Doctrine Unites, Part 3
Posted by Matt Postiff July 13, 2026 on Matt Postiff's Blog under Theology
Why is the mantra "doctrine divides" as it is commonly used actually a false teaching?
First, because proponents practically assume most division is wrong (see parts 1 and 2). But the Scripture presents ample evidence that separation from false doctrine is a basic aspect of the Christian faith. This is so because of God’s holiness. Doctrines that do not agree with God’s word are not holy and thus not pleasing to God.
Second, because proponents over-emphasize unity at the expense of truth. Unity is important, but unity around the truth is what God desires, not unity for unity’s sake with error mixed in. We are called to be one as the Father and the Son are one, John 17:11, 22. They are and always have been and always will be perfectly agreed with one another, of the same mind, of one accord. “As” means we are to be unified in the same manner—not just unified in any way.
Third, because practitioners of "doctrine divide" downplay genuinely important doctrines that are critical for developing a Biblical, Christian worldview. Matters such as the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture, the historicity of the creation account, the historicity of the flood account, God’s irrevocable promises to Abraham, and many others are critical to a Biblical worldview. They are doctrines and they are interwoven into all of Biblical revelation. Taking them out undercuts much of Scripture. They cannot be simply set aside for unity’s sake.
Fourth, because some proponents accuse those on the opposite side of possessing a schismatic spirit. If A accuses B of over-emphasizing doctrine and tells him that doctrine divides, person B may well respond that he has no desire to divide. He is just holding to what Scripture plainly teaches and wants to convince others to do the same. A schismatic person is much different than a person who has thought through a Biblical question and come to a specific answer. For example, believing that inerrancy is worth taking a strong stand is not schismatic. I would argue that departing from that standard and uncontroversial doctrine is what is schismatic.