Exposing Error
When dealing with error, we need to define the problem first. This means understanding the questionable doctrine on its own terms. Any respectable critique must avoid caricatures, straw man fallacies, and other misrepresentation. We should aim to define the view as well as its proponents can. We need to understand the main arguments and the motivation for making them.
Then we need to compare the view to Scripture. With Scripture as our standard, we can properly identify error. Does it contradict any Scripture passages? Which Scriptures seem to support it? We should not act on a general feeling that a view is wrong. We need to be able to point to specific Scriptures and explain why they mitigate against the errant doctrine. And if there are passages which seem to support the error, we need to know how those passages have typically been understood by believers and whether or not they are being understood correctly by those promoting the error.
If we have understood the doctrine in question, and we have compared it to Scripture and determined that it is errant, we need to expose it by publicly identifying the source of the error. This is the hardest and least popular step. But unless we make the source of the error clear, we leave others vulnerable. If it is a minor doctrinal issue, it may be wise to address the problem generally without identifying its source. But if it is a gospel issue, we need to be willing to point fingers and name names. The editors of The Sword and Trumpet have always been willing to do this if necessary, and it was never popular. But it is increasingly unpopular in 21st century America, where being nice is preferred to “speaking the truth in love.” Yet it is necessary nonetheless.
We are in good company, though. Jesus and His followers (Paul, Peter, James, John, Jude) were all willing to point directly to the problem and its proponents, naming names when necessary. Paul withstood Peter to his face when he was in error (Gal. 2:11-13) and warned Timothy that “Alexander the coppersmith did me much harm” (2 Tim. 4:14), that “Phygellus and Hermogenes” had turned away from him (2 Tim. 1:15), and that “Hymenaeus and Philetus” had strayed concerning the truth (2 Tim. 2:17).
But none of this countenances unloving behavior toward weak, struggling individuals. The same Paul who called out erring men by name said we should “comfort the fainthearted, uphold the weak, be patient with all” (1 Thess. 5:14). Jude says we are to have compassion on some, “making a distinction” (Jude 22).
It is a bad day when a shepherd beats a sheep because he confuses it for a wolf. George Brunk I said, “We intend to make due allowance for ignorance and weakness in people.” That is to say, there are those who hold to error because they have been mistaken or misled. They need the truth as much as anyone, but how we administer it will be different in that case than in the case of blatant and determined error. We need to be humble, gentle, kind, and patient.
Some who have adopted error must be led out with patience and compassion. Others must be warned (cf. 1 Thess. 5:14) and saved with fear (Jude 23). Given that some heresies are damnable (cf. Gal. 1:8-9, 1 John 4:3), no temporal pain should be spared in attempting to save such a person from the eternal fires of hell. Biblical love requires speaking the truth—even when it’s painful—sincerely hoping that it will be received and that repentance will follow.
Why We Confront Error
Isn’t all this a bit inconvenient and unkind? Why would we bother to interfere in someone else’s matters? Why not leave well enough alone?
The Bible gives several reasons why we should confront error. First, because God has commanded it. Titus was appointed to pastor a church which was being influenced by “many insubordinate [people]…whose mouths must be stopped.” What were Paul’s instructions? “Rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith” (Titus 1:10-13). Titus, as leader of the church, needed to rebuke those who were in error (and those who were being misled) in order to preserve the purity of the church. Jude stands as an example of one who “found it necessary to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. For certain men have crept in unnoticed…who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Second, we need to confront error because we love others. Rebuke isn’t enjoyable, but when we avoid it we aren’t actually loving others. “Whom the LORD loves He chastens” (Heb. 12:6). If we are concerned for someone’s eternal destiny—and not just their temporary happiness—we need to speak the hard truth. As we find in James 5:19-20, “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.” If the truth is heard and the person is convicted, we may in fact be a part of saving him from eternal death.
Third, we need to confront error because we love God. This is the most necessary of the three, though it is the most neglected. We attack error and defend the truth because we love God. Jesus’ love for the glory of the Father motivated Him to cleanse the temple: “Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up.” (cf. John 2:13-22). If we truly love God, we will hate the error which tramples His glory into the mud.