...turned unto fables...

As an institution, the church has lost its passion for truth and is no longer preparing the saints to recognize and deal with the false prophets and false doctrines that have, as predicted, become so pervasive (Mt. 24-11 & 24). Likewise, the church is not preparing the saints to withstand the persecution and tribulation that is part of the run-up to the date the world has with Armageddon (Rev. 13:7). Indeed, churches have become part of the problem. Most promote a form of “itching ears theology” that is based more on filling the pews and coffers than on sound doctrine. To compete for “contributors”, they have stretched the positive while glossing over and watering down the hard truths. This has gone on to the point that much of what emanates from pulpits today is bordering on fairy tale and many believers have been “turned unto fables” (2nd Tim 4:4).

In an effort to appeal to the world, the church is losing its soul. It’s a very short, steep, and slippery slope between putting a positive spin on an ugly truth and perverting the gospel. When the church began to put a positive “spin” on doctrine in order to win converts (aka contributors), those doctrines were bound to devolve into the “doctrines of devils”. We would do well to heed Jesus’ warning from Matthew 16:6, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees”. We know from verse 12 that He wasn’t talking about bread; Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. What an apt analogy; doctrinal error is just like leaven; once it is introduced, it spreads almost supernaturally throughout the loaf. Such are the fables that pass for doctrine today. Apart from a remnant that God is never without, the whole church is infected.

How did this leaven get into the loaf? From the very beginning the church began to split into factions and compete for followers. Differing doctrinal positions were behind most of the splits. We see the earliest examples in Acts Chapter 15 involving some of the heroes of our faith. Paul and Barnabas were said to be involved in “no small dissension and disputation” with people promoting doctrine with which Paul and Barnabas disagreed (15:2). Even when the matter was taken to the highest levels, there was still “much disputing” (15:7). Ultimately, Peter’s well thought out argument won the day and at least the Apostles weren’t split. The point is that doctrinal issues have been, and always will be, with us. As long as they are decided on the basis of fidelity to truth, there is no problem. When the question of appeal becomes a factor in determining doctrinal positions, we don’t just invite error, we invite evil. It’s all the opening the Devil needs to introduce and eventually substitute his watered down and powerless perversion of the gospel.

Unfortunately, appeal was allowed to become a factor. Indeed, I believe it has become a major factor in the modern era. The sects, that we now call denominations, may have been born out of pure doctrinal differences; but ultimately, in order to survive, they had to frame those differences in ways that appeal to prospective followers; even if that meant rounding off the rough edges of truth. These new doctrines were then taught by the colleges and seminaries established by the denominations for the purpose of indoctrinating new pastors. Pastors are almost compelled to accept the doctrine of the denomination in charge of the school, college, or seminary they attend; and members of the pastor’s church are pretty well trained not to question the pastor’s doctrine as long as it is in line with the denomination.

Consequently, error, introduced for the sake of appeal, is nearly impossible to purge from the system. Any attempt at correction has three strikes against it before it even starts. The indoctrination process insures the error will be taught to all incoming pastors. The appeal that led the church to adopt the error in the first place is not likely to be overcome by congregants who are largely apathetic when it comes to issues of doctrine. Finally, not many people have a “burden” for the church as a whole and even fewer see doctrinal purity as the basis upon which the church will either rise or fall. Accepting second, third, or fourth hand doctrine based on another person’s understanding of truth is a lot less time consuming. You can quote a lot of statistics from a lot of different sources to show that even born again Christians don’t read their Bibles. Only about 35% of Christians even claim to read them on a regular basis. A much smaller percentage; about 5%, have ever read the Bible cover to cover. Since these people spend little time in the Word of truth, they have no basis for questioning second hand doctrine, or developing their own. It pains me to say it, but based on these figures, and other evidence, there aren’t a lot of lovers of truth even among those who claim to serve the God of truth. Where are the Bereans of our day?