How Do We Arrive at the Right Doctrine?

The other day, Jan started a thread on the forum* under the title “the right doctrine.” He begins his contribution as follows:

Recently there has been intense discussion on this forum about weighty doctrinal issues. “Does man have free will?”, “Has God foreordained everything?”. The issue is what the right doctrine is in these matters. Finding the right doctrine is comparable to finding the correct scientific theory for physical (biological and chemical) phenomena. It is also comparable to finding conclusive proof that a certain person is guilty of a certain crime.

In all these cases, there are a limited number of “clues” (Bible passages, physical phenomena, forensic clues, etc.), and these clues must be creatively related to one another so that a conclusive “doctrine,” “theory,” or “legal proof of guilt” emerges.

Although I agree with what Jan goes on to say, I object to the above portrayal. Biblical doctrine is not obtained by drawing correct conclusions but by simply believing what “is written.” “Sound doctrine” is not some kind of academic theory laboriously arrived at by “brilliant minds.” “Sound doctrine” is the doctrine that is clearly and explicitly taught in Scripture. All that is needed for this is to let Scripture itself speak, assuming for convenience that the biblical wording corresponds to the original text and that it has not been taken out of context.

To determine whether a statement is “sound doctrine,” I do not need to be trained in correct reasoning, but only to ask the question: where is that written in Scripture? I have discovered that this makes my thinking considerably more efficient. This attitude also makes me alert to unsound terminology. I strive for phrases and terms that are based, as much as possible, on biblical vocabulary.

When I apply this criterion, many theories fail at the very first screening. Scripture does not speak of the “Trinity” (but it does say there is “one God, the Father”). Scripture does not speak of “free will” (but it does say that God “is operating in you to will as well as to work”). Scripture does not speak of “God the Son” (but of “the Son of God”). Scripture does not speak of an immortal soul (but of “The soul that is sinning, it shall die.”). Scripture does not speak of Satan’s fall into sin (but that “from the beginning is the Adversary sinning”). Scripture does not speak of endless punishment in hell (but that “the living God, Who is the Saviour of all mankind”).

Not everyone may be happy with all the examples given, but bear in mind that each of them is a statement of fact. My point here is not the content of the examples given, but solely to promote that we derive our assertions directly from what “is written.” Worth mentioning in this connection is that the word for “confess” in the New Testament is omo logeo. Literally, this means “say the same.” Therefore, right or correct confession is by definition not a creative activity; on the contrary, it is (so to speak) simply parroting what has been said.

(*Forum is offline, 2026)

Share: