Primary Issues vs Secondary Issues (Adiaphora) - Testing The Spirits Podcast Episode 9

Hello and thank you for listening to the Testing the Spirits podcast. In this episode, we are going to be discussing the subject of primary issues versus secondary issues. Also, there is this term, maybe you've heard people use it, they talk about ideophora.

But first, I think it's safe to say that Christians disagree on a lot of things. And yet we agree on a lot. Now the things we disagree on, I'm not talking about which color carpet the church should install.

You know, there's a joke that church is split. They're more likely to divide over the color of the carpet rather than divide on important doctrinal issues. And I don't think that that's true. It might be in some cases, but hopefully we can all agree that what color carpet you put in or what color you paint the wall doesn't really matter.

Although these days, if someone suggested they put in a rainbow pattern carpet, I mean, that's another story. But in all seriousness, what we're talking about here, what must a Christian believe? What do you have to believe in order to even be a Christian?

And then what are those things we can agree to disagree on? What issues are primary? What issues are secondary? And then are there issues that just don't matter? I mean, after all, truth matters, right?

If it's in the Bible, it matters, right? But throughout history, Christians have agreed on certain core beliefs. For example, here would be some of the primary issues that all Christians agree on. The Trinity, which includes the deity of Christ, the virgin birth of Christ, the resurrection of Christ, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment that there is a judgment, there is a place called heaven and a place called hell, the authority of scripture and how it was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

All of these are core tenants and they have one thing in common, that they're all connected somehow to the nature of God and salvation through the person and work of Christ. Another essential, and this really goes to the heart of the gospel, another essential that all evangelicals agree on is that a person is saved by grace alone through faith, not works.

Now, someone might say, well, I know a Christian and they believe that you can be saved by works. Well, they're outside of the kingdom then. They believe in a false gospel. And this is where you run into those people that, well, you should never judge.

And they just want to muddy the water. And you know, it's like with anything in life, you have to draw the line somewhere. So if somebody denies the gospel, or let's just put it this way, in order to be a true Christian, you have to believe the true gospel that salvation is by grace alone through faith, not of works, Paul says in Ephesians 2, 8 and 9, lest any man should boast.

So you cannot work your way to heaven. Good works are the evidence of salvation. They're not the cause of it. Grace cannot be earned. If it's something that can be earned, it's no longer grace. Salvation, according to the apostle Paul in the epistle to the Romans, he said, it is a free gift.

So this is what unites us. This is one category, the primary issues, and the Bible is clear on these things. So if a person denies a primary issue or a primary doctrine, that's going to be a problem, to say the least.

Secondary Issues and Matters of Conscience

Okay, secondary issues. What would that look like? A secondary issue might be the mode of baptism. Is it by immersion? Can it be done by sprinkling? Can a baby be baptized? Now I personally feel very strongly about this and I'm convinced I know what the scripture teaches, but regarding something like that or questions about the end times or the spiritual gifts, Christians have generally built a consensus that we don't judge a person's salvation when it comes to those issues.

So that's why they're considered secondary. And I'll be honest, I don't even like calling them secondary issues because it makes it sound like that they're not important. But here's the difference. If somebody denies the virgin birth, this should be clear, or if somebody says that Jesus, his death was unnecessary or the cross was no big deal, or they say something outrageous, I'm viewing that person as someone who is lost.

If they were a member of a Bible-believing church and they started espousing things like that, they would be under church discipline. On the other hand, if they deny or have a different view of something that's secondary, you know, to be part of a church, you shouldn't work against or openly be contradicting the teachings of your church.

Maybe you should go to a different church, but when it's a secondary issue, you just don't judge a person's salvation. If somebody thinks sprinkling is a legitimate form or mode of baptism, I mean, I totally disagree with them, but I'm not going to say that they're lost because of that.

If somebody denies the pre-tribulation rapture and they're post-trib, I think that's totally wrong. But, and for some people, that would be a really big deal. And, you know, maybe you think it is, but you wouldn't condemn a person to hell over something like that, or at least you shouldn't.

So, there's primary issues and there are secondary issues. Now, it can get complicated because there are some things that are debatable, whether or not they are primary or secondary. A literal interpretation of the Genesis account, for example.

If someone believes in an old earth along with theistic evolution, Tim Keller is a good example of this. He was considered orthodox, a well-respected pastor and theologian. He held to that position. I think that at the very least, that comes very, very close to being a primary issue.

I mean, the Bible says the heavens and the earth were created in six days, and evening and morning were the first day, and evening and the morning were the second day. It seems clear they're literal days to me, but if someone held to Darwinian evolution, it's clear they're lost.

Everyone agrees with that. Theistic evolution, some people agree, some disagree. Now, I have my opinion, but typically you're not going to be seen as being outside of the kingdom by the majority over not holding to a literal interpretation of Genesis, at least in regards of the age of the earth.

If you deny Adam ever existed, that's too far. If you say Adam is symbolic, because that really, there's a whole argument of everyone being in Adam versus everyone being in Christ, and it deals with original sin.

Don't want to get into the weeds on that, but people see that differently. Another issue that people see differently, hell. Okay, so there are some Christians, for example, there are evangelicals who have denied the literal nature of hellfire.

Billy Graham once said that there is no fire in hell, that the fire is just symbolic. Others take it a step further and deny hell altogether and say the whole thing is symbolic. Billy Graham was not considered a false teacher.

