You are reading in "Odds and Ends" of the appendix to the free, global online book, Fellowship With God in the Sixth Path. Navigation at the top and bottom of each page, allows you to open the table of contents, visit the home page, ask questions or share your story.
"7 But they worship me in vain, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men... 9 you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. 13 making void the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down. You do many things like this" (Mark 7:7,9,13).
The context is Mark 7:1-13. In verse seven Jesus said that the Pharisees had invented commandments for the people and taught them as doctrines (of God). They replaced God's doctrine with their doctrine (v 9, 13) and passed their man-made doctrines down from generation to generation (v 13).
God is speaking against doctrines made by man, but proclaimed to be doctrines of God.
Are there doctrines of man, disguised as doctrines of God, which are in our seminaries and churches that have been passed down from generation to generation? That is the focus of this page. Please prayerfully consider the scriptures I am about to present to you.
1) Three Warnings Against Manipulation
- "Every word of God is flawless. He is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Don't you add to his words, lest he reprove you, and you be found a liar" (Proverbs 30:5-6).
- "learn not to think beyond the things which are written" (1 Corinthians 4:6, micro-subchapter 1.5h2).
- "... but I will look to this man, even to he who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at my word" (Isaiah 66:2).
We should not add to God's words by proclaiming doctrine that scripture doesn't proclaim, whether the addition comes through falsifying scripture, misinterpreting scripture or any other means (Proverbs 30:5-60). We should not think our way into a believing a doctrine which is not written in scripture (1 Corinthians 4:6, 3:20). We are to respond to God's word as if it is God's word. The words of scripture are to be respected, with awestruck reverence. We are to tremble at His words (Isaiah 66:2). They are Holy!
2) Cultish Behavior
The question to ask when we hear a doctrine is:
Where does it say that?
If you ask a seminary trained minister this question and the minister will not point you to a specific scripture, like Galatians 3:29, Genesis 13:14-16, etc. you may be witnessing cult behavior. They can be quite clever. But when you see a refusal by a professional teacher of scripture to prove his teaching from a specific scripture, you may be seeing a doctrinal bias that is setting aside the scripture in favor of the minister's man-made doctrine... cult behavior.
3) Contradictions in the Bible?
Since there are more truths in the scripture which are expressly stated than I will ever be able to hear, do and be... How much time should I spend attempting to logically deduce truths, which may or may not be correct?
When I attempt to make logical deductions from scripture I am thinking "beyond the things which are written". My deductions were not "written". Doctrines deduced by human reasoning from a particular scripture, seem to always contradict an express statement of some other scripture.
As I read scripture in my younger days, I continually saw contradictions. I thought that these contradictions were contradictions between one scripture and another scripture. But I eventually realized that they were contradictions between scripture and the deductions from scripture made by myself and my teachers. When I limited my doctrines to the exact statements of scripture, my difficulty with contradictions as I read the Bible disappeared.
At this point, you may think that you are smart enough to do what I could not... That you can logically deduce a truth from scripture which was not expressly stated. Many have a sharper mind than God has chosen to give me. But God has said:
"The Lord knows the reasoning of the wise, that it is worthless" (1 Corinthians 3:20).
Reader, please understand this: I understand the power of logic. Many years ago I studied logic at the University of Texas at Austin. My professor of symbolic logic asked me to be his assistant, because of my near perfect scores. This was quite a complement since I was only an undergrad.
But when we violate the scriptural admonition to not "think beyond the things which are written" (micro-subchapter 1.5h2) we end up committing logical fallacy which results in contradiction with scripture. I know this because I committed logical fallacy with scripture for decades. I was looking for confirmation of my beliefs instead of prayerfully reading and submitting to the words of scripture while in intimate spiritual interaction with God, the author of scripture (subchapter 1.1). I wanted to solve the great puzzles and controversies of the Bible. But God wanted me do hear, be and do what He had clearly stated.
