A Question I Was Asked:



Could I Be Wrong?






The Question:

Could you be wrong? Websites like yours are very dogmatic on Bible issues and subjects but there are often different opinions on these things. Why should you be right and liberals and charismatics always be wrong?


UK Apologetics Reply:

Could I be wrong over my explanation of some Scripture or other or some theological viewpoint which I have expressed? In a word: yes. I don't claim any sort of infallibility. I obviously don't claim that my writings are 'divinely inspired.'

But I am only dogmatic where the Bible is clear. Where there are possible differences of explanation and interpretation I am often prepared to say so. Also, I often don't condemn a group for being a cult - when I am asked to do so - whenever I find insufficient evidence, so I am not as 'hard-line' as the questioner is suggesting. Just in the last few months I have been directed to about 6 websites by people saying, "This is a cult, can you write something to condemn them?" But I have found insufficient evidence, maybe some of those are cults but the evidence is not yet strong enough to condemn.

Where plain lies are plainly being told, however, I am prepared to stand up; especially where the lie is being presented as the ultimate truth, in contradistinction to "religious superstition." As an example, people are now indoctrinated with macro-evolution at quite an early age in most of the world's educational systems. Frankly it is a lie and we Christians have just stood back and allowed our children to be indoctrinated. So I am quite 'hot' against what is now termed 'Neo-Darwinism.'

I am also really 'hot' against the 'health, wealth and prosperity gospel' because this lying perversion of the true Gospel has taken over quite large areas of evangelicalism. All Christians should be 'hot' against this, if we all had been, it would not have enjoyed such success.

I try only to be really dogmatic where the Bible itself is, and where people are out to pervert this teaching, but I am not dogmatic where there are legitimate differences of opinion among Christians; so I don't attack paedo-baptism, I don't attack 'old earth creationism,' although I think it has flaws, I don't attack sacramental theology, I don't even attack the papacy (although I recently answered a question on the popes of the middle ages). There are also an army of US-based dispensationalist-based prophecy ministries out there which I just leave alone (although I think their approach to Bible prophecy is usually very seriously flawed).

When Jude wrote that Christians should always go on striving for 'the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints' (Jude 3-4), I take that very seriously indeed. After all, if we find ourselves following a subverted and flawed version of that gospel message, how may we even be sure of our salvation?

I also correct myself when necessary. Recently, I looked again at the way I responded to a question back in 2008. I thought it not good enough and slightly altered the way I answered the question.

This thing is too big, too important, for any of us to allow the 'wool to be pulled over our eyes' in any aspect of Christian teaching.

Robin A. Brace. February 22nd, 2013.

UK APOLOGETICS HOME