Doctrine as the Road or the Map? Not really.

C.S. Lewis says that Doctrine and Theology is like a map that will be discarded in Heaven. "Now, Theology is like the map. Merely learning and thinking about the Christian doctrines, if you stop there, is less real and less exciting than the sort of thing my friend got in the desert. Doctrines are not God: they are only a kind of map. But that map is based on the experience of hundreds of people who really are in touch with God - experiences compared with which any thrills or pious feelings you and I are likely to get on our own are very elementary and very confused. And secondly, if you want to get any further, you must use the map. You see, what happened to that man in the desert may have been real, and was certainly exciting, but nothing comes of it. It leads nowhere. There is nothing to do about it. In fact, that is just why a vague religion - all about feeling God in nature, and so on - is so attractive. It is all thrills and no work: like watching the waves from the beach. But you will not get to Newfoundland by studying the Atlantic that way, and you will not get eternal life by simply feeling the presence of God in flowers or music. Neither will you get anywhere by looking at maps without going to sea. Nor will you be very safe if you go to sea without a map." - C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Pg. 154 - 155 (HarperSanFrancisco Zondervan Publishing House)

Even newer theologians are saying the same thing. Read what this little devil said in his book.

"A final word about the use of slogans and doctrines. Anthony Lane rightly says that doctrines are maps and models, not mathematical formulas. We must avoid, then, relying on simplistic appeals to sola fide, or condemning without conversation or understanding those who reject the term. Instead, we must ask what those who reject sola fide intend when they question its adequacy. Perhaps those who reject it and those who affirm it are speaking past each other." - Thomas Schreiner, Faith Alone, Page 17

Is it true that those who hold to the simple belief of the gospel alone to save are just talking past each other with those who teach one is saved by Christ and something else?

Several questions come to mind when reading what Lewis wrote: How is theology less real, How do you know God? What exactly is a feeling? But, Gordon Clark, who was probably not thinking of Lewis at the time or perhaps he was, wrote on this subject about making theology only the map.


Gordon Clark says, "Passing on from Barth and Brunner we now come to Dr. George S. Hendry, Professor of Systematic Theology at Princeton Seminary. It is not so much his rejection of predestination and the atonement to which attention is here directed, as it is the non-Christian view of the nature of religion that underlies these rejections. In his book The Westminster Confession for Today Dr. Hendry writes,

Doctrines are not faith; they are statements of faith in propositional form. Faith has often been compared to a journey or a pilgrimage. Doctrine may then be compared to a map. No one would suppose he had reached his destination merely because he had located it on the map, or traced the route that leads to it. Yet the map is an indispensable aid to any traveler in unfamiliar country. And just as the map is right when it enables the traveler to reach the end of his journey, so doctrine is right when it enables the pilgrim to reach the end of his faith.

One should note that this analogy applies to the Bible itself as well as to the creeds, for the Bible also is written in sentences - propositions. When, therefore, Dr. Hendry in the next sentence says that doctrines are never 'infallible and irreformable,' his words apply as much to the Word of God as to the Confession. On these premises the Bible must itself be amended, and not simply the creeds where and if they inadequately reflect the Bible.
The analogy is attractive, but like all analogies it is misleading. Obviously a doctrine or a set of doctrines is not our ultimate destination, Heaven. But it does not follow that doctrine is merely a map. If an illustration is needed, let us say that doctrine is the road itself. If we change the doctrine, we change the road and head off in a wrong direction. Here we recall Luke's words to the effect that doctrine (that is, the propositions Luke wrote) is 'a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us.'
In fact, this illustration of doctrine as map is so inept that even when corrected so as to make doctrine the road, it remains misleading. After we arrive at a destination, we not only throw away the map; we also cease using the road. But in Heaven we shall continue to believe these infallible and irreformable doctrines and learn many others, too. They will remain our precious possessions forever." - The Philosophy of Gordon H. Clark, Pg. 98

Christianity based on Doctrinal truth

 "It was less the miracles of the Apostles that gave to Christianity its outward extension and inward strength, than the substance, the truth of the doctrine itself. Christ himself says: 'Many will say to me at that day: Lord, Lord! . . .'" - G.W.F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, Page 329

In a lot of ways Hegel was a great rationalist, but in a lot of ways he was a collectivist.