In John 15:5, Jesus said "apart from me you can do nothing". Should Jesus help me to "think beyond the things which are written" when God's word has instructed me to "learn not think beyond the things which are written"?
Doctrines deduced by human reasoning from a particular scripture, seem to always contradict an express statement of some other scripture.
4) Express Statement of Scripture
I must repeat my last statement:
Doctrines deduced by human reasoning from a particular scripture, seem to always contradict an express statement of some other scripture.
I am not speaking against an exact paraphrase of scripture. I am repudiating the deduction of new truths from scripture which are not an express statement of scripture.
I am speaking against thinking philosophically.
Instead of thinking philosophically, we should think scripturally.
The section above titled "Three Warnings Against Manipulation" cited three scriptures which told us:
- Tremble at God's word,
- Don't add to God's written word.
- Don't think beyond God's written word.
In other words;
Exact statements of scripture should be in our minds rather than theological generalizations.
5) Scripture is inerrant.
Scripture is inerrant. Theological systems are not. Man-made doctrinal generalizations are not. When much time is spent studying a Theological system, and the student accepts its tenants, the mind tends to absorb its message and interpret scripture in a way that is consistent with the system. I have seen this repeatedly in myself and others. So, the inerrant scripture is often misinterpreted because of the corruption in the system which as been accepted.
6) Scripture Explains How to Understand Scripture
Understanding of scripture is a gift from God to converts with soft hearts and a willingness to obey, who receive this understanding by zealously seeking it through prayerful meditation on scripture.
Click here to read subchapter 1.5 titled, "Conditions for Understanding the Word". You will see that scripture tells us exactly what to do so that we may receive understanding of scripture.
Click here to learn how to prayerfully meditate on scripture in subchapter 1.1 titled, "Learning to Read: Five Paths". Scripture will always be difficult for you if you don't prayerfully meditate on scripture.
7) Burden of Proof
What burden of proof is necessary to declare that a particular interpretation of scripture is a doctrine of God?
I will explain using the burden of proof required in the court systems of my country. In the USA, the burden of proof for a civil lawsuit is a preponderance of the evidence (51%). So, the jury must side with the plaintiff if it is more likely than not that the defendant did the wrong which caused the damage. In a criminal case, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. So, to convict the accused, there must be a great likelihood that the accused committed the crime. In other words, a likelihood of maybe 95% or more is necessary for conviction.
Which of these two burdens of proof should an interpretation of scripture surpass, before that interpretation may be viewed as a doctrine of God? Or... should interpretation of scripture be subject to a higher standard like, clear and obvious.
Three Burdens of Proof:
- Preponderance of Evidence (51%)
- Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (95%)
- Clear and Obvious (100%)*
* By 100%, I mean... as close to 100% as a human can get.
What burden of proof is necessary to declare that a particular interpretation of scripture is a doctrine of God?
Imagine that you have died and stand before God in the judgement. What do you suppose that God's standard will be?
The preponderance standard, more likely than not, is just a little better than a coin toss. Is that the standard we should use to determine that a doctrine is a doctrine of God? If yes, then, if it is my opinion that it is more likely than not that God intended to say X, then I could proclaim X to be a doctrine of God. Under the preponderance standard, some would say yes, others would say no. With this standard, it seems like men could declare many doctrines to be doctrines of God that are not doctrines of God. Even if we are able to correctly quantify the odds, we will still by wrong almost 50% of the time.
Do you believe that God intended to give man this much latitude with His Holy perfect word? I think not. Every church would have different doctrines... and call them doctrines of God. The doctrines of one church would contradict the doctrines of other churches. I suspect that the over 50% standard is good enough for some. But I suspect that God will say that this standard is careless and presumptuous.
How about the 95% standard? Does scripture say that it is ok for 5% of our doctrines to be wrong... and to declare those incorrect doctrines to be doctrines of God? 95% is much better than 51%. But, is this the standard of God presented by scripture for declaring a doctrine to be a doctrine of God? Continue reading... and you shall see.
