THE GOSPEL, DOCTRINAL ESSENTIALS, AND MINISTRY

EFCA Texas-Oklahoma District Conference

Gregory C. Strand

Executive Director of Theology and Credentialing

February 22, 2019

INTRODUCTION

The Shift in Objective Meaning

• A pre-modern baseball umpire would have said something like

this, “There’s balls, and there’s strikes and I call ‘em as they are.”

Objective truth and meaning is.

• The modernist one would have said, “There’s balls and there’s

strikes, and I call ‘em as I see ‘em.” Objective truth and meaning

is there, and it needs to be discerned/determined.

• And the postmodernist umpire would have said, “They ain’t

nothing until I call ‘em.” Objective truth and meaning is

individually determined.

Cultural Moment/Mood

• FOMO - Fear of Missing Out: FOMO was added to the Oxford English Dictionary in

2013. “Anxiety that an exciting or interesting event may currently be happening

elsewhere, often aroused by posts seen on social media.” One study defined it as

“the uneasy and sometimes all-consuming feeling that you’re missing out – that

your peers are doing, in the know about, or in possession of more or something

better than you.”

• KMOO - Keep My Options Open: To refrain from making a decision or commitment

that will limit one's choices in the future.

• CMON - Construct My Own Narrative: We create our own story. We write our own

script. We do not acknowledge or recognize we are actually in the midst of another

greater and grander story, the story of God’s “in the beginning.” Rather than having

transcendent meaning and purpose, we need to create it from moment to moment.

And my meaning and worth is as significant as the last like on my post or picture.

Social or behavioral Contagion: The spread of ideas, attitudes, or behaviour patterns

in a group through imitation and conformity.

• These describe the cultural moment/mood. But they create

a fog, concealing God and transcendent truth. We need the

sun to burn off the fog so we can see the landscape, the

terrain, the path, the beauty. So in contrast to the spirit of

the age, God describes a different eternal, transcultural

truth, reflective of the spirit of the ages.

• DLOL - Delight in the Law of the Lord: We were created by

God for God (Col. 1:16; Rev. 4:11). “You have made us for

yourself, and our hearts are restless, until they can find rest

in you.” (Augustine, The Confessions, Book 1).

THE STATE OF THEOLOGY SURVEY

The State of Theology, Ligonier Ministries (LifeWay Research

conducted the survey of 3000 Americans)

• 20% of the U.S. population profess evangelical beliefs,

affirming that they can be saved only by Christ’s death on

the cross and that the Bible is the highest authority.

• 91% of evangelicals affirm justification is by faith alone.

• 52% of evangelicals agreed with the statement, “Everyone

sins a little, but most people are good by nature.”

• 51% of evangelicals agreed that God accepts the worship of

all religious, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

• 78% of evangelicals agreed that Jesus is the first and

greatest being created by God.”

• 60% of Americans agreed that religious belief is a matter of

personal opinion, not objective truth.

• 64% of Millennials (18-34) agreed that there will be a time

when Jesus Christ returns to judge all people who have

ever lived.

• 57% of Millennials agreed that abortion is a sin, 5% higher

than the general American population.

• Millennials were the most likely to endorse unbiblical

views on gender and homosexuality, and 36% said they

think God is unconcerned with their day-to-day decisions.

• Half of Millennial Christians Say It’s Wrong to Evangelize:

Survey finds young believers want others to know about

Jesus. They just don’t want to speak up about it.

• “But new research from Barna Group and the creators of

the Alpha course offers some disappointing news

regarding the 20-somethings and 30-somethings now on

deck to carry on the faith: nearly half (47%) of practicing

Christian millennials—churchgoers who consider religion

an important part of their lives—believe that evangelism is

wrong.”

THE BIBLE AND DOCTRINE:THE RELATIONSHIP

Exegesis ≠ Theology/Doctrine

Exegesis ≠ Theology/Doctrine

Exegesis = Theology/Doctrine

Exegesis ≠ Theology/Doctrine

Exegesis = Theology/Doctrine

Exegesis -> Theology/Doctrine

THE BIBLE AND DOCTRINE:A BETTER WAY

Understanding the Integrated Disciplines

Here are five interdependent disciplines associated with the study of the

Bible.

Careful Reading: “‘Exegesis’ is the word often used for careful reading.

Exegesis answers the questions, What does this text actually say? and,

What did the author mean by what he said? We discover this by applying

sound principles of interpretation to the Bible.”

Biblical Theology: “BT answers the question, “How has God revealed his

word historically and organically.” For example, consider the theme of

Shepherd (Ps. 23; Ezek. 34; John 10).

