“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” Romans 16:17
In the previous article’s thread a question was posed by Christian concerning Romans 16:17. Instead of answering within the thread, I thought it would work better to introduce it in a new article.
Romans 16:17, I believe, is the touchstone for this issue of, “careful, limited forms of fellowship” between those who call themselves or are identified as Fundamentalists and those who are viewed as Conservative Evangelicals (or anyone else for that matter, Fundamentalists or Evangelical). And at the heart of this touchstone is the phrase, “contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned.” Robert Haldane, in his commentary on Romans states, “The force of the passage lies in this sentence” (“contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned”). The teaching of Scripture which we have learned forms the basis by which all other teaching is to be judged. To this end, W. H. Griffith Thomas writes, “It is well for us to have some such simple powerful means of putting to a test the things we hear from time to time. Are they in accordance with the truth which we have learned and received? If they are, let us accept them; if they are not, let us beware of them.”
It really is as easy as Griffith Thomas states. We don’t need an elaborate schematic of, if yes, then this…; or if no, then this…. Does the teaching of the man or institution in question agree with the teaching that I have been taught? If so, I accept it, we’re agreed, we fellowship, etc. If not, I “mark” (skopeo- to look at, observe, to have the eyes open to) and “avoid” (ekklino-to turn aside, deviate, to turn away from) them. Paul does not break down “the doctrine” into different levels of importance so that we can then do a system of “twenty questions” in order to see if we can somehow cooperate at some level or not.
The men within Conservative Evangelicalism teach doctrine that is contrary to what I have been taught. The word “divisions,” dichostasia, refers to dissensions, parties, factions; and “offenses,” skandolon, refers to a trap or impediment, a stumbling block placed in the way to cause someone to fall. When this contrary teaching enters churches, “divisions and offenses” form and tear at the unity of that particular body of Christ. These things ought not so to be! I am called upon by God Almighty in Scripture to “mark” and “avoid” these men. To do otherwise is to go against God’s own mandate and thereby be in disobedience. I am not perfect, nor are any of the readers who may happen by, but we are all called upon to walk in obedience to the Word the God.
6 comments:
Brian:
Thanks for addressing this passage.
You wrote, “And at the heart of this touchstone is the phrase, ‘contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned’.”
Romans 16:17 instructs believers to “mark” false teachers; that is, to keep their eyes open, to scrutinize, to look at, to observe, and to stay fixed so that they can guard against the introduction of false doctrine.
For me above all other considerations for marking and avoiding evangelicals is their contrary doctrine of Lordship Salvation. There are other grave concerns such as their ecumenical compromises, but to corrupt the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Cor. 11:3), which is what LS teaching does. This distortion of the gospel trumps all other considerations and therefore mandates that I/we mark so as to warn others and avoid them.
We are commanded to “mark” and “avoid” those who have adopted a theology and/or taken on practices that are “contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned.”
Lou
Brothers,
Questions to pose to the text:
a. Is Paul saying that we are to mark and avoid all who believe differently than us?
b. Is Paul saying that we are to mark and avoid all who believe differently than we have been taught?
c. Is Paul saying that we are to mark and avoid all who teach differently than we have been taught.
d. Is Paul saying that we are to mark and avoid all who are causing divisions (seditious - see 1 Corinthians 3:3 & context; as well as Galatians 5:20) and causing offenses (see Romans 14:13 for Paul's most recent usage of this term) contrary to the doctrine (teaching) that we have learned?
Which of these (or all of them) are what Paul is teaching here in this context? (please note the intentional distinctions in each question)
What are the ways that this can be done? What are the ways that Paul seems to be concerned (within the context of the Book of Romans) that this is being done to/by his audience? How are we (or better, am I) possibly causing divisions and offenses contrary to biblical doctrine? Then, how are others doing it and who should I be marking and avoiding.