Let's take one version of the doctrine of original sin as a case in point. I was taught that all people were born guilty of the original sin... guilty of the sin of Adam... born spiritually dead, deserving damnation.
So, I inquired as to which scripture was the authority for this doctrine of original sin. I was told Psalm 51. I was shocked. I said "Wow... that is really going out on a limb." Here are the words of David from Psalm 51:
- "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me' (Psalm 51:5).
What do you think? What are the odds that Psalm 51:5 means that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation?
If you think that there is an 95% chance, is that enough to declare the doctrine of original sin, as it was explained to me, to be a doctrine of God? Remember, we are using this doctrine as a example, to understand the BURDEN OF PROOF for declaring a doctrine to be a doctrine of God.
I'll repeat the passage:
- "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me' (Psalm 51:5).
What are the odds that Psalm 51:5 means that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation? Does God punish us for another person's sin?
I am going to say something that may startle you. What I am about to say comes from what I learned in my work as I negotiated the wording of legal documents, enforced the wording in contracts, testified about the wording in agreements and litigated the wording in agreements.
Sometimes I would spend hours working with an attorney to come up with precise wording in a document. We would examine the words in light of state and federal law, to be sure that the words clearly and obviously represented the agreement of the parties and accomplished the intended objectives. I have testified in federal, state, civil and criminal courts. So, I have seen the importance of understanding the true meaning of the words in contracts and laws. Wishful thinking does not help when we testify before the judge. The actual meaning of the words is the issue.
I'll repeat the passage again:
- "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me' (Psalm 51:5).
What do you think? What are the odds that Psalm 51:5 means that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation?
Do you see a clear statement of this doctrine or is there ambiguity?
Some might say that they are 95% sure that Psalm 51:5 says that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation. Is 95% the burden of proof?
If... and I say IF you can accurately estimate the odds to be 95%, which you can't, then you will be wrong 5% of the time. When you "stand before judgement seat of Christ" to give account of yourself (Romans 14:10-12), will you say to Him:
"I thought that this doctrine was true, and You didn't exactly say it but You came close... so I taught that the doctrine was true and that You said it in scripture, even though it wasn't absolutely clear"?
Did God give us scripture so we could use it to discover things that God didn't intend to reveal? No. God gave us scripture to tell us what to do and be. He didn't give us scripture to provide a basis for speculations.
I'll repeat the passage again:
- "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me' (Psalm 51:5).
What do you think? What are the odds that MEN SHOULD PROCLAIM that Psalm 51:5 proves that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation?
There is a ZERO percent chance that men should proclaim that doctrine from Psalm 51:5. That's right... zero. Even if one is 95% certain, man doesn't have the right to say... "It says X and probably proves Y, therefore I can declare Y to be a doctrine of God. We simply don't have the right. Scripture explicitly instructs us to not assume:
- "But if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he doesn't yet know as he ought to know" (1 Corinthians 8:2, micro-subchapter 1.5h3).
I'll repeat the passage again:
- "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me' (Psalm 51:5).
Where do you see the phrase "guilty of Adam's sin"? Where do you see the phrase "spiritually dead"? Where do you see the phrase "deserving damnation"? You don't see those phrases because those phrases are not there.
What we do see in the passage is... a conception and development of a child occurred "in sin" and "in iniquity". Perhaps David's parents conceived the child in connection with idol worship. We are not told. Possibly David's mother was an unbeliever. And we do know that everything an unbeliever does is sin, for Romans 14:23 says:
"whatever is not of faith is sin"
But, Psalm 51:5 is supposed to be the proof that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation... supposedly proof that we must pay the penalty of another person's sin.
Psalm 51:5 does not say that all men pay the penalty of another man's sin. Even if it is true that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation, this scripture doesn't prove it. The scripture simply doesn't say it.
