Paul’s War on Error: Towards a Theory & Practice of Calling Out Harmful Ideas

ARTICLE • In confronting harmful ideas, many Christians get stuck in one muddy ditch or the other—peace-faking passivity or peace-breaking aggressivity. Using Paul as a case study, we seek Terra firma in the apostle’s theory and practice.

Read time: 5 min

It was J.I. Packer, I think, who said that “balance” is a terribly self-conscious word. It nearly always feels too middle-of-the-road to be useful. There are times, however, when no other word seems to suffice. There are ditches that—biblically speaking—must be avoided, where the path forward necessarily lies somewhere in the middle. This is the case when we consider how Scripture calls Christians to harmful error in the culture and in the church.

Why is this relevant?

Some believers tend naturally towards staying far removed from the fray while the world and many in the church go, quite literally, to hell. Others revel in getting the dirt and grime of debate and culture war under their fingernails. Like a mechanic worth his salt, all the grease, scars, and calluses are sure signs of faithful labor, right?

In short, many of us tend toward squeamish passivity and others of us towards bullish aggressivity. Both extremes likely cite Scripture: “The minister of God must not strive!” one says from an ivory tower. “We must cast down every idea that exalts itself against the knowledge of God!” says another. The first calls out the latter as a carnal, war-mongering Diotrephes, and the latter dubs the former an effeminate, sweater-vest-wearing altar boy. And in some cases, they may both be right!

Is there not a biblical theory and practice of believers being both humbly, patient, and kind and on guard and vocal against harmful ideas? Is is possible to integrate and exhibit Christlike attitudes and Christlike vigilant engagement in the war of ideas in our day?

Paul’s Theory of War on Error

The apostle Paul is an excellent case study, since Acts and his epistles contain both a philosophy and snippets of his practice of confronting cultural and ecclesiological error. Here we’ll for the most part limit our cursory observations to the Pastoral Epistles of 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus.

Christians—especially leaders—must actively wage war on error.

1 Timothy

1. 1 Timothy 1:3-7 emphasizes the need to charge certain persons not to teach anything that contradicts the gospel.

2. 1 Timothy 4:1-6 warns about deceiving spirits and teachings of demons, and the importance of pointing these out to the brethren. Done that lately?

3. 1 Timothy 5:20 talks about rebuking those who persist in sin.

4. 1 Timothy 6:3-5 advises to withdraw from those who do not agree with sound words and godly teachings.

2 Timothy

1. 2 Timothy 3:1-17 warns of difficult times due to people's sinful nature and emphasizes the importance of continuing in what has been learned.

2. 2 Timothy 4:2-5 instructs to preach the word, be ready in season and out of season, reprove, rebuke, and exhort with complete patience and teaching.

Titus

1. Titus 1:9-16 talks about holding firm to the trustworthy word and rebuking those who contradict sound doctrine.

2. Titus 2:1, 7-8, 15 exhorts to speak things which are fitting for sound doctrine and rebuke with all authority.

3. Titus 3:9-11 says to avoid foolish controversies and warns about divisive people. Not every ideological skirmish is worth fighting!

Christians—especially leaders—must keep an attitude of humility and patience

1 Timothy

1. 1 Timothy 3:2-3 describes the overseer as being sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, and hospitable.

2. 1 Timothy 4:12 mandates setting an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity.

3. 1 Timothy 6:11-14 calls us to pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness.

2 Timothy

1. 2 Timothy 1:7 affirms that God gives us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control. Don’t hold your tongue out of fear.

2. 2 Timothy 2:24-26 advises on how to handle quarreling about words and godless chatter, instructing the servant of the Lord to be kind and patient to even those who contradict themselves.

Titus

1. Titus 2:2-6 envisions older men being sober-minded, dignified, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in steadfastness.

2. Titus 3:2 instructs to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people.

Summary

Paul's philosophy involves a proactive stance against false teachings, emphasizing the importance of sound doctrine and rebuking those who contradict it. He advocates for maintaining spiritual vigilance against deceiving spirits and the need for especially leaders to be examples in speech and conduct. Simultaneously, he underscores the necessity of self-control, respectability, and gentleness.

Paul's Practice of War on Error

From Acts to Philemon, we see the apostle on more than one occasion speak up confrontationally in defence of the truth of the gospel. What were some key markers of his practice of dispute?

Bold Confrontation in Galatians 2:11-14

Here we note Paul directly confront Peter over his hypocrisy in Antioch. Peter had withdrawn from eating with Gentiles due to pressure from the circumcision party. Paul's public rebuke of Peter was not just about correcting a fellow apostle but also about maintaining the truth of the gospel for all believers, regardless of their background. It’s noteworthy that, in Galatians 2:14, Paul didn’t attack Peter’s character, mock, or belittle: he spoke with precision to the heart of a gospel issue, pointing out Peter’s own inconsistency with the gospel he professed:

“I said to Cephas before them all, ‘If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?’”

Insults in Philippians 3:2-3 & Galatians 5:12

Paul’s approach changes as he addresses the Judaizers, who insisted on circumcision for Gentile converts. His language is vivid and harsh, labeling them as “cutters,” “dogs” and “evil workers.” This stark language indicates Paul's sense of urgency and the level of danger their teachings posed to the church. As rarely goes unnoticed, also addressing the Judaizers, in Galatians 5:12, Paul writes rather crudely that he wished the circumcising advocates would go all the way and emasculate themselves. Did Paul go too far? If he felt remorse, we have no record of an apology.

Sarcastic Rhetoric in 2 Corinthians 11:5 and 11:13-15

Another notable instance is in 2 Corinthians, where Paul employs sarcasm to address the so-called "super apostles." In 2 Corinthians 11:5 and 11:13–15, he uses irony and sarcasm to undermine the claims of these self-appointed leaders, defending his apostolic authority and the authenticity of his message. This approach reveals a strategic use of rhetoric to expose the absurdity and deception of his opponents’ claims.

Written Rebuke in 1 Corinthians 5:1–13

Additional instances of Paul opposing error can be seen in his dealings with the church in Corinth. In 1 Corinthians 5:1–5, he confronts the issue of sexual immorality in the church, advocating for strong disciplinary measures. This response underscores Paul’s commitment to moral integrity within the Christian community. So bold was Paul’s rebuke that he later worried that he’d over-burdening his readers (2 Cor 2:1–4). This importantly shows that Paul’s rebuke was based ion a passionate love for the church and their welfare and not impatience or ego.

Summary

Throughout these instances, Paul's attitude and methodology in opposing error are characterized by an unyielding commitment to the truth of the gospel, coupled with a willingness to employ a range of approaches—from direct confrontation and sharp rebuke to sarcasm and strategic instruction. His actions were always grounded in a deep concern for the spiritual wellbeing of the church and the preservation of the core tenets of the Christian faith.

Conclusion

So, as with many matters, Christian dispute must be undertaken by men and women steeped in Scripture, guided by wisdom, tempered by patience, motivated by love, and urged on by a jealous passion for Christ’s glory in the church and world. Between those two ditches, we’ll all carve our own tracks in the sand, and we’ll inevitably need each other to call us back to one side or the other, until that day when we will no longer know in part or need to engage in disputes of any kind. ❖