Historical Theology: “HT answers the questions, How have people in the

past understood the Bible? What have Christians thought about exegesis

and theology? and, more specifically, How has Christian doctrine

developed over the centuries, especially in response to false teachings. HT

is concerned primarily with opinions in periods other than our own. But

we may also include under this heading the importance of reading the

Bible globally – that is, finding out how believers in some other parts of

the world read the text.”

Systematic Theology: “ST answers the question, What does the whole Bible

teach about certain topics? or put another way, What is true about God

and his universe?”

Pastoral Theology: “PT answers the question, How should humans

respond to God’s revelation. Sometimes that is spelled out by Scripture

itself; other times it builds on inferences of what Scripture says. PT

practically applies the other four disciplines – so much so that the other

disciplines are in danger of being sterile and even dishonoring to God

unless tied in some sense to the responses God rightly demands of us.”

DOCTRINAL ESSENTIALS AND NON-ESSENTIALS

norma absoluta: absolute norm, applicable only to Scripture as principium theologiae (Scripture and God, the revelation and the one who reveals himself)

norma normans: the standardizing norm, applied to Scripture as that norm standing behind the standardized confessions

norma normata: a standardized norm applied to church confessions as they set forth the truths of Scripture.

Fundamentals of the Faith and Secondary Matters

Richard Muller (Richard A. Muller, Dictionary of Latin and

Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant

Scholastic Theology [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985], 45-46)

identifies the way in which the Lutheran and Reformed

Scholastics addressed this issue in order of importance:

articuli fundamentals, the fundamental articles (of faith or

doctrine); articuli fundamentals secundarii, secondary

fundamental articles and articuli non-fundamentales,

nonfundamental articles.

articuli fundamentales: fundamental articles (of faith or doctrine) – “the basic doctrines necessary to the Christian faith are distinguished from secondary or logically derivative doctrines.” These are the “doctrines without which Christianity cannot exist and the integrity of which is necessary to the preservation of the faith” (the body of truth once for all entrusted to the saints). This “includes only articles given by revelation, viz., the doctrine of sin and its consequences; the doctrine of the person and work of Christ; the doctrine of the resurrection; and the doctrine of the scriptural Word as the ground of faith.” This category is used to distinguish these fundamental articles, those of “first importance” (1 Cor. 15:3) “from certain highly important derivative articles, like baptism and the Lord’s Supper.”

Fundamentals of the Faith and Secondary Matters

articuli fundamentales secundarii: secondary fundamental articles

– some of the fundamental articles “such as those concerned

with baptism and the Lord’s Supper, might be lacking in a

person’s faith, or at least lacking in correct definition, and

that person still be saved in the promises of the gospel, since

forgiveness of sins rests on faith in Christ, as witnessed in the

Word, and not on acceptance of the doctrines of baptism and

the Lord’s Supper.” Despite these differences and divides, the

conclusion was that adherents of the other view were “Christian

and participated in the promise of salvation in Christ because of

their acceptance of the primary fundamental doctrines of the

person and work of Christ,” even though they voiced concern that

the other person’s doctrinal system was considered endangered.

Fundamentals of the Faith and Secondary Matters

articuli non-fundamentales: nonfundamental articles –

“articles the denial of which does not endanger

salvation since they are not fundamental to the

maintenance of Christian truth and are not

concerned with the objects of faith,” e.g., identity of

the Antichrist and the nature of angels. “Such doctrines,

nonetheless, are scriptural and, therefore, if rightly

stated, edifying.”

Essential vs. Peripheral Doctrine

Erik Thoennes, Life’s

Biggest Questions: What

the Bible Says about the

Things That Matter Most

(Wheaton: Crossway,

2011), 35-36.

The relative importance of theological

issues can fall within four categories:

1. absolutes define the core beliefs of the

Christian faith;

2. convictions, while not core beliefs, may

have significant impact on the health

and effectiveness of the church;

3. opinions are less-clear issues that

generally are not worth dividing over;

and

4. questions are currently unsettled issues.

Where an issue falls within these categories

should be determined by weighing the

cumulative force of at least eight considerations:

1. biblical clarity;

2. relevance to the character of God;

3. relevance to the essence of the gospel;

4. biblical frequency and significance (how

often in Scripture it is taught, and what

weight Scripture places upon it);

5. effect on other doctrines;

6. consensus among Christians (past and

present);

7. effect on personal and church life; and

8. current cultural pressure to deny a teaching

of Scripture.

