Before we look at this topic, it might be worthwhile to comment on the occurrence of the two Greek words for “sound” and “doctrine” in our Bibles. Although the words individually occur more than 30 times, in combination they only occur four times, and those instances are in Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus. In these three epistles Paul is giving his last charges to these two younger men, and in doing so, touches on the importance of sound doctrine in their own lives, and in the lives of those with which they were in contact.
What is sound doctrine?
Not being a Greek scholar, nor living in the 1st century, it’s not possible to give a full description of what this phrase meant to those receiving these letters, but it would seem that the thought contained in this phrase denotes “the content of teaching which is healthy and properly developed.”
The word “sound” carries the thought of “wholesome” or “well-developed” when speaking of a person, and this thought is present when speaking of doctrine also.
Doctrine, in this context, refers to the content of the teaching. It isn’t any particular item of doctrine, as we might refer to the “doctrine of salvation,” but the whole body of the things taught.
Why is sound doctrine important?
The first instance of this phrase is in 1 Timothy 1:10 where Paul writes that the conduct which he describes is “contrary to sound doctrine.” The consistent teaching of the New Testament is that what is in the heart gives rise to conduct. If our conduct is to be wholesome, what is in our heart must be also. Our Lord used the figure of a tree and its fruit. The character of the tree is seen in the fruit. So the first reason why sound doctrine is important is that without it, there will not be godly conduct.
In 2 Timothy 4:3, Paul talks about people who cannot tolerate sound doctrine, but look only for those teachers who are pleasant to listen to, with the result that they become occupied with fables. Sound doctrine may not be easy to listen to, but it is an antidote to being led astray. In the context of today’s Christian society, this is an important thought to keep in mind. Have we sunk to the level of being more concerned about how pleasant the words are than how truthful they are?
The qualifications for elders given in Titus 1 point out that it is by sound doctrine that the shepherds of the flock are able to deal with those who are “gainsayers” and who subvert whole households.
As Paul introduces the role of the teacher in the various aspects of the local assembly (Titus 3), he says that it is to be consistent with sound doctrine.
So we see that in all areas of life—our conduct, heeding good teaching, refuting those who oppose, and teaching the various groups in the local assembly—sound doctrine is the foundation.
What are the marks of sound doctrine?
There are a number of ways in which we could evaluate sound doctrine, but perhaps the following very simple points would be a help.
• Sound doctrine is Christ-honoring
• Sound doctrine is internally consistent
• Sound doctrine is based on solid biblical principles
Sound doctrine is Christ-honoring: The first and most important mark of sound doctrine will be that it brings honor to our Lord Jesus. The aim of the enemy is to diminish His honor, and the mark of most of the heresies from the 1st century to the present day is that they diminish the honor of our Lord. This has been done in many ways—from the outright denial of His deity, through the various permutations of teaching which would say that He is an angelic being, or only partially God, to doctrines that would in subtle ways make Him less glorious than He actually is.
So when we encounter a particular group or body of doctrine, that diminishes either His person or His work, we need to be wary. It is likely that we are in the presence of unsound doctrine.
A second aspect to this is that our own studies and thinking need to always keep Him in our focus. Our studies, thinking, preaching, and teaching ought always to be Christ-centered. This will then be sound doctrine.
Sound doctrine is internally consistent: Not too long ago I was reading a book that decried the lack of the teaching of logic in our schools. The author’s point was that very few of us in this day have the ability (or desire) to think logically about a particular statement or teaching. The book was written from an entirely secular viewpoint, but the thought is applicable to biblical teaching, to our doctrine. Peter writes in his first epistle that we are to gird up the loins of our mind and think soberly. The context is that of holy living, but it is applicable to all areas of doctrine.
We should think things through carefully with a view to examining the internal and external consistency of the particular area of teaching. For example, the results of our study of the typology of the Tabernacle should not contradict our theology of the person and work of our Lord Jesus. Because all Scripture is from one Author, there will be no contradiction if we have understood things correctly.
Of course, there will be times when we will not be able to fully understand some of the things we study, since they will touch on areas outside our realm of time and space; but the things that we are able to grasp should not contradict one another. The Scripture itself is perfectly consistent, and our study of it should not lead to contradictory teaching. This is a valuable concept to keep in mind when dealing with the cults. Their doctrines will often be internally contradictory.
This is a common cause of error. Sometimes a person will become so engrossed in a particular narrow area, to the exclusion of all other areas, that he might wander off into ideas that could properly be termed “speculative.” One man was heard to say that he had not studied or thought of anything else but “baptism” for a period of more than six months. Intensive and careful study is good; but we need to guard against “tunnel vision.”
It is based on solid biblical principles
The third point is somewhat related to the preceding ones. What do I mean by “solid biblical principles”? The principles referred to are what might be understood as foundational. For example, we understand the Bible to be the Word of God. That implies accuracy and precision. Therefore, when we might be tempted to discard from our thinking a passage which does not seem to agree with the conclusions at which we have arrived, we need to pull ourselves up short. If my thinking seems to contradict the Scripture, then it is my thinking that is wrong, not God’s Word.
Another principle would be that we understand the clear sense of the Scripture to be the correct interpretation, unless there are good reasons to do otherwise. An example here could be that if we find ourselves having to allegorize or spiritualize at every turn, we are doing something wrong. If, for instance, my view of prophetic matters means that I cannot see any future for Israel as a nation, and I have to see all the prophecies of the Old and New Testament as having only allegoric or “spiritual” application, then I need to go back and re-examine my basic principles. Without an extreme degree of stretch, these prophecies relating to Israel and her return to the land under her promised King can only be seen as literal and historical.
What are the results of sound doctrine?
The world sometimes says, “You are what you eat.” Applying this to the subject at hand, if you wish to have a healthy spiritual life, and know a healthy assembly life, sound doctrine must be the diet. Paraphrasing a godly author of the last century, “Principles are more important than practice, but practice reveals principles.”
There are other reasons for a lack of soundness in the spiritual life of the believer, or of the local assembly, but a lack of sound doctrine is an important one.
It is this author’s prayer that the Lord’s people, and the assemblies they fellowship in, will be known as sound in doctrine and in personal life.