For a scripture to prove that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation, the scripture must actually say that we are born guilty of Adam's sin, spiritually dead, deserving damnation.
The burden of proof to prove a doctrine of God is:
The doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God.
Do you remember the three warnings against manipulation?
- "Every word of God is flawless. He is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Don't you add to his words, lest he reprove you, and you be found a liar" (Proverbs 30:5-6).
- "learn not to think beyond the things which are written" (1 Corinthians 4:6).
- "... but I will look to this man, even to he who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at my word" (Isaiah 66:2).
The doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God.
Here is an example of how doctrine should come from an express statement of scripture. I know that salvation comes by grace, through faith because Ephesians 2:8 states: "by grace you have been saved through faith".
It is really simple. You don't need to go to seminary to do that.
In the next section we will explore various man-made theologies. But first, I will provide some clear statements from scripture regarding the doctrine of original sin we examined.
- "... death passed to all men, because all sinned" (Romans 5:12).
- "I was alive apart from the law once, but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died" (Romans 7:9).
So, death passed to us because we sinned, not because of our birth, not an imputation of Adam sin to us. We were alive before we died (Romans 7:9). Spiritual death is obviously intended by Romans 7:9 since we don't die physically when the commandment comes. For additional explanation of Romans 7:9, click here, find section A3d, and look down the page for Romans 7:9.
Truth regarding one individual doesn't create a doctrine for all of mankind (micro-subchapter 1.5h4). For example:
- John the Baptist was "filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb" (Luke 1:15). This doesn't apply to all people. All are not filled with the Holy Spirit at birth.
- Centuries after Moses and Elijah died they reappeared on the earth to talk with Jesus on a mountain in the presence of Peter, James and John (Luke 9:28-36). This doesn't apply to all people. All people can't reappear on the earth to have after death conversations with the living.
So, just because David was conceived in sin doesn't mean that everyone is. See micro-subchapter 1.5h4 for more on this topic.
Perhaps David's mother was an unbeliever and therefore he was conceived in iniquity, formed in the womb of a sinner. There are many other explanations which you could research on the internet. But the purpose of this section is not to comment on a particular version of the doctrine of original sin. The purpose of this section to to communicate the burden of proof to establish a doctrine of God.
The burden of proof for declaring a doctrine of God is:
The doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God,
Now that that is established, lets look at some man-made theologies.
8) Man-Made Doctrines
Please pray for understanding now...
(Pause for prayer)
(Pause for prayer)
I will present some errors I see in various theological traditions.
9) Some Versions of Calvinism
The cult doctrine of predestination to damnation in John Calvin's Calvinism is one example of a doctrine of man which did not meet the burden of proof for proving a doctrine of God. It was not proved by express statements of scripture. Even if the burden of proof was lowered substantially, the doctrine would still fail to pass. Calvin asserted that God created all men for damnation except those whom God chose to predestine to eternal life... that those whom God chose for eternal life were chosen without regard for any condition or trait of the individual.
Click here to for an in depth explanation of Ephesians 1:4 and a presentation of Calvin's predestination to damnation, with quotes from Calvin's book. God did pre-ordain eternal life, but not individually and not unconditionally (not arbitrarily). Click that link and I will explain. It is the individual and arbitrary elements of some versions of Calvinism that makes their predestination evil.
Doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God. If these theologians had observed this truth of scripture, these errors would not have been made (Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, Isaiah 66:2).
10) Some Versions of Dispensationalism
Seed of Abraham
I know that I am the seed of Abraham because Galatians 3:29 says "If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring (Greek sperma, seed) and heirs according to promise." I know that I inherit the land promised to Israel because of Genesis 13:15-16, not because of replacement theology. In other words, my train of thought interprets scripture by scripture, not by theological generalizations.
Here are both verses together:
- "If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring and heirs according to promise" (Galatians 3:29).
- God said to Abraham, "15 for I will give all the land which you see to you and to your offspring forever. 16 I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if a man can count the dust of the earth, then your offspring may also be counted" (Genesis 13:15-16).
