Refutation by Ridicule

by R. Andrew Parker
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 1, 31 March 1991

"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction" (II Peter 2:1).

I think it is right that we are concerned about false teachers. They can damn our souls! However, we must be sure that we go looking for the correct thing when we seek to root out a false teacher, lest we end up with a religious version of Joseph McCarthy’s communist hunts of the 1950s.

First, the phrase "false teacher" appears only once in the entire New Testament. A much more common phrase is "false prophet." I suggest that we examine what Jesus said about false prophets.

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" (Matthew 7:15-20).

So, what is "fruit"? Paul discusses fruit in Galatians 5:22-23, "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." These things constitute good fruit. What constitutes evil fruit? That would seem to agree to the things mentioned in Galatians 5:19-21, "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are [these]; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told [you] in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."

Does Peter agree? Indeed, he does. In the verses that follow his warning about false teachers, we find the following descriptions: licentiousness, greed, lust of defiling passion, despising authority, willfulness, reviling the glorious ones, reveling, carousing, adultery, waterless springs, boasting, and being slaves of corruption (II Peter 2:2-19). Rather obvious, isn’t it? The false teacher practices the works of the flesh rather than yielding the fruit of the Spirit.

But what about false doctrine? Isn’t a false teacher one who teaches false doctrine? Not necessarily; Paul mentioned some who preached Christ correctly, because he rejoiced, but who were clearly false teachers due to their fruit (Philippians 1:15-18). False teachers may or may not primarily teach error. In this case, however, these false teachers taught the truth! Generally, of course, they will one way or another strive to lead us into their pernicious ways. That is why they are to be avoided — they "secretly bring in destructive heresies." What we need to do is examine the fruit of the man’s life before we call him a false teacher.

Does his life show forth love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control? Or does it show immorality, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit, envy, drunkenness, carousing, or the like? This is the only test given by the Lord!

Does this have anything to do with the title of this article, "Refutation by Ridicule"? Indeed, it does. None of us agrees on every point of doctrine; how do we treat those with whom we disagree? Do we respectfully beg to differ, and, if they remain unconvinced, leave it between them and God? (We recognize that soul-damning heresies have to be dealt with differently, per Titus 3:10.) Rather, do we call them idiots? Unstable? Duped? False teachers (and that, often having not observed their fruit)? "But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, ’The Lord rebuke you’" (Jude 9). Do we ever consider that in refuting our opponent by ridiculing or condemning him, we actually stand in danger of provoking enmity and strife? Is that not an irony: one may prove himself to be a false teacher by calling his opponent one!

You may have noticed that I have said little about false doctrine. There is a reason for that: "false doctrine" is an unscriptural term! Perhaps you were unaware that the phrase does not appear in scripture. Oh, I do not doubt that you may find the phrase in some English translation, but the Greek word "false" (pseudo) is not connected with the word "doctrine." Why not? Perhaps because the falsity to be most concerned with is in the man, not the teaching. The teaching may very well be in error, but as such it constitutes a mistake, not a pretense.

An error is indeed serious. However, do not forget that we are all guilty of it. All errors are not equal. However, being in error is not a reason to assassinate character. We have all seen it. There are many dissenters from our established orthodoxy. An orthodox writer refers to several of them, accusing them, for instance, of "venomous slander against God’s people." In some cases, the character assassin may not even have read the victim’s work! I have seen one such character assassination where no one could honestly have read the book in question and dispute the author’s integrity. One need not have agreed with the man to at least acknowledge that his fruit was good.

If someone teaches error, refute the error - but don’t ridicule the man! If we are wise, we will keep personalities entirely out of it. We must behave ourselves toward our brethren as brethren lest we be guilty of "malice" toward them (Romans 1:29). It has happened many times: one disagrees with a man; maybe he can and is too lazy, or maybe he cannot refute the man, so he call him a heretic. Brother, I beg you not to do that.