For His Glory,
Christian Markle
Thanks Lou and Christian for stopping by. Christian, I will digest your questions and give my thoughts here a bit later. I am off to physical therapy on my hand so I will not comment yet. These are things that we must ponder and come to terms with as we study the Scriptures.
Christian,
Thank you for your questions. I will attempt to work through your questions. To “a” and “b” I would say, no, the text is not mandating this, for this would lead us into an isolationist mentality. To “d” I would obviously say, yes, since it is a restatement of our verse in question. And to “c” I would say, a guarded yes. I will expand what I mean by a guarded yes.
When looking out at the landscape of doctrinal teaching we can place aberrant doctrine within, I think, two frameworks. First, there are those who are promoting aberrant doctrine for their own gain. Second, there are those who are promoting aberrant doctrine without thought of personal gain. Using Lou’s citing of LS as an example, there may be some that are actively engaged in promoting this false gospel for their own gain (as described in v. 18). Then there are others who are proponents of LS who are not promoting it for their own gain but the results (divisions and offenses) are the same within a body of believers. This is why I say a guarded yes to “c.” Either way the aberrant doctrine is harmful and should be avoided.
Your closing paragraph questions.
#1 Well, from a personal standpoint, literally doing what the Bible says, observe and then turn away from, having no dealings with them. There are men who I don’t have contact with. I don’t attend meetings where they speak. I don’t invite them to speak in my church. As far as literature is concerned, I realize that in the context of my ministry, I possess books which fit this discussion and I typically mark in those books where they diverge. I also try to keep the more egregious ones from plain view so as to not give assent to them for the casual observer in my study.
#2 Paul does not mention specific “doctrine” or men. Though he uses the definite article with “divisions” and “offenses,” he does not give flesh, so to speak, to these two words. With the 2nd aorist tense being used for the doctrine that they “learned,” Paul is referencing the doctrine that they had already been taught before writing this epistle. The doctrine Paul teaches in this epistle builds upon/reinforces what they already possessed. As I mentioned in the article, “the doctrine which ye have learned,” is the key. “Divisions” and “offenses” are as varied as are the doctrines in Scriptures, so I think Paul is being all inclusive without naming them specifically.
#3 As Paul notes in v. 18, the motives of some were wrong. We must view our teaching by the light of Scripture (is it Bible?) and upon ourselves (am I seeking to glorify God or self?).
#4 People are presenting this from any number of fronts today. By printed material, the many and varied internet avenues, radio programs, or ministers presenting it in your church. The second part is really your call. What I view as contrary someone else may not. We can certainly ask others what their thoughts are, particularly men who have been around for a while. As a pastor who is 49, I have some who look to me and I have men older than me in the ministry whom I look to for help. We do ourselves a great service when we know men who have been in the ministry for a number of years and they are men of integrity who have earned our trust and we can talk to them about what we are facing.
When we know our doctrine (ultimately know our Bible) then we will recognize wrong teaching. I would say this, the longer I have been a believer and saturating myself with His Word, the clearer His truth becomes and the easier it is to see the wrong teaching. Am I perfect? Not by any means. Do I understand everything in the Scriptures? Again, not by any means, but I am growing.
It is my desire that this has been helpful. Hopefully I have answered questions rather than generating more.
Brother,
Thank you very much for your lengthy reply I read it last night and have spent some time this morning digesting it. I strongly appreciate the time and thought you put into it.
I agree that "a" and "b" are not within Paul's scope of teaching in these verses. Due to the word "all" in my original question I would also exclude "c" in my understanding of what Paul is concerned with. I am willing to unpack my thinking at a later date.
As usual, I do have additional questions. However, I know from experience the burden of preparing for Sunday and do not want to overburden you.
Have a great Lord's day!
For His glory,
Christian Markle
Christian,
I look forward to the continued interaction. Even after working through all that I wrote, I think it is a bit rough. At times I find it rather challenging to adequately articulate what is in the heart and mind.
Post a Comment