In the Septuagint, offspring in verse fifteen is rendered as spermati and as sperma in verse sixteen... the same Greek word as underlies offspring in Galatians 3:29. The Galatian Christians (included Gentiles) were Abraham's offspring since they belonged to Christ. And the land was promised to Abraham's offspring. So, Gentile Christians inherit the land along with Jewish Christians. It's very simple and straight from scripture.
Romans 4:11 also asserts that Abraham is the father of believing Gentiles (the uncircumcision). Romans 4:13 says that Abraham inherits the world by a promise. Then Romans 4:16 says that the promise is to ALL the descendants, both Jew and Gentile, his Gentile offspring having just been mentioned explicitly in 4:11. So, ALL the descendants inherit the world. So Abraham is the spiritual father of many nations (Romans 4:18), the believers of which will inhabit the New Jerusalem as "the nations" (Revelation 22:24-26).
So, scripture directly contradicts one versions of dispensationalism which says that only genetic Jews will inherit the land... that genetic Gentile Christians are not Daniel 7:27 saints who inherit the kingdoms of the world... that genetic Gentile Christians inherit fewer blessings from God than genetically Jewish Christians. The book of Ephesians was clearly written to Gentile Christians (Ephesians 2:11-12).
According to scripture, genetic Gentiles (Gentiles of the flesh, Ephesians (2:11) were strangers to the commonwealth of Israel (past tense, Ephesians 2:12), but after conversion are now citizens (Ephesians 2:19). So, genetic Gentile Christians are considered to be part of true spiritual Israel, not Gentiles (1 Corinthians 12:2, Greek ethnos). Peter tells genetic Gentile Christians, the "not a people" of 1 Peter 2:10, that they are "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession (1 Peter 2:9). These words in verse nine match the language used to describe Israel in the Old Testament (Exodus 19:6, Deuteronomy 7:6). Romans 9:24-26 tells us that the "not a people" are Gentiles of the flesh (the nations). In 1 Peter 4:3-4, "they" are Gentiles in contrast to "you" who are not. The "you" are genetic Gentile Christians (1 Peter 2:9-10). So, the Genetic Gentile Christians are not considered to be "Gentiles". The English words Nations and Gentiles are both translations of the Greek word ethnos and mean the same thing.
In one popular version of the Bible, the Greek word ethnos, Strong's 1484, was translated as Gentiles 93 times, nation(s) 68 times, people once and pagan once. It was translated as pagan in 1 Corinthians 12:2, which hid the message that genetic Gentile believers are not considered to be Gentiles in the current age. The World English Bible translated ethnos in this verse as "heathen":
"You know that when you were heathen..." (1 Corinthians 12:2). The word "heathen" is a translation of the Greek word ethnos which means Gentiles or Nations. They were Gentiles or Nations... in the past tense.
Jewish and gentile believers are "one flock with one shepherd" (John 10:16).
Salvation by Works in Schofield's Dispensationalism
In Scofield's comment on John 1:17 in the 1917 version of the Scofield Reference Bible we see: "The point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the condition of salvation, but acceptance or rejection of Christ, with good works as a fruit of salvation." But Psalm 103:17 reveals that everlasting life in the Old Testament was received by the fear of God (faith) as I explain in the appendix. Click here and read paragraph f for an explanation.
False Prophetic Doctrine in Some Versions of Dispensationalism
In the 1970's I repeatedly heard, from different dispensationalist teachers, that the second coming should occur by 1988. This was false prophetic doctrine. It is now 2022 and the second coming has not occurred. Click here to read about this from another website.
One Version of Dispensationalism: Start Sacrificing Animals Again
Some dispensationalists say that Christ will reinstitute animal sacrifice in His 1000 year reign.
