The Essentiality of Doctrine

Jesus commanded the church to make disciples by going, baptizing, and teaching (Matthew 28:19-20). Therefore, all the missionary activity in the world is of little value unless the ultimate result is the dissemination of biblical truth resulting in the salvation and transformation of lives in accordance with the revealed will of God.

In past ages, theology was considered the “queen” of all sciences, the highest and most worthy occupation for the human mind. However, in recent years, the study of doctrine has fallen upon hard times. In fact, doctrine is not just depreciated or ignored but often disdained, even by those who pretend to propagate the Christian faith! Consider the following four examples:

1. It has become a popular opinion that Christians should lay aside their doctrine and unite around their common faith in Christ. The harsh reality, however, is that there are many different versions of Christ being proclaimed on the Earth today by those who claim to be His followers. How can we distinguish the true Christ from the multitude of false christs except through a careful study of the Scriptures and a faithful application of its doctrine? Are we to preach a Christ to the nations that is so general or vague that we fill the world and the church with countless contradictory opinions regarding His person and work? Unity cannot logically be founded upon our common confession of an undefined Christ and our contradictory opinions regarding the most basic fundaments of the Christian faith.
2. It is often stated that Christians should lay aside their theology and unite around the common cause of the Great Commission. However, the Great Commission is primarily a theological endeavor. To lay aside theology in order to advance a theological endeavor is logical suicide and destructive to both. It is absurd to think that the Great Commission can be the thread that binds together individuals who differ in the major tenets of doctrine. Unity must be based upon a common view of the person, work, and teaching of Christ.
3. It has become a common belief that Christians should only concern themselves with the major doctrines of the faith and not sweat the “small stuff.”The famous quotation attributed to Augustine reflects this wisdom: “In essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity.”  The statement is legitimate, but it is also fraught with underlying dangers. One of the most serious has to do with the current trend in Christianity which increasingly depreciates the importance of absolutes. As this trend continues, Christians relegate more and more doctrines to the “small stuff” category. Doctrines that were previously held to be absolute essentials are no longer considered worth contending over. Another danger concerns the practical realities of real-life ministry. Being unconcerned about everything except the absolute essentials works fine so long as you are meditating in an ivory tower or philosophizing with your friends in the seminary student center. However, when you begin to plant a church or when you begin to disciple real people with real questions, those small matters of doctrine become extremely important and demand clear definition.
4. It has become a common practice for mission organizations to reduce their doctrinal statements to the lowest common denominator in order to include as many missionary candidates and supporters as possible. In most cases, this is done with proper motives (i.e., to advance the Great Commission more quickly), but it is a blatant surrender to pragmatism, and thus ultimately self-defeating.

The work of Christian missions is the propagation of biblical truth. Therefore, any attempt to fulfill the Great Commission by depreciating the importance of doctrine is a theological and philosophical contradiction—an absurdity of the worst sort. We must reject the lie that doctrine, except in the most fundamental matters of the Christian faith, is not essential. Furthermore, we must realize that doctrine is not the antagonist of the Christian faith, but its foundation. Though there are those who do great damage by splitting hairs without love over truly minor issues, a great deal more damage is done by those who ignore the importance of doctrine and do not follow the Apostle Paul’s admonition to young Timothy:

“Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.” – II Timothy 4:16

Our Confession

The Bible is the only inspired, infallible, inerrant, and sufficient standard of the Christian faith (II Timothy 3:15-17). However, the historic confessions of Christianity are also helpful for two primary reasons. First, they serve as a subordinate standard by which we can compare our doctrines with Christians throughout church history who have believed and loved the Scriptures. This comparison helps us to know whether or not we are remaining within the great doctrines of historic Christianity (I John 2:19). Second, confessions help us to summarize what we believe and to communicate it to others in a clear and concise manner.

HeartCry primarily and substantially identifies with the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith. It was the standard confession of the early Baptists in Europe and the confession of Charles Spurgeon and the Metropolitan Tabernacle. HeartCry also identifies with other historic Baptist confessions such as the New Hampshire Confession of Faith (1833), the Philadelphia Confession of Faith (1742), the Abstract of Principles (1858), and the Baptist Faith and Message (2000).  

Historical References

To provide further historical context for what HeartCry believes and practices, we have listed below a few of the most important influences upon our doctrine and ministry from movements in church history and individuals who have been mightily used of God to advance the cause of Christ. With regard to movements in church history, HeartCry greatly appreciates the lives and writings of the Reformers, Separatists, Puritans, Particular Baptists, and early conservative Evangelicals. With regard to individuals, we hold in high esteem such men as John Bunyan, Andrew Fuller, William Carey, Adoniram Judson, Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, David Brainerd, John Gill, Charles Spurgeon, George Müller, Hudson Taylor, Charles Simeon, E. M. Bounds, Arthur Pink, A. W. Tozer, and Martyn Lloyd-Jones.