Why make issues over doctrine?

By asserting that doctrine is important, we put ourselves in the position of creating issues over doctrinal distinctives.  Many today see this as a troublesome thing.  It is often perceived as unloving or intolerant to make an issue or draw lines over doctrine.  In fact, the ecumenical mind-set of today would have us put all our differences aside and concentrate on the things we have in common. 

However, if we reduce Christianity to its lowest common denominator, we will end up putting aside the clear teaching of the Bible for the sake of religious unity.  This approach merely paves the way for a “different gospel which is not merely another,” (Galations 1:6).  I think it is important for our doctrine to be as strictly biblical as possible and therefore I am willing to take issue with that which I believe to be at odds with the teaching of Scripture.  If the Bible is indeed the word of God, then what we believe is not only important but has eternal consequences.

In the Bible, the term doctrine refers to that which is taught.  The Greek word in the New Testament is didaskalia, and it is variously translated as teaching, instruction, or doctrine.  We use it to describe the basic theology that we understand to be the teaching of the Bible.  In a sense it represents the content of our faith.

Some may question the importance of doctrine, asking, “Why can’t we be satisfied to simply say we believe the Bible?”  Or, “Isn’t it good enough just to refer to ourselves as a New Testament church?”  Or, yet again, “Why stir the pot by making doctrinal distinctions regarding what we believe? Why do what will surely raise questions and issues that may cause division in the body of Christ?”

In the final analysis, I think the reasons to be definitive far outweigh the reasons to remain non-descript and inconspicuous regarding our doctrine.  For example, the Mormons acknowledge the Bible as a divine work, yet there are tremendous errors in their theology;  errors which, if the Bible is true, are matters of eternal life and death.  The Roman Catholics claim to be the New Testament church and they also hold to the authority and inspiration of the Bible, yet Reformed theology sees fundamental and critical errors in Roman doctrine.

In many mainline Protestant denominations, the inerrancy of the Scriptures is either up for debate or openly denied.  Also, I might add, the basic teaching in many so-called conservative evangelical churches today, when pressed against a sound biblical theology, is found to be deficient in critical areas such as the nature of Christ’s atoning work on the cross, the nature and state of man, the nature of God’s sovereignty in salvation, and the nature of saving faith — to name a few.

Our doctrine is important.  Scripture itself stresses the importance of sound doctrine.  In the pastoral epistles of 1st and 2nd Timothy and Titus alone, I counted 28 specific references to the importance of doctrine or the content of our teaching.  For example,

Give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching (i.e. doctrine). 1 Tim. 4:13.

Preach the word . . . with great patience and instruction.  For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires.  2 Tim. 4:2-3.

[An elder must] hold fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict. Titus 1:9

A failure to endure sound doctrine logically gives rise to unsound doctrine, and unsound doctrine in the professing church has historically led to critical perversions of God’s grace in Christ and the gospel itself.