“All the categories should be considered collectively in

determining how important an issue is to the Christian faith. The

ability to rightly discern the difference between core doctrines

and legitimately disputable matters will keep the church from

either compromising important truth or needlessly dividing over

peripheral issues.” Erik Thoennes, Life’s Biggest Questions: What

the Bible Says about the Things That Matter Most (Wheaton:

Crossway, 2011), 36.

• Divisive people are ones who elevate lower-level issues to

divide fors.

• False teachers treat die for issues as questions open for

humble discussion.

Essentials and Non-Essentials

C. Michael Patton,

“Essentials and Non-

Essentials in a Nutshell”:

http://credohouse.org/blo

g/essentials-and-non-

essentials-in-a-nutshell

DOGMATIC RANK AND A STATEMENT OF FAITH: EFCA

• “the gospel . . . as of first importance (1 Cor. 15:1-3)

• “sound doctrine, in accordance with the glorious

gospel” of the blessed God with which I have been

entrusted” (1 Tim. 1:10-11).

• “only let your manner of life be worthy of the

gospel of Christ” (Phil. 1:27).

• “conduct was not in step with the truth of the

gospel (Gal. 2:14).

DOGMATIC RANK

Of First Importance

Of Second Importance

Of Third Importance

Disputable Matters

We have identified four categories of dogmatic rank*:

1. Of First Importance

2. Of Second Importance

3. Of Third Importance

4. Disputable Matters

*Dogmatic rank: the notion that not all doctrinal claims stand on

the same level.

This four-level framework has been selected because it allows

for enough nuance and distinction between levels without

becoming overly complex. The two poles of this four-level

framework are drawn directly from Scripture. Paul says, “For

what I received I passed on to you as of first importance …” (1

Cor. 15:3). In Romans 14:1 he also says, “Accept the one whose

faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters.”

(emphasis mine)

We have also developed a taxonomy/grid by which we

determine this rank, the category in which a certain doctrinal

issue falls:

1. Relevance to our understanding of the nature and character of

God: To what extent does this doctrine or practice reveal the

person and nature of God?

2. Connection to the gospel and the overarching narrative of the

Bible: How directly is this doctrine or practice connected to

the gospel and to the storyline of the whole Bible?

3. Exegetical clarity: To what extent does Scripture

unambiguously affirm this doctrine or practice?

4. Biblical prominence: How prominent is this doctrine or

practice in Scripture?

5. Historical consensus: How widespread is the consensus on

this doctrine or practice in the Church of both the past and

present?

6. Application to the church and the believer: How relevant is

this doctrine or practice to us today?

God and his word are uniquely connected. What God says is

grounded in his nature. His nature is revealed and reflected in his

speech. The Bible stands alone as God’s Word. It is not included

in the grid. In other words, we must affirm the inerrancy and

absolute authority of the Bible. There is no disagreement or

equivocation on that. Beginning with the Bible as foundational,

we then consider these six issues to determine dogmatic rank.

While affirming the truth and truthfulness of the whole Bible,

there will be differences of understanding. This is when we begin

to apply the principles to discern dogmatic rank.

The mark of true theological liberalism is the refusal to admit

that essential doctrinal and theological issues even exist.

Liberals treat essential doctrines as if they were merely

opinions, questions or speculations, and doctrinal ambiguity is

the inevitable result.

Theological Liberalism

Fundamentalism, on the other hand, tends toward the opposite

error. The misjudgment of true fundamentalism is the belief

that all disagreements concern doctrinal and theological

essentials. Thus, opinions, questions or speculations are

raised to an essential, and Christians are wrongly and

harmfully divided.

Fundamentalism

THEOLOGICAL ISSUES AND TRENDS

What do you think are the most critical biblical, theological,

missiological, moral/ethical/bioethical, cultural issues facing us

at the moment? What might be some issues on the horizon

looking ahead to the next 5-10 years? Since we are not prophets,

it is easier to assess the former than the latter, but there are

some trends that can be ascertained that may shed a dim light

on what may be ahead.

One New Testament scholar writes the following, which gives the

proper context in which to think about issues and trends:

• What is "on the horizon" looks different in different denominations, in

different parts of the country, in different demographic sectors even

within the church. As for the greatest needs, the ones of which I am most

certain are the perennial ones: the centrality of the gospel, such Spirit-

empowered transformation that we love holiness, death to self-interest,

the importance of the local church, and the like. The particular pressures

against these important and urgent needs vary quite a bit, but the central

needs themselves do not change very much. And if we think they do, we

are probably in danger of being seduced by relatively secondary things.