What is meant when it is said that doctrine is not an end? I asserted this in a sermon a week ago last Sunday evening.
Consider this possibility: A person can be doctrinally sound yet spiritually inept. Doctrine can be likened to law. We certainly understand what is meant by the difference in speaking of "the letter of the law" versus "the spirit of the law."
Religion must, at bare minimum, motivate and empower one to rise to a higher state of being. The most potent and efficient means of expressing Christianity's goal must involve the concept of bearing God's image. Orthodoxy (doctrinal soundness) as the primary goal betrays a limited and narrow understanding of what must be meant by the description, disciple of Jesus Christ. Hence, as stated above, one can be doctrinally sound yet spiritually inept.
Of course, I am not opposed to doctrinal soundness. However, I am contending that we can become so focused on the letter of the law that we fail to develop with regard to compliance with the spirit. Discipleship is a matter of being. It must involve transformation.
Does this post make sense to you? What are your thoughts?
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Doctrinally sound yet spiritually inept
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Yes it makes perfect sense to me. We can get so caught up in trying to get our doctrine perfect that we can miss the spirit of being a Christian.
Both the doctrine and the spirit of the law are important and we should do our best to develop both to the best of our ability but if i had to choose I would rather error of the side of the "spirit" of the law.
Thanks for your post, i always enjoy reading them. Wayne
The non-institutional groups seem to equate turning someone into a sound-doctrine church-of-christ member with evangelism and the gospel.
Post a Comment