No scripture states that animal sacrifices will resume. But some dispensationalists combine their opinions regarding numerous debatable passages to come up with this doctrine. When I look at their source scriptures I see that verse one could imply A or B. Verse two could result in C or D. Verse three could mean E or F. But I could not see scriptural proof sufficient to restrict those verses to only one of the options. But some dispensationalists say that A, D and E are correct, so animal sacrifices will resume. This appears to be cherry picking one of two possible meanings. Essentially, they are assuming that their opinions are correct, combining their opinions with some logic and proclaiming a doctrine of God. Click here for more information from another website.
Doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God. If these theologians had observed this truth of scripture, these errors would not have been made (Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, Isaiah 66:2).
11) Arminianism
I worshiped and taught in an Arminian church for many years. I was told by a sincere and loving pastor that I could lose my salvation if I stopped believing. This comes from Luke 8:13. But at that time I didn't know about John 5:24. We can't just choose one scripture over the other. We must reconcile them, in context. Here they are:
- "Those on the rock are they who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; but these have no root, who believe for a while, then fall away in time of temptation" (Luke 8:13).
- "Most certainly I tell you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life, and doesn't come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life" (John 5:24).
The short reconciliation is that Jesus later explained that the one who "believed for a while" had a flawed faith from the beginning called "faith without root" (Matthew 13:6). Click here and look for the section titled, "Faith Without Root" for additional information. Matthew 13:6 is from Matthew's account of the same event as was described in Luke 8:13. It provides additional information about Luke 8:13. So, the pastor was correct that one can stop believing, but only if the faith was flawed from the beginning. He shouldn't have used logic to conclude that one can lose eternal life.
John 5:24 above shows that at the time we believe we have eternal life, in the present tense.
If we could lose eternal life, it wouldn't be eternal.
All of this and more is explained, in "Odds and Ends" of the appendix, A9i, titled, "Once Saved Always Saved: Perseverance of the Saints". Click here to read.
Doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God. If these theologians had observed this truth of scripture, these errors would not have been made (Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, Isaiah 66:2).
12) Pre-Tribulation Rapture Doctrine
The Pre-Tribulation Rapture doctrine is a philosophy which directly contradicts Revelation 14:14, in the context of Revelation 13:1 - 14:20. There is no scripture which states that the rapture occurs before the great tribulation. But Revelation 14:14 meets the conditions of the rapture prophecies. In the order of events revealed in Revelation 13:1 - 14:20, the rapture (14:14) occurs after the global murders of Christians by the one named 666. Click here for a thorough explanation.
Doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God. If these theologians had observed this truth of scripture, these errors would not have been made (Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, Isaiah 66:2).
13) Cessationism
The cessationist asserts that the miraculous spiritual gifts no longer exist. But scripture does not say that they have ceased. 1 Corinthians 13:10 does say that certain gifts will cease when "the perfect comes". But the cessationist says, with no scriptural authority, that the completion of the Bible is "the perfect"... and therefore, proclaims that the miraculous gifts have ceased.... declaring cessationism to be a doctrine of God.
The context of 1 Corinthians 13:10 is 1 Corinthians 12:1 - 14 :40. But, I have seen the cessationist teacher stop reading the passage at 13:10. But verses 11-12 explain exactly when those gifts will cease: when we see "face to face", when we "know fully"... as we are "fully known". We can't see the Bible "face to face". We can't be "fully known" by the Bible. But we will see God face to face (1 John 3:1-2). We are fully known by God.
What scripture tells us... who we will see and what will happen when we do? Scripture expressly states: When we see God, "we will be like him; for we will see him just as he is" (1 John 3:1-2). So, when we see God "we will be like him" (1 John 3:2)... . we will "know fully" (1 Corinthians 13:11-12). To "know fully" will happen when we are "like him". If you disagree, then you must believe that you "know fully" now... or that being like Him is not sufficient to "know fully"... that knowing fully will happen later. But these beliefs are merely speculative false doctrines.
