The Insidious Danger of Doctrinal Indifferentism

What would happen to the crew of a submarine if they were indifferent toward keeping water out of their vessel until their socks were wet?

Likewise, what happens to churches when they aren’t concerned with Trinitarian doctrine until half their congregation is singing to the tune of a semi-Arian song?

In this blog I want to argue that the most common threat to sound doctrine in Bible-believing churches is not usually an overt assault, but silence and neglect.

I say “Bible-believing” churches because I’m talking about generally conservative evangelical churches–churches that actually contain believers and affirm inerrancy.

The danger in your Bible-believing church is not that your members are reading Arius. The threat to your home is not that your children have been taken captive by crafty Socinians. Instead, the lethal poison that erodes churches, denominations, institutions, and families is known as doctrinal indifferentism.[1]

In this article, I want to look at two common causes of this dangerous indifference.

Their Indifference

One common reason that the Trinity gets shoved aside as “unimportant” is the hellish thought that doctrine itself is unimportant. I do not suspect that this type of indifference is the main issue for readers of this blog. That’s why I’ve labeled this “their” indifference. You know, those people. The ones that believe they can adopt all the methods of the seeker-sensitive movement without adopting the content (even though the methods arose from the content).

Several months ago I was on the phone with a pastor of a relatively large, uber-trendy, multi-site church when he told me, “I DON’T want to talk about doctrine.” He was so insistent on this matter that our friendly conversation (on the person of Christ, no less!) was dragged to a heartbreaking halt. Sadly, this is the stance of many Christian leaders today.

But has the black mold of indifferentism really spread to the doctrine of the Trinity? Is the foundational doctrine of our religion really susceptible to the erosion of neglect? Absolutely.

Say God is made up of three parts?[2] Who cares! God the Son has a separate will from God the Father?[3] Fine! Imply that there is somehow conflict within God?[4] Great! But for goodness’ sake, don’t divide over doctrine.

Note: Each of these examples come from major evangelical institutions.

The point is that all doctrine is up for grabs when believers adopt a policy of indifference. For this reason, Christians must actively work to understand and defend the doctrine of the Trinity even when no threat is detected. If we don’t take this posture, we are in no better shape than those submariners who are unconcerned with water until it is inside their own boots.

Even if you are personally aware that doctrine matters, don’t fall into the trap of assuming that everyone in your church agrees. This is never a safe assumption. So, even if you take your life and doctrine seriously (1 Tim. 4:16), don’t passively assume the Trinity, actively affirm it. 

Our Indifference

I think a more common issue among conservative Christians is to assume that some hot-button cultural issue deserves more attention than the Trinity.

“The point is that all doctrine is up for grabs when believers adopt a policy of indifference.”

Many of you reading this likely understand the fact that Christians in America are basically in the same position as Frodo and Sam when they tiptoed through Mordor. We are surrounded on every side by people that think we are insane. We have spiritual enemies that would see us persecuted, divided, and destroyed. And our usual point of contact with this society that hates us comes in the form of cultural issues, not overt Trinitarian disagreements. 

Every day I see Christians scrambling to answer the questions of their children and friends on the issues of sex, transgenderism, homosexuality, race, critical race theory, social justice, and a host of other issues. I’m thankful to God for the resources that navigate these topics with Scripture as their guide (I even plan to review some of those resources in a future post!). They are a gift to the Church and I understand why they get so much attention. It’s encouraging to see believers on Expository Parenting and other social media platforms defending the faith against modern cultural errors. 

However, Christians can only address these cultural issues if they are standing on the firm foundation of sound doctrine. 

We do “contend for the faith” (Jude 3) against perverse doctrines in the church. We boldly give answers for the hope we have (1 Peter 3:15). We are joyfully “destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God” (2 Cor 10:5). 

But if we go out to boldly contend for the faith and to courageously give an answer for the hope we have, but neglect the Trinity, for what faith are we contending? What hope do we have if not in our Trinitarian Savior? 

Unfortunately, many well-intentioned Christians rush out to combat godless ideologies and leave the Trinity behind. Whatever faith they are defending at that point, it is not the one “once and for all handed down to the saints” (Jude 3). 

To return to our aquatic analogy: What good is a crew that ignores deadly leaks so they can break up a fight in the sleeping quarters? The temporary dispute may be solved, but the vessel is sunk. 

Speaking on apologetic methodology, Van Til said, “Basic to all the doctrines of Christian theism is that of the self-contained God, or, if we wish, that of the ontological Trinity. It is this notion of the ontological Trinity that ultimately controls a truly Christian methodology.”[5] 

Elsewhere he adds, “The Christian faith as a whole, as a unit, must be set over against the non-Christian faith as a whole. Piecemeal apologetics is inadequate, especially for our time.”[6] We cannot apply part of our faith to part of the issues in the culture. We must bring the full revelation of God to bear on cultural issues. And this begins with the foundation of our faith: God Himself. 

Things like CRT and transgenderism are demonic and, I believe, the symptoms of America’s inevitable end. But far better for America to burn and the Church remain faithful to God as He is than for the Church to temporarily stem the tide of destructive ideologies and forsake her Triune Savior. That price is far too high. 

Instead, we should say with Bavinck, “The doctrine of the Trinity is of incalculable importance for the Christian religion. The entire Christian belief system, all of special revelation, stands or falls with the confession of God’s Trinity.”[7] We cannot pretend to be defending biblical truth if the Trinity is not both the ground on which we stand and the reason we fight.

---

Suggested Resources:

1. Free introduction and first chapter of Matthew Barrett’s Book Simply Trinity

http://cdn.bakerpublishinggroup.com/processed/book-resources/files/Excerpt_9780801098741.pdf?1550756689

2. “Bavinck on Trinitarian Error” by Carl Trueman

https://www.reformation21.org/mos/postcards-from-palookaville/bavinck-on-trinitarian-error

References:

[1] I am borrowing this term from Machen’s book Christianity and Liberalism. Read a free PDF of his classic work here: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/machen/Christianity%20and%20Liberalism%20-%20J.%20Gresham%20Machen.pdf (see page 42 for “doctrinal indifferentism”)

[2] SBC president’s doctrinal statement. Changed without explanation only after the election and major scrutiny. http://web.archive.org/web/20210616140002/https:/goredemption.com/new-here/our-beliefs/

[3] Longstanding professor at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary: Bruce Ware, “Unity and Distinction of the Trinitarian Persons,” in Trinitarian Theology: Theological Models and Doctrinal Application, ed. Keith S. Whitfield (B&H, 2019), 38.

[4] Runaway best-seller from Crossway: Dane Ortlund, Gentle and Lowly (Wheaton: Crossway, 2020), 138.

[5] Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1976), 61.

[6] Cornelius Van Til, An Introduction to Systematic Theology, 2nd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2007), 12–13.

[7] Herman Bavinck, RD, 1:333.