evangelicals’, describe those who are moving in the direction of others who, historically, departed from true evangelicalism. “Green Grass Evangelicals are not interested in doctrinal questions ….” We were not raised in such an atmosphere. We now realize that our parents and those in their circle of fellowship were very doctrinally conscious.

We quote the following: “The laity over thirty years ago was more doctrinally conscious and theologically literate than it is today. It seems every sermon must address some personal or family need. The pulpit has become a counseling tool. We are told to make the message light in order to sustain interest.”

Before the arrival of these new evangelicals, the pulpit was the place where one proclaimed the creed. It was the place where we were to declare what we believed and why we believed it. But what has happened? The pulpit has become the place for ‘quiet talks’ and ‘dialogue’. And as a result, we are seeing few preachers being produced with any punch! And the needs of the people are not being met. If our new evangelicals are not interested in doctrine, such as ‘eternal security’, the next step will be to NOT BE INTERESTED in doctrine at all. Leave out one major doctrine and it becomes a natural process to depart from all.

Malcolm Muggeridge has been credited with having said of the denomination to which he had belonged, “They reached the point where they agreed on almost everything because they believed almost nothing.”

Carl F. Henry wrote: “Because the church stopped preaching Bible doctrine it lost its influence for good in people’s lives.”

We have observed that Christians who are not interested in ALL the major doctrines of Scripture, soon become careless as to the way they live.

As long as we can remember, preachers and people have complained about doctrine. Here we are not referring to the word ‘doctrine’ in its ordinary sense of ‘teaching’ but rather to the extra-ordinary sense of ‘specific teachings’. It has always been the trick of the Enemy to tell saints that doctrine is not important. We recall being with a preacher who began his sermon by introducing himself as one “who did not preach doctrine”. That was strange to these ears, for we had been taught that doctrine is like the bones in one’s body. Bones give shape to one’s flesh. Without them we are but jellyfish. And we apply that to the condition of many Christians today.

We were delighted to find the following in a 1923 sermon preached by Rev. M. V. Brown:

We are told we ought to preach the gospel and not bother about doctrine. But we answer: there is such a thing as ‘sound doctrine’ and we wonder in some cases if the approach to the heart does not come through the mind. We are being told that doctrine is dead that the age needs something living and practical. It is true men do not want what God commands. What does God think needful for us? This is the question. Whatever that is, it must be our first consideration. Does He not require that we preach and teach doctrine?

Now if we have read the Bible correctly, we are instructed to study the Scriptures. God requires that we LEARN doctrine. God requires that we KNOW doctrine and that for our own good. Paul's Christianity was not only a life but a doctrine and obviously the doctrine came first.

Paul certainly was not indifferent to doctrine, for doctrine and doing go along together. In 2 Timothy 3:10 Paul writes: “Thou has fully known my doctrine, my manner of life...” Notice the order. It was the doctrine that developed his way of life. The doctrine produced the doing. It was not the doing that produced the doctrine.

2 Timothy 3:10

(10) But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,

Proverbs 23:7

(7) For as he thinketh in his heart, so [is] he: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart [is] not with thee.

“As a man thinketh in his heart so is he” for out of the heart proceedeth good or evil.

See also 1 Timothy 3:10; 1 Timothy 4:1, 6, 13, 16; 1 Timothy 5:17; 1 Timothy 6:1-3; 2 Timothy 3:10, 16 and 2 Timothy 4:2-4.

1 Timothy 3:10

(10) And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being [found] blameless.

1 Timothy 4:1, 6, 13, 16

(1) Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

(6) If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.

(13) Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.

(16) Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

1 Timothy 5:17

(17) Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

1 Timothy 6:1-3

(1) Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and [his] doctrine be not blasphemed.