Well, we haven't seen God face to face yet, so the gifts have not ceased. According to the express statements of scripture, they cease when we see God. The cessationist must assert that we already "know fully... as we are fully known", before we have seen God (1 John 3:2). That would not be honest. But, the cessationist teacher may convince the naive of his man-made doctrine, if he stops reading at verse ten, and if the students don't read ahead with faith in scripture.
I do not have the gift of tongues or the gift of healing and have not proved that anyone I have ever met has those gifts. But that doesn't mean that others don't have those gifts in my country or Africa, Asia, South America or Europe. To say that sign gifts are not necessary in countries where Christianity is new and where people are killed for converting to Christianity is naive to say the least. I have greatly benefited from the teaching of some who believe that they have the gift of tongues.
Doctrine must be expressly stated to declare a doctrine of God. If these theologians had observed this truth of scripture, these errors would not have been made (Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, Isaiah 66:2).
14) Think Scripturally
Scofield's Dispensationalism, Calvin's Calvinism, Cessationism, and other isms have been and will be adjusted as critics call attention to their obvious contradictions. But, man-made doctrine evolving from man-made doctrine results in man-made doctrine which will also be corrupt, but with sometimes different corruptions from those which existed in the original man-made doctrines.
Instead of being careless with God's word, we should handle His word reverently and fearfully:
- "... but I will look to this man, even to he who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at my word" (Isaiah 66:2).
THE SOLUTION IS TO THINK SCRIPTURALLY INSTEAD OF THINKING IN MAN-MADE DOCTRINAL GENERALITLES.
Scripture is perfect. Doctrinal generalities are not.
Once a believer adopts reason based cultish doctrines, they will not be able to understand simple clear statements of scripture, because the clear and obvious meaning of scripture contradicts their cult doctrine. The clear meaning of the passage is not a possibility to them. The variety of Calvinism which believes that God created men for damnation, creating men as spiritually dead beings, cannot accept Romans 7:9. They will torture the verse to twist it into the opposite of what it clearly says. Romans 7:9 clearly says that we were spiritually alive before we became spiritually dead.
I have worshiped in Arminian churches for well over a decade and in churches with very strong Calvinistic, Dispensational or Cessationist inclinations for decades. I have grown spiritually in those churches. If you find yourself in a church with doctrinal bias, don't engage in philosophical debate. Just quote scripture which contradicts the teacher's doctrine. Pray for the teacher. Pray silently the Endorsed Prayer of Humble Rebuke in micro-subchapter 4.3L. Also pray that God will increase the teacher's faith and obedience (micro-subchapters 4.3a and 4.3f, respectively). Perhaps God sent you into that congregation to bring doctrinal healing to that congregation. There are no perfect congregations. I doubt that there are any churches without some doctrinal bias.
Seminaries may be responsible for more false doctrine about God than any other source. Observe, Jesus did not choose one single seminary graduate to be one of the twelve apostles. Paul was a seminary graduate and did become an apostle after Christ death. But, Paul murdered Christians until Christ rebuked him severely on the road to Damascus. Seminary professors in those days were the ones who spearheaded the crucifixion of Christ.
So, as you listen to a preacher or teacher, only accept that part of the message which the teacher or preacher clearly proves from scripture.
If that seldom or never occurs, then you may remain in that church as a missionary to that church; But you need teachers who prove doctrine from scripture. You also need fellowship with those who prove doctrine from scripture.
Remember the three warnings against manipulation:
- "Every word of God is flawless. He is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Don't you add to his words, lest he reprove you, and you be found a liar" (Proverbs 30:5-6).
- "learn not to think beyond the things which are written" (1 Corinthians 4:6).
- "... but I will look to this man, even to he who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at my word" (Isaiah 66:2).
The doctrine must be expressly stated in scripture to declare a doctrine of God.
"... but I will look to this man, even to he who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at my word" (Isaiah 66:2).
My Prayer:
My Lord, teach me and all of Your people to not "think beyond the things which are written" and to tremble at Your word.
Amen