Well, he was by some, but not by everyone. But if you denied hell altogether and said the whole thing is symbolic, that would be a bridge too far. Because if hell is symbolic, maybe heaven is symbolic.

Maybe the whole Bible is, maybe everything's symbolic, right? So it's a slippery slope. Now, what exactly are heaven and hell going to be like? The Bible gives us some information. I would never say that fire doesn't mean fire.

It could be symbolic in theory, but some people disagree on this. So heresy is when you say there is no hell. Billy Graham saying that there is no fire and that the fire is symbolic, typically most people wouldn't consider that heresy, but some would.

Okay, so obviously people are going to disagree on some of these things. Now, regarding hell, even Pope Francis, as progressive as he is, even Pope Francis has indicated that he believes there are some people who are going to hell.

And I only brought him up really as a segue into the next subject, that the thing that has divided Catholics and Protestants, I mean, the real issue, and there's a lot of things that divide Catholics and Protestants, but the real issue is the gospel, right?

This is what it all boils down to, the gospel. Rome says that salvation is by faith plus works. And we all agree, we both agree that faith is part of it. So the bottom line is Rome is teaching a works-based salvation.

Works salvation, the Protestants said, and evangelicals say, and Baptists say, that's heresy. That is a different gospel. And Rome says that the Protestants and the evangelicals and the Baptists, you know, you have the different gospels.

So the two have remained separate to this day. And people say, oh, isn't that a shame? People should just set aside their differences and come together in unity. Wrong. The Bible is clear. We can have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness.

In Galatians chapter one, the apostle Paul anathematized the Judaizers, even though they claimed the name of Christ. There could be no fellowship because they had, Paul says, a different gospel. Jesus was not going to unite with the scribes and Pharisees.

So this mantra that doctrine divides and love unites. Yes, doctrine does divide and it should because doctrine divides truth from error. It divides the true doctrine of Christ from the false doctrine.

The apostle John says in 2 John verses nine through 11, whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the father and the son.

If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds. So division is necessary, but there is a good type of division and a bad type.

When you are looking to divide over anything and everything, that's bad. If you have unity, that's good, but love does not rejoice in iniquity, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13. Love rejoices in the truth.

So the only real unity that Christians can have in the Holy Ghost is to have that unity revolving around the truth. And what is the truth? Jesus said, I am the truth. I am the way, I am the truth, and I am the life.

If anyone denies this truth and denies this doctrine, the doctrine of Christ, according to the apostle John, that person does not have God. And as Christians, he says, we should not greet them or welcome that person into our homes.

And just to clarify, that isn't talking about sinners or unbelievers. They are the mission field. We want to reach out to them, just as Jesus did. Jesus ate with sinners. Of course, he called them to repentance, but he showed compassion on them.

So John is not talking about sinners or unbelievers. I mean, he's talking about heretics and false teachers and apostates who, when confronted with the truth, they deny it. They know what's right, but they've turned away from it.

They're seeking to undermine the truth and corrupt the truth and persuade others to follow them in their error. These apostates or heretics may have been part, once upon a time, of a good church, and they said they believed all the right things.

Then they deconstructed, and now they're in the ditch, and they want to drag others down into the ditch with them. These are the people who deny the biblical teaching. Instead, they twist the word of God, Peter said.

They do it to their own destruction. 2 Peter 3, verse 16. Jesus said in Matthew 15, verse 14, If the blind leadeth the blind, both will fall into the ditch. Now, before I close, I want to address this word that I mentioned at the beginning, idiophora.

Disputable Matters in Romans 14

So what is that? I'm just going to read a segment from an article from the website GotQuestions .org. I found this website to be reliable. It says idiophora in biblical terms would be the disputable matters mentioned in Romans 14, verse 1.

The ESV calls them opinions. He says, We are not to quarrel over them. Some things are right because the Bible says they are right. Other things are wrong because the Bible says they are wrong. But some things the Bible neither condemns nor approves.

We often refer to these issues as gray areas or matters of conscience. We could also call them idiophora. For example, the Bible clearly promotes truth-telling and condemns lying. But what about writing fiction?

As long as everyone knows that it's fiction, that's idiophora. We can also think of the non-essentials of the faith as idiophora. So these would be the secondary issues. Teachings on the timing of the rapture, the identity of the two witnesses in Revelation 11, these are non-essential to the faith.

They are idiophora. On the other hand, doctrines such as the deity of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, the bodily resurrection, these are essential and non-negotiable. So I think that article is helpful.

I think this is a good way to look at it. There are the primary issues and then there are secondary issues, idiophora. Now that's not to say, and I want to stress this again, it's not to say that the secondary issues are not important, nor does it give us license to affirm seven or eight essential doctrines and deny everything else, because one teaching of Scripture is connected to another.

So we need to recognize that some things are more clear than others. That's true. Some doctrines are more important than others. That's true. But all truth is important and we should always be searching the Scriptures to discover what is true.

One last thing, as far as doctrines that are the most important, again, it really revolves around the nature of God, the person and work of Christ. It's the gospel. This is of first importance. I'll close with the words of the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, 1 through 4, where he says, now I make known to you, brothers and sisters, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain, for I handed down to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

So, in conclusion, I hope this was helpful. I hope everyone who listens has believed the gospel of Christ crucified and risen and I hope you are part of a good local Bible-believing church. So, until next time, may the Lord be with you and have a great day.