Minister's Toolbox

One of the critical functions of a church leader is to teach "sound doctrine."

What is sound doctrine and is one view "sounder" than another? How does a leader discern what is true from what is error?

On today's show we talk about how a leader can discern true doctrine from false in a discussion that will definitely NOT be what you expect!

On Today's podcast, I mentioned our free eBook on Why Social Media is Vital To Sharing The Good News.

 Transcript of Today's Show

As church leaders, we have been commissioned by Christ to equip our congregations to do the work of ministry according to Ephesians 4: 11-16. This word equip incorporates teaching, mentoring, training, supplying – whatever it takes to bring those in our care to a place of spiritual maturity and effectiveness.

A big part of that is feeding them sound doctrine. Jesus charged Peter to feed the sheep of God. (John 21:15-17) Peter called upon all leaders to feed the flock and be examples to the congregation in I Peter 5:1,2. Paul charged his protégé Timothy to give his attention to doctrine and teaching in I Timothy 4:12-17. He warned leaders wolves that would come into congregations bringing false doctrine that would lead many astray.

So this is serious stuff. As ministers, one of our critical functions to make certain that our teaching squares with Christ’s mission and purpose. In essence, we need to know we are feeding people what is biblically sound from both the pulpit and through the example we demonstrate.

So, what does sound doctrine look like?

If you look at the general landscape of Christianity throughout the world, you have the catholic church, eastern orthodox, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran, Brethren, Congregational, Amish, Mennonite, Baptist, southern Baptist, church of God, assembly of God, Pentecostal, charismatic, independent, non-denominational…and the list goes on.

All of these denominations typically divide up as either Calvinistic or Arminian. Calvinists tend to be cessationist and Arminians tend to favor charismatic behaviors, generally speaking. Which is correct doctrine?

Here’s the thing: You can have perfect doctrine and yet be wrong before God.

Much of what the Pharisees and scribes taught was biblically sound, yet Jesus reserved his most stinging rebukes - for them. He even went so far as to say in Matthew 23:2,3: The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses. So practice and obey whatever they tell you.

So, is it possible to get your doctrine right, but miss God altogether? And what does false doctrine actually look like? Is it merely the lack of biblical orthodoxy?

I mean, the scribes and the Pharisees appear to have gotten the good housekeeping seal of approval from Jesus on what they taught, but in the next sentence he warned his disciples to stay clear of them.

In Luke 12:1, Jesus told his followers: Notice what he said: Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. In other words, in determining false doctrine, it is not merely dotting I’s and crossing t’s. You need to go deeper and look at the fruit of what is being taught.

The Pharisees and scribes produced disciples which is clear from Mark 2:18, but their disciples were legalistic and arrogant. Their doctrine produced followers who looked and acted like them. This legalistic arrogance would eventually crucify Christ. So, their doctrine wasn’t just wrong, it was straight-out evil.

I think we would all have to agree that any doctrine, any preaching, any expounding of scripture that leads to the denigration or devaluing of Jesus is false by its very nature. But there is more to identifying false doctrine than hunting down textual error.

I’d like to pause here and consider the people that Jesus chose to become his disciples. In Luke 6:12,13 we are told that Christ selected his disciples after an all-night prayer meeting. This is not a responsibility He took lightly.

Among them, were there any scholars? Perhaps, Nathaniel. John’s gospel seems to indicate he liked to sit under trees and think. He might have been a philosopher or scholar, we’re not sure. Here is what we do know. Four fisherman, one tax collector and at least one political zealot.

Peter certainly was not known for his use of big words or deep thoughts, yet Jesus selected him to feed his sheep in John  21:16,17. He also ordained him to use spiritual keys to open doors in Matthew 16:17,18. Peter would become instrumental to open the door to the church age in Acts 2 and then again to the Gentiles in Acts 10. These two doors are the most significant changes in history and the responsibility to open them was given to a fisherman.  

Keeping this in mind, Jesus instructed his non-scholarly followers about how to detect true and false doctrine. In Matthew 7:16,and again in verse 20, he tells his followers to identify true and false doctrine by inspecting the fruit.

What does that mean? Look at the followers; look at the results. Do the results look like, smell like and act like Jesus? In other words, as people inculcate the teaching into their own lives, are they transformed? Do the angry become kind? Do the depressed become joyful? Do liars start telling the truth? Do narcissists start giving generously of their time?

This is what fruit is. Your teaching produces fruit.

I really like elements of reformed theology. There is something powerful about honoring the sovereignty of God which is at the heart of reformed theology. There are truths in reformed theology that I hold to, embrace and benefit from. Reformed theology has a great deal to offer.

Reformed theology is not necessarily biblical doctrine. I do not preach reformed theology, nor do I recommend anyone should.

Wait a minute. Isn’t that a contradiction? A little bit, but if you study reformed theology, you’re used to contradictions and we don’t have time to discuss it in depth.

I look at the fruit of doctrine. I have noticed that the deeper any minister gets in reformed theology, the more arrogant and dismissive of everyone else they become! In essence, their knowledge puffs them up and they become unteachable except by others who share their views.

Granted, that is my experience, but you will find it reasonably accurate. The fruit of dogma is arrogance. Arrogance is the precise opposite of Christ’s doctrine, no matter how you slice it. Doctrine that produces prideful, dismissive arrogance is dangerous and more closely linked to the Pharisees than Christ.

You may quickly and wrongly conclude that I feel this way because I am a member of the dreaded Arminian camp founded by Jacob Arminius.

In that conclusion, not only would you be proving my point, but you also would be inaccurate.

In the Arminian camp are leaders who are just as arrogant, cocky and dismissive as their reformed counterparts.

