First, when our discourses lead us into the realm of peripheral doctrine (e.g. predestination and election, speaking in tongues, timing of the rapture, etc.) we must diligently strive to maintain a spirit of humility.  Recognizing that many of evangelicalism’s most highly respected biblical scholars, theologians and exegetes land on opposing sides of these debates should help to restrain the dogmatism we might otherwise unleash when it comes to teaching and defending “the essentials.”

Second, we can help to guard against doctrinal bias and error by incorporating three approaches to self-study: (1) consult a multiplicity of reputable commentaries, especially those that are authored by scholars of differing bents; (2) research specialty books that are reputed for a strong defense of their respective positions; and (3) BE WILLING to sacrifice our positions on the altar of pride should the Spirit compel us.  I am convinced that it is not until we have adequately examined and understood the arguments of those who hold views that run counter to our own that we can approach the biblical text and teach others with even a modicum of intellectual honesty.  This is, of course, a lifelong pursuit and one to which all Christian teachers should rigorously aspire.

Case in point, I was a hard determinist (a.k.a. “strong Calvinist”) for many years, although I chose to never formally teach this doctrine.  It wasn’t until I read Dr. Norman Geisler’s Chosen But Free that I began to seriously scrutinize my position and consider what some refer to as the “moderate Calvinist” viewpoint.  Dr. James White, in The Potter’s Freedom, countered Geisler with a formidable defense of Calvinism, which prompted Geisler to rebut White in a second edition of Chosen.  What followed was a couple more years of research, reflection and ultimately a change of heart and mind (not necessarily in that order).  Was this easy to do in the face of a ministry where such a high premium is rightly placed on credibility and doctrinal self-certainty?  Certainly not!  Have I demonstrated to myself and perhaps others that personal pride is less likely to be a hindrance to my discernment of peripheral biblical doctrine?  I certainly hope so!  Am I now more willing to formally teach on the biblical doctrines of predestination and election?  Not necessarily, but this leads me to my final rumination.

When it comes to teaching from the Bible, or more specifically addressing texts that bear on hotly-debated peripheral doctrines, I believe we better serve our students not by dogmatically defending our positions, but by teaching them to approach the Scriptures with a healthy dose of humility and objectivity.  Does this mean we avoid sharing our personal positions and the insights that led us to them?  I don’t think so.  Rather, we temper our tautologies with the self-understanding that our culpability before the LORD is at least in part due to the sway we hold as teachers over many of our hearers.  We would do well to exercise this sway by wielding the gift of teaching in the manner and for the discretionary doctrines God intended.  The apostle Paul reminds us: “By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you.  Otherwise you have believed in vain” (1 Cor. 15:2 NIV; italics mine).