Exhortations are to be Instructive and Doctrinal

"Exhortations should be Instructive and Doctrinal, Declaratory and Manifestative, as the Scriptures plainly show. We should find the Gospel in an exhortation, and not lose it there. An exhortation should be every way suited to the Gospel Profession in the Good News its self; and sinners are not to be told that the whole of exhortations are a practical point; for a great deal of them are Doctrinal and Instructive points; and he that never made this distinction in his very defence of exhortations, hath held forth rather his own darkness, than the Word of God hereabout, a Gospel Exhortation instructs into the objects, principles and springs of motion, agreeably with a new creature-change; and then under right discourses directs to the immediate duty of believing, repenting, &c." - Joseph Hussey, God's Operation of Grace, Pg. 386

The use of Faith

Some verses seem to teach that a believer might fall from grace.

However, the question becomes are there really such verses?

There are different uses of the word faith. It can be used as a verb or noun.

So if one is said to have fallen away from the faith? Does this mean that one actually had Faith?
The two uses are equivocal. Faith is a term used to denote a doctrinal system. The other use of the term is referring to our act of believing.

1 Timothy 4:1 1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 4For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: 5For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.


Tobias Crisp says, "But, Secondly, suppose the words to run as they are commonly rendered; I answer, then are we to distinguish in faith two things; there is the act of believing, and the object on which we believe; and so the words may be understood thus, 'Being justified; by the righteousness of faith, or by the righteousness of Christ which we believe, 'we have peace with God;' and so ascribe our justification to the object of our believing, the righteousness of Christ, and not to the act of believing." - Christ Alone Exalted, 127


Gordon H. Clark says this also.


"James 2:20 speaks of a dead faith. James also says that Abraham was justified by works and not by faith alone. How does this fit in with what Paul says? . . . The term faith has two very distinct meanings. Sometimes it means the mental activity of believing. . . . While the second meaning, namely the propositions believed, occurs in Revelation 2:13, 19 and 14:12. This second meaning is prominent in the pastoral epistles. Although many people confuse the two and slip from one to the other without realizing what they are doing. . . ." - Gordon H. Clark, Faith and Saving Faith

God is one and three in different senses

Van Til has said in his writings that Scripture is made up of paradoxes. One instance where he affirms this diabolical teaching is founs in his doctrine of what he would say is the Trinitarian view. Van Til says that God is one and three in the same sense. God is, for Van Til, one person and three persons at the same time. How he is able to say such things and with a straight face confounds me. However, the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity doesnt purport such nonsense. God is one and three in two different senses. God is one in essence but three in Persons. These things are not paradoxical. God is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent in essence but three in persons. What God is the three persons is. The three are co-eternal but not confused or confounded.

James 2 teaches us the importance of right doctrine

The point of James 2 is quite simple. No it has nothing to do with works righteousness or salvation hinging on works as the lordship salvation guy says. The point of the chapter is to say that Faith results in action. Right doctrine results in action. Even the devils believe that God is one and they shudder. Faith without works is dead. If Christ has really torn down the dividing wall of hostility and that there is now no distinction between Jew or Gentile, slave or free, ri...ch or poor then how might that result how we ought to live towards our brethren in Christ? We do not judge according to the law but we are now free from the cursed law. This is not a passage to endorse self righteousness. Macarthur is wrong and so are the Lordshipers who try to distinguish between works done by the power of the flesh or works done by grace. Simply put, this passage removes all kinds of boasting in ones works whether the works done are of flesh or of grace; for the passage is about right doctrine or more particularly right gospel doctrine and not about works.

