I recall with great fondness my days at Bible college.

We “scholars” revealed our naivety

as we argued incessantly about theological matters while gulping down really bad cafeteria

food. Amazingly enough, these arguments served to divide us into two ecclesial categories:

those of the “word” and those of the “Spirit.” The “word men/women” were those who

appealed to the Bible as final and absolute authority in all issues concerning everything with

no room for deviation from the “definitive biblical absolutes” we had been given in class.

The “Spirit men/women” were those who, while believing in and trusting the Bible, felt it

was not quite as important as an “experience with God” and constantly recounted tales of

midnight prayer meetings. The “word” people would always question the “Spirit” people

about the biblical authenticity of their experience. At the same time, the “Spirit” people

would question the “word” people for their rigid and cold doctrinal stances.

Unfortunately, the same scenario above is played out in churches and denominations

across the world. There are those who feel that “doctrinal” teaching is the only answer. After

all, they argue, “We just need more word and people will come right.” Others call on church

leadership to organize more prayer meetings and revival services in order to “revive the dead

saints who are fat with church doctrine.” But who is right? Should Scripture be primarily a

tool of doctrinal instruction or of spiritual formation? Does one have to surrender pride of

place to other or can they work in tandem to accomplish God’s will in the lives of believers?

Is Scriptural doctrinal teaching necessary in the church today? Yes! Pastoral experience

has taught me that people are interested in being able to articulate what their church believes.

Though anecdotal in nature, my observations have led me to conclude that those who can

succinctly express their church’s doctrine tend to be more engaged in missional activities.

Nevertheless, merely being able to communicate dogma well does not mean someone is

necessarily being shaped by it. Anyone, I suppose, can memorize a “What We Believe”

statement (along with the standard biblical references) but that does not always translate into

1
a life that is being formed by the statement? My proposition should not be construed as

implying doctrine, derived from the foundation of good biblical interpretation and connected

to Christian orthodoxy/tradition, should be set aside. Instead we should insist on some form

of doctrinal catechism being included in the formational process of all believers. Coupled

with the catechismal instruction however should be some form of modeling that encourages

the believer to engage Scripture on a personal and practical level. This means congregants

become knowledgeable of church beliefs so as to articulate them to others. But believers

should also be equipped to understand, interpret and apply Scripture in their location (cf.

Westpahl 2009, 108). Another possibility is the believer can be mentored in such a way as to

develop the habits of obedience, receptivity, and vigilance in order to hear the Spirit through

tradition and Scripture and act appropriately (Addison 2006, 445). The hopeful result of

church doctrine coupled with mentoring should be a believer who not only embodies the

word of God but also manifests its inspirational characteristic through performance or, put

another way, by incarnating a Spirit-led Scripture shaped life.

The dual edged blade of doctrinal instruction and scriptural life formation provides a

model giving appropriate attention to the voices of doctrine and formation derived from

Scripture. The Scriptures, through tradition and orthodoxy, speak from behind the believer

assuring him or her of a firm foundation established by years of listening and looking for

God. The Scriptures, through present-day reading and listening, compels the believer to add

his or her voice to the host of witnesses. The contemporary voice is not limited to writing

further doctrinal material but also speaks through acting upon the example of the past and

how the Scripture spoke to them personally. Thus, the Scriptures are affirmed by their actions

and in their action formation is being achieved.

2
 References

Paddison, A. (2006). Scriptural reading and revelation: a contribution to local hermeneutics.

International Journal of Systematic Theology, 8(4), 433-448.

Westpahl, M. (2009). Whose community? Which interpretation? Grand Rapids, MI: Baker

Academic.