It depends on what you mean by "false doctrine." Does that mean teaching something besides Christ as sufficient for salvation? Or does it just mean maybe an incomplete view of atonement, or sanctification, or something?
It seems unlikely that someone who truly knows Christ's salvation could preach anything other than that salvation. But those who are in Christ are not perfect. We are always growing. God continues to reveal Himself to us, and so a brother can err in his teaching.
I would use the illustration of Arminian vs. Calvinist evangelism. While I disagree with the easy believism of many, I wouldn't say they are unconverted for preaching it. Furthermore, I have heard testimony of people coming to true saving knowledge under such preaching. The power is in the Word, not the messenger. The early apostles even had disagreements on some doctrinal matters, but that doesn't cast doubt on any of them as to their salvation.
As to why God allows it? It amazes me that God allows any of us to serve Him. We are all so weak and worthless at times. Grace is the only answer.
Scott - First of all, thank you brother for taking the time to respond! Second, you went right where I was "cogitating" on! I don't want to start controversy, I just want to work toward an answer of a question that was asked of me personally.
I was asked when I was converted. When I gave the approximate time frame I was told I could not have been converted then else I wouldn't have preached the false doctrine of Arminianism.
Let me say I am not doubting my salvation. I also find the question somewhat "quarelsome" in the sense that I knew I had been saved and yet preached basic Arminianism until I became taught by the HS in the Doctrines of Grace.
I, too, would repent of some of my earlier sermons! Since I keep written copies of nearly all of them, I sometimes cringe to think someone might read one of those early offerings. Don't know why I keep them. Anyway...
Unless a man is born/born again into perfection, he is going to teach things at some point that are not perfect. Whether it's "false doctrine" or not I'm not sure, but...
It sounds to me that the person who asked the question might be a bit arrogant. To assume that unless someone is just like me, they aren't saved...well. Not to make light of doctrine. I do think there are true/untrue things we teach. If you teach salvation by Buddha, obviously you aren't saved. But anyone who teaches Christ... The real key, as I said earlier, is in defining what we mean by "false doctrine." Within orthodoxy there is a lot of "wiggle room."
Depends on whether one believes that people can mature theologically and doctrinally? I am reminded of this passage from Acts 18:
"Now a Jew named hApollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, icompetent in the Scriptures. He had been instructed in jthe way of the Lord. And being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately."
Scott - I agree 100%. He is arrogant and has some real "dilly" of opinions. I thought I would get some input, but my response was similar to yours, Brad Huston's and KC Bob's. Thanks again kind sir!
KC Bob - I thought of that one first. I agree with you and thanks!
6 comments:
It depends on what you mean by "false doctrine." Does that mean teaching something besides Christ as sufficient for salvation? Or does it just mean maybe an incomplete view of atonement, or sanctification, or something?
It seems unlikely that someone who truly knows Christ's salvation could preach anything other than that salvation. But those who are in Christ are not perfect. We are always growing. God continues to reveal Himself to us, and so a brother can err in his teaching.
I would use the illustration of Arminian vs. Calvinist evangelism. While I disagree with the easy believism of many, I wouldn't say they are unconverted for preaching it. Furthermore, I have heard testimony of people coming to true saving knowledge under such preaching. The power is in the Word, not the messenger. The early apostles even had disagreements on some doctrinal matters, but that doesn't cast doubt on any of them as to their salvation.
As to why God allows it? It amazes me that God allows any of us to serve Him. We are all so weak and worthless at times. Grace is the only answer.
Scott - First of all, thank you brother for taking the time to respond! Second, you went right where I was "cogitating" on! I don't want to start controversy, I just want to work toward an answer of a question that was asked of me personally.
I was asked when I was converted. When I gave the approximate time frame I was told I could not have been converted then else I wouldn't have preached the false doctrine of Arminianism.
Let me say I am not doubting my salvation. I also find the question somewhat "quarelsome" in the sense that I knew I had been saved and yet preached basic Arminianism until I became taught by the HS in the Doctrines of Grace.
I, too, would repent of some of my earlier sermons! Since I keep written copies of nearly all of them, I sometimes cringe to think someone might read one of those early offerings. Don't know why I keep them. Anyway...
Unless a man is born/born again into perfection, he is going to teach things at some point that are not perfect. Whether it's "false doctrine" or not I'm not sure, but...
It sounds to me that the person who asked the question might be a bit arrogant. To assume that unless someone is just like me, they aren't saved...well. Not to make light of doctrine. I do think there are true/untrue things we teach. If you teach salvation by Buddha, obviously you aren't saved. But anyone who teaches Christ... The real key, as I said earlier, is in defining what we mean by "false doctrine." Within orthodoxy there is a lot of "wiggle room."
Well, to many "quotes" so I'll be going now.
Depends on whether one believes that people can mature theologically and doctrinally? I am reminded of this passage from Acts 18:
"Now a Jew named hApollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, icompetent in the Scriptures. He had been instructed in jthe way of the Lord. And being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately."
Scott - I agree 100%. He is arrogant and has some real "dilly" of opinions. I thought I would get some input, but my response was similar to yours, Brad Huston's and KC Bob's. Thanks again kind sir!
KC Bob - I thought of that one first. I agree with you and thanks!
"For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. Matthew 24:24 (NIV)
I suppose that it's possible. "truly and biblically converted" ! = Perfect Discernment at all times.
Post a Comment