No such thing as good fruit without good seed. Knowing truth matters first before any good works can be done

"... what an awful delusion has taken hold upon so many men's minds who ridicule the pure doctrine and say to us: 'Ah, do cease clamoring, pure doctrine! Pure doctrine! That can only land you in dead orthodoxism. Pay more attention to pure life, and you will raise a growth of genuine Christianity.' That is exactly like saying to a farmer: 'Do not worry forever about good seed; worry about good fruits.' Is not a farmer properly concerned about good fruit when he is solicitous about getting good seed? Just so a concern about pure doctrine is the proper concern about genuine Christianity and a sincere Christian life. False doctrine is noxious seed, sown by the enemy to produce a progeny of wickedness." - C.F.W. Walther, The Proper Distinction between Law and Gospel, pg. 20-21

Bring forth a new set of beliefs

Luke 3:8 says to bring forth fruits worthy of repentance. What does Luke mean? He clarifies it with an additional statement "and begin not to say within yourselves". Fruit doesn't mean works such as walking an old lady down the street. Fruit means the result of something; in this case the result of repentance is a set of new adopted beliefs that are believed. 

The Gospel alone is the standard

To walk in the light is not something about the measure of or quality of our works but rather is about the minds conversion to reject the self-righteous way to gain acceptance with God and to accept that only way which God has declared or revealed in His word what gains the elect sinner's acceptance before God - the righteousness of Christ alone imputed. This is what it means to repent and believe.
To repent from dead works is to believe and confess the true gospel as the only grounds of acceptance before God. A sinner is made right with God by no other way than the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ alone. It is by his work alone the elect sinner lives. Christ died to save his people from their sins and that he will do because he died for them and has appeased the wrath of God on their behalf.
The gospel is the only means of the elect's salvation. To walk in Christ therefore is to accept the gospel as the truth and ground of salvation. This is what James means when he says faith without works is dead. We are to walk in the truth, to build our home on the rock of his word, to therefore believe in Him as the author and finisher of the faith.

Doctrine has an influence upon practice

"Doctrine has an influence upon practice, especially evangelical doctrine, spiritually understood, affectionately embraced, and powerfully and feelingly experienced; so true is what the Apostle asserts, that the Grace of God, that is, the Doctrine of the Grace of God, that bringeth Salvation, the good news, the glad tidings of salvation by Christ, which is peculiar to Gospel Doctrine, hath appeared to all men, Gentiles as well as Jews, in the external ministry of the word; teaching us, to whom it comes with power and efficacy in the demonstration of the Spirit, that denying ungodliness and worldly lust, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world, Tit. ii. 11, 12." - John Gill, Introduction to the Body of Divinity, Pg. xxiii


I like what he says here. Doctrine has an influence upon practice. Of course we know that we may believe the truth and yet sometimes what is believed does not right away translate in what we practice. But the order is first doctrine and then practice. Not that we look to doctrine first and then second to our practice but rather it is the case that as we look to doctrine always that it SHOULD turn out to practice.

The hearers are to judge what is taught

"Christ says in Matthew 7[:15], 'beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.' Observing that he here assigns the judgment not to the prophets and teachers but to the pupils or to the sheep. For how could one beware of false prophets unless one examined judged, and gave a decision on their teaching? There can be no false prophets among the hearers but only among the teachers. Consequently all teachers and their teaching should and must be subject to the judgment of the hearers." - Martin Luther, Right and Power of a Christian Church, Pg. 327

Martin Luther on Judging doctrine adn teaching of the pastor or teacher

Martin Luther on Judging doctrine and teaching of the pastor or teacher:

"Second, in this matter of judging doctrine and of appointing dismissing teachers or pastors, not the least attention is to be paid to any human decree, law, precedent, usage, or custom, whether it be decreed by pope or emperor, by prince or bishop, whether it has been observed by half the world or by all the world, whether it be in existence for one year or for a thousand years.

. . . .

The word and teaching of man have decreed and prescribed that the judging of doctrine be left altogether to bishops, theologians, and councils; all the world is bound to regard as law and as articles of faith whatever these have decided. This is abundantly proved by their daily harping on the pope's canon law. One hears scarcely anything else from them but the boast that they have the power and the right to judge what is Christian and what is heretical; the plain Christian must await their decision and abide by it.

. . . .

Christ decrees the very opposite. He takes from the bishops, theologians, and councils both the right and power to judge doctrine and confers this right and power on all men, in particular on all Christians. . . ." - Martin Luther, Right and Power of a Christian Church, Pg. 326


(John 10:3, 5, 8; 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4; Matthew 7:15; 1 Thessalonians 5:21; Matthew 20:26; 24:4-5)