A question someone asked my wife, followed by her response.
Listener: Hi Faith, was wondering what you'd define "a doctrine" as... then compare it to what the Word of God defines it as, then define it as the "christian" world does...
I heard a sermon today and that tired old "doctrines don't matter...just your love for God and how close you are walking with him" type dogma being pushed out there as if it were a smart thing to think or say.
I often have people get on me about worrying too much about "doctrine"...and started thinking of verses that Paul used that word in.
Anyhow...when I have time to sit down I was thinking you are about the only person I could even have a discussion with about this.
Thoughts? input?
TTR: I agree with how the scriptures define the word. Doctrine is, very simply stated - a teaching; an instruction. The contextual usage of the word relies solely on it's object. I see the word all by itself, and relate the practice of using the word in the same manner that I would with the term "faith." Both of these words have direct OBJECTS. When you have faith, your faith has an object (is directed toward something). Concerning doctrine - the same principle applies. It is a teaching/instruction having an object (teaching/instruction ABOUT something).
As far as the way the "christian" world describes it: in my experience listening and conversing with others concerning "doctrine" - they see it as dogmatic teachings of individual factions (denominations) of "christianity" (when compared to modern society) as something that is old and outdated. This causes them to ignorantly turn away from something that is of utmost importance: The teaching of God's literal instructions to us.
Ironically, Paul uses the word "doctrine" more than any other single writer who was inspired to pen the words of God. Apparently this little "outdated word" is something that God intended the Body of Christ to pay close attention to, and to adhere to. Yet, just as Paul's letters are suppressed, looked over, twisted, and recycled in mainstream christianity - the importance of doctrine is filtered out as well.
After all, who needs teaching these days, when you are taught that a relationship with God is based solely on emotions and so-called "divine revelations" and "miracles, signs and wonders" that are supposedly still occurring thousands of years after they ceased?
According to the teaching of Christ through Paul, AKA OUR DOCTRINE:
1 Corinthians 13:8-10 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
So, who needs doctrine, when you can FEEL God, hear Him whisper in your ear, and believe that He is directing your every step? Who even needs the Bible at all when that's the case?
One thing that you will notice for sure - those who oppose doctrine very rarely (if ever at all) step foot in reality. It's like talking to someone from another dimension - a dimension that only exists in their own mind. Why? Because they can mold and bend their definition of God to fit their own "reality" - which is nothing more than a lie that they have repeated enough to have it become truth in their own "spiritual realm."
Rebellion against doctrine (and of course, I'm speaking of SOUND doctrine, when I say "doctrine") is New Age to the absolute CORE.
And with all that being said, those who oppose adherence to doctrine are not actually opposing the principle of the term "doctrine." For they, themselves, are ignorantly and hypocritically teaching or adhering to a doctrine, after all. It's just that they have redefined the term to mean something else, by assuming that it has more connotations than it does (all by itself.)
New Agers definitely have a doctrine, whether they want to admit it or not. -Just like atheists have a religion, while they deny religion.
Add comment
Comments