Whole wars have been fought arguing the merits of both theological perspectives; and for what? Bragging rights!

One of the amazing historical facts concerns the Great Awakening of the 1740’s.

Principally through Jonathan Edwards and his band of clergy friends, God moved so demonstratively in cities and towns throughout New England that it is estimated up to 50K came to faith. In fact, I live only a few miles from where this amazing revival broke out.

When you factor in that the population of the U.S. was significantly smaller in those days, this revival was extraordinary.

Jonathan Edwards has been called, perhaps rightly so, the greatest theologian our country ever produced.

He was a true Calvinist, and in most instances a very humble and godly man. Much could be said about him, but I leave that to your study.

On the other side of the Atlantic, another revival was occurring simultaneously under the leadership of John and Charles Wesley. As a result of their preaching, drinking establishments closed and whole regions were gloriously converted to Christ.

Here is the amazing part: Wesley was Arminian in his theology.

What is interesting is that God couldn’t seem to make up his mind as to which theology to support! He ignored the tension between the two theologies and invaded both parts of the world by His Spirit. Does God like to have the last laugh or what?

Truthfully, if you examine both theologies, you will find flaws and things that don’t add up. Ministers spend years of their lives studying and writing books to defend themselves or prove the other camp wrong. What an incredibly stupid waste of time. People are perishing every day, and leaders are arguing over who is right. All the while, the devil is quite amused by our foolishness.

Consider this: Not a single apostle or disciple was from the Reformed or Arminian camp. As you study the scriptures objectively, you will discover that neither theological perspective is able to solve the contradictions place in scripture. Both camps have to prove their validity by minimizing the truths of the other camp.

Like I said, a waste of time. Here’s the deal: God put tension in scripture. You will never adequately answer those contradictions; perhaps because God never intended we should, or these things are yet to be revealed.

Paul became the only true scholar among the early disciples, but hear how he viewed his own training and knowledge: Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ.

This is from Philippians 3:8. I am quoting from the King James, because most translators elect to say garbage instead of dung. The Greek word skubalon does mean garbage and waste and junk, but it also means human excrement.

We miss something if we don’t get the full strength of what Paul is saying here. He wants his readers to know that all the knowledge gained under Gamaliel, one of the most famous rabbi’s of history was useless, disgusting excrement.

That is a strong statement. Was he saying that knowledge was useless? As he points out in I Corinthians 13, knowledge by itself inflates peoples egos, yet knowledge when used as intended can help people enormously.

Some think that he was just referencing the knowledge he’d gained as a Jew, but listen to Paul describe his ministry to the Corinthians: “For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.”

Let that sink in for moment. The greatest New Testament scholar in history, said that he left all his knowledge, all his thinking, all his wisdom in the back seat of his chariot and focused on one thing: Christ and him crucified.

Pure doctrine always exalts, always magnifies, and always points the attention to Christ and his efficacious work at the cross. Efficacious means effective and capable. The cross was effective at delivering people from their sins and the power of Satan.

Allow me to draw you attention back to Peter. He describes for us what true doctrine really is. In I Peter 2:2 he says, “Like newborn infants, desire the pure spiritual milk, so that you may grow by it for your salvation, since you have tasted that the Lord is good.”

Interesting passage here. It harkens to a woman breastfeeding her infant. Babies don’t get fed without an intimate connection to their mother. We don’t learn true doctrine apart from intimacy with God.

Studying the bible to find truths that refute others is by nature the wrong approach to doctrine. Our preaching, teaching and ministry ought to be focused towards helping our fellow man taste and see that the Lord is good. It is not your job to preach sermons against Joel Osteen, John MacArthur or the Pope.

People need the Lord. I love the small brass sign fixed to the pulpit of a popular church. It quotes John 12:21: We would see Jesus. If our disciples are filled with judgments against other churches and preachers; if our congregants are always arguing the merits of one point of view over another, perhaps they are just following the preachers example.

Our disciples need to look, smell and acts like Christ. They ought to have his nature. What was that nature: the fruit of the spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, faith and the rest. We as ministers are called to be examples of what we teach because more is caught than taught.

On a practical level, how do we as ministers of this good news, make certain our doctrine as right as possible. Truthfully, you can never be 100% sure because you’re human and that element is subject to flaws, either in what you say or how you deliver it.

2 Timothy 2:15 states: Work hard so you can present yourself to God and receive his approval. Be a good worker, one who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly explains the word of truth.

Truthfully, the best interpretation of scripture is the scripture itself. Do your best to make sure that whatever you preach squares with the rest of the Bible. If it is not taught in the Bible, tell people.

Most of the giants of faith who have been instrumental in great moves of God have been flawed men, but God still used them powerfully. The great evangelist D.L Moody butchered the English language. When asked, he responded. “I do the best with what I’ve got. Do you do the best with what you’ve got?”

As a servant to your people, give yourself to prayer and reading the word. In the weeks and months ahead, as God wills I am going to put together some practical teaching tools for you to consider.

Jesus always said profound things. Here is one of my favorites from John 6:63: “It is the Spirit that gives life. The flesh is of no help. The words I speak to you are spirit and life.

I don’t care how good a preacher you are, you’ll never fully expound what Christ says here and that is both our dilemma and our joy.

As usual, I like to end each show with a quote from Martin Luther. “To preach Christ is to feed the soul, to justify it, to set it free, and to save it, if it believes the preaching.”

Ministers are called by God to be societal change agents. When peoples’ hearts change, then their actions change. Revivals never follow political elections. Good government follows genuine revival because the focus switches to honoring and pleasing God.

To leave us an honest review at ITunes: ministerstoolbox.com/review