In the previous post, I wrote a lot about creeds. One of the arguments that I’ve heard for having them, at least in Protestant circles, is the idea that they guard against theological “threats”.
And to that I’ll just list the relevant Scripture here (not a exhaustive list, I’m sure!) with some bits of commentary:
Rom 16:17
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Seems pretty self-explanatory. Nothing about needing to write anything to “lock down” the bounds of Orthodoxy™.
Tit 3:9-11
But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
Note that the word “heretick” in the KJV is a transliteration of the Greek word hairetikós, not an actual translation. Other Bible versions translate this as “divisive person”, “a person who stirs up division”, “a factious man”, and even “a sectarian man”.
1 Tim 1:9-11
Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.
What’s interesting here is that doctrine relates to behavior and living, not intellectual affirmations. I’m not implying that it’s like this everywhere (Galatians 1:8-9 comes to mind!), but that there’s a wider semantic range with the word doctrine…which it kind of has even in English today; a policy or principal, especially when established by precedent (e.g. the Monroe Doctrine or legal doctrine in general).
1 Tim 1:18-20
This charge I commit to you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, having faith and a good conscience, which some having rejected, concerning the faith have suffered shipwreck, of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.
It’s very clear that Paul doesn’t feel the need to employ additional creeds or confessions to the churches. He straight up Ubers them to the Devil.
1 Tim 6:20-21
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.
Paul mentions those who err, but only commands that the content and behavior is to be avoided.
2 Tim 2:16-19
But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.
Again, Paul doesn’t use or tell Timothy to create a creed in response, but rather assures him that the Lord knows who His genuine children are and provides a call to action for all who are Christian to depart from iniquity themselves.
Also of note that there are certainly in fact false propositions/statements that are to be shunned. In this case, it’s the claim that the resurrection is already past, which is profane (profane in that it disorients people from that which is sacred and good). We could say the same things about other truth claims to reality that ought to be held such as the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
2 Thess 3:6-15
Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you…For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat…And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.
Same deal here. It’s to admonish, rebuke, part company with, hand over to Satan (see also the passages about the Corinthian man in sexual immorality). This appears to be the pattern of dealing with divisive men, false teachers, etc: Don’t follow their ways, don’t follow their conduct, note them, mark them, and if they don’t yield, don’t associate with them and kick them out of the church.
In my next and final post about creeds and such, I’ll briefly be examining a very popular Christian creed and see what fruits it bore and if it did what advocates of such things claim to have accomplished.