(2) And they that have believing masters, let them not despise [them], because they are brethren; but rather do [them] service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort

(3) If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, [even] the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

2 Timothy 3:10, 16

(10) But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,

(16) All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Timothy 4:2-4

(2) Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

(3) For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

(4) And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

In the book of Galatians, Paul was very intolerant towards certain men because the message they proclaimed was false doctrine. As the years have gone by, we have become more thankful for those who taught us to cherish, study and believe sound doctrine. By experience we have learned that doctrines about which there have been the greatest conflicts, have most often proven to be the most important ones.

From where stems this departure from the love of doctrine? And into what dangers does it lead?

First it leads to a general lack of understanding and ability to interpret many Scriptures a-right. And when the Scriptures are not understood the devil is able to steal away the seed (Matthew 13). When Scriptures are misinterpreted then they are wrongly applied and a chain reaction takes place which becomes destructive and not edifying. From our earliest days we were taught that it was of utmost importance to “rightly divide the Word of truth.”

2 Timothy 2:15

(15) Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Second Timothy 2:15 was a first for memorization. To not rightly divide the Word of Truth, as a result of diligent study, would be a cause for shame at the judgment seat of Christ.

Walter Smith often said: “The believer should live only to discover those things that are written.” All this was indelibly printed upon us by every teacher we had the privilege of hearing. It was considered to be the basis for understanding the Scriptures of truth.

The people among whom we lived and moved, really loved the Lord Jesus. They stood up and out in the community. They were marked by their separated Christian testimony. And they had something about them that was outstanding then, and in our memory stands out now. THEY HAD A GREAT LOVE FOR THE SCRIPTURES. They dared to teach Bible doctrine. They did not refrain from discussion on doctrinal issues. They insisted on Bible study that involved sound doctrine. Bible teaching and Bible doctrine had priority. Everything else was only secondary. No gathering was complete without something from the Bible followed by prayer.

Our kin folk were Pentecostal people tied to the Scriptures. Their Pentecostal experience in no way diminished their love for the Bible. As we see it clearly now, their experience enhanced their desire for the Word of God. But what has happened? What IS happening? The generation of whom we write is gone. And our generation and those following do not seem to have the intense desire for the Word that our fathers had.

It was not until the early 1940's that we personally had to face “the more enlightened men”, who were bold in telling us that what we had learned was “wrongly dividing the word of truth”. However, throughout the years, we have observed that these men tried to follow a path which we can best describe as NO DIVISION of truth. And the result has brought confusion, and within the Churches, almost a total ignorance and rejection of doctrinal teaching. It was because of “rightly dividing the Word of truth”, we were able to establish in our heart, a very important fact:

THERE IS BUT ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE, even though there may be many applications of Scripture.

But we must never confuse “application” with “interpretation.”

This breaking-away-from the importance of “rightly dividing the Word” was soon to be followed by a move of the Spirit (?) now identified as the “charismatic movement.” But what has happened? A charismatic leader said to me, “The charismatic movement is dead”. BUT WHY?

We noticed first of all, that people who had seemed to be sound in faith, suddenly no longer wanted to hear sound doctrine. They were willing to forget all they had heard because the Bible, the Word of God, had lost its appeal and grip on them. When before, WHAT was believed meant something, now it mattered not! So we have had to conclude that a move of the Spirit, so called, that does not exalt the Bible is not a move of the Spirit. For all that is spiritual must be Scriptural. The Spirit leads into the Word of God.

Paul warns in 1 Corinthians 14:37, “If any man is a prophet or if he is spiritual let him acknowledge that the things I write are the commandments of the Lord.”

You test spirituality by one’s attitude toward Scripture and especially the letters of Paul.

1 Corinthians 14:37

(37) If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

From the beginning we were taught to see the difference, the division, to divide the Scriptures pertaining to “Israel” and “The Church”. Today it is at this point and concerning this matter the greatest confusion reigns in the Church of the present generation. And because this division has not been clearly taught, the door has been opened for the entrance of many current heresies. We were taught to rightly divide the Word relative to the “Sabbath” and “The Lord's Day”, the former belonging to Israel, the latter belonging to the Church; the former being the last day of the week, the latter always the first day of the week. “Sabbath” was kept by Israel. The Church is not to be troubled about new moons and Sabbaths.

Colossians 2:16

(16) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]:

Romans. 11:6

(6) And if by grace, then [is it] no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if [it be] of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

We were taught to divide between “law” and “grace” and between “works” and “grace”. If it is of works it is not of grace (Romans. 11:6). Grace and works do not mix. Today most evangelicals are not clear on this issue because they continue to appeal to the Sermon on the Mount as the book for Christian living. We were also instructed to see the difference between our STANDING and our STATE as believers. Our STANDING, being a position, is never attained and never changes; our STATE being one which can change daily. And it was these two divisions that brought to the fore the debates on “eternal security”.

During the days of our parents’ generation and at the beginning of our ministry, the majority of Pentecostal people did not believe in nor would they accept “eternal security”. This damnable doctrine was left with the Brethren, the Baptists the Presbyterians, to name a few. One of the reasons the early Pentecostals did not accept the doctrine of eternal security was the fact that many of the original leaders of the movement came out of Methodist, Holiness Movement, and like denominations, which did not embrace this doctrine.

Thus where we were born and raised, we were considered to be speckled birds because we were both Pentecostal and eternal security, a mixture almost unheard of by many of the Denominations. And in our opinion, it was because of these two doctrines our circle of fellowship was unique.

When we entered the ministry in the late 1930's the lines of battle were clearly drawn between those who believed “eternal security” and those who did not. At that time, one must needs commit oneself on the issue before being allowed to preach in the district. As Brother Hollands said to a neighbor, “There are only two kinds of Christians, those who have eternal life and don't know it and those of us who have it and know it.”

Our first preaching experience away from home was in a Church where the congregation was divided on this issue. Those who had recently accepted the doctrine of eternal security welcomed us with open arms but those who had not were suspicious of us. In fact, we were told that some of the dear aged ladies hated our preaching but they would not miss the meetings lest they would miss the Rapture! It was there I began to see how important doctrine really is.

A few years later a dear soul, raised on this ‘fall-away-doctrine’ took her own life. She drove herself mad because she could not see that she had full salvation in Christ. Once again we were caused to see the importance not only of the doctrine but of proclaiming it. So through the years many experiences have taught us the value of sound doctrine. One man told us that he was in a certain Church where one testified and thanked the Lord that he had been saved all day. The person had day-at-a-time security!

We sat with a young woman after we had conducted her mother's funeral who told us the following story. She had been raised in a Church, where every Sunday she was “dangled over Hell”, if she didn't walk a separated life acceptable to her pastor. She said, “I finally decided that I could never make it to Heaven, and if I were going to go to Hell anyway, I might as well try and enjoy the journey.” She left the Church, believing she was no longer saved, and in that state of mind later married an unsaved man. She then added, “My life has been Hell.” She went on to say, “At the time I married, I thought I was unsaved because I was told and taught such.” But then, with tears she added, “But through the years the Lord has never left me.” And her question was this, “Am I all to blame for my ruined life or do the preachers bare some of the blame?” I turned to James 3:1. “Be not many teachers for ye shall receive the greater condemnation.” That is the answer to her question.

James 3: 1

(1) My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

It is a serious matter to teach wrong doctrine.

We could write of many more experiences, but the point of this writing is this. To have a class of young Evangelical preachers NOT INTERESTED in doctrine, such as Eternal Security, alarms us. Do they not realize what they will do to people? Do they not realize what judgment they will bring upon themselves? As for myself, having had to face the issue of the doctrine of eternal security from the beginning of my ministry, it has given me some conviction in my preaching.

In this paper we have not endeavored to present a case for eternal security nor any other doctrine. We have simply used these matters to try to illustrate that one who claims to be evangelical and is not interested in doctrine will soon cease being evangelical.