Should We “Eat the Meat and Spit Out the Bones”? - by Leslie, Growing 4 Life

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------------

The author will tell us we should be striving for 100% purity, which she says includes everything we “feed” to our minds. Thus we are to be consumers of pure teaching that comes from pure doctrine. A teacher with no "bones" is 100% pure. Anything less than 100% purity is false and to be avoided, which means that a teacher who does not teach 100% pure doctrine is a false teacher, and the bones are the false teacher's false teaching.

Yet the author concedes that 100% purity is not attainable. 

Therefore, everyone's doctrine has some bones. Every pastor's teaching has some bones. The greatest theologians in the world have some bones. The author's favorite teachers have some bones. And, the author herself has some bones. Yet she rejects the idea of eating the meat and spitting out the bones, but that is the only choice she's faced with.

Which of course means that the author's premise is absurd. But more importantly, The entire concept is irrelevant. There is no biblical call for absolute purity, no fruit that can be born from such a pursuit, and no real endgame for it. Further, there is no Bible verse that commends a person for their purity. While we would concede that living a holy life with good doctrine is important, it simply is not the standard some seem to think it is.

There is little fruit in such an approach. In fact, it's cultic thinking. 

Strangely, the author will commend the Puritans for their teaching, despite their false eschatology. And we know that John MacArthur is one of the author's preferred teachers. Years ago Dr. MacArthur changed his doctrine regarding the eternal sonship of Christ. These, dear reader, are "bones." 

So our question is, are the Puritans false teachers, or are they good teachers with a little bit of falseness? Is Dr. MacArthur a false teacher now, or was he a false teacher before? 

Based on the author's presentation, it appears that a false teacher is simply someone she doesn't like. But she gives a pass to other teachers, even those with substantial doctrinal problems, probably because she likes them. 

Or maybe it's a sliding scale. A teacher can get one or two things wrong, maybe. Perhaps that's a "rounding error" for the 100% standard. So how much is too much? Unknown. With such uncertainty, it seems we should not listen to any teaching. And especially, we should not listen to the author.

The Scriptures have a different standard than does the author regarding a false teacher. It's found in 2 Peter chapter 2. A false teacher is an egregious and public sinner. He is actively malevolent. A false teacher is recognized by his lifestyle of excess and total disregard for holiness, teaching gross falsehood.

Clearly we are not talking about someone whose doctrine doesn't always agree with the author's doctrine.

Lastly, while the author makes reference to a few Scriptures, she doesn't quote a single one. Nothing. It mystifies us how a supposed Bible teacher can completely omit the Bible.

-------------------------

A few years ago I heard a pastor say to his congregation that, as believers, we need not reject a teacher simply because he is false in one area. We can “eat the meat and spit out the bones” is the phrase used to describe such an approach.

In theory, it sounds nice, doesn’t it? I’d like to share with you today a recent (and rather embarrassing) example from my own life as to why I do not follow this approach myself personally. And I encourage you not to, either.

Last week, I wrote about a book of prayer that I had picked up by an author I thought I could trust (you can find that post here). In that post, I mentioned that something seemed off and that I gave it to my brother (the pastor) for review. A few days ago, he sent me a text and mentioned some of the serious theological errors in the book, along with screenshots of the marked pages.

I was thoroughly ashamed of myself. Why didn’t I spot those? They were so blatantly obvious now that he had pointed them out. But I can tell you why I didn’t spot them. It was because I was so enamored by the amazing “answered prayers” and the experiences of the author. While my eyes were drawn towards these fascinating accounts, the other parts that go completely against the Bible found a back road into my brain.

And, while I had no idea this author was compromised, I will not choose to read any other theological offering he may have now that I do know. Why is this? Why would I choose to avoid him if he clearly showed himself unbiblical in just the area of prayer?

Well, let me give you four simple reasons why I’ve come to the conclusion that “eating the meat and spitting out the bones” is not for me–

First, God demands 100% purity. (He does? Where does the Bible say this?)

While balance is important in most areas of life, it is never called for when it comes to discernment. While we will never be able to be perfectly pure here on this earth  (which is the reason we need Christ), (But, but... if this demand for 100% purity is covered by Christ, then purity is no longer a standard. Jesus' blood takes care of that. This means there is no demand for 100% purity anymore, because Jesus did what we couldn't do.)

we should be striving for it. (Where does the Bible say this?)

We should desire to make our lives as pure as possible as we seek to live for Christ. (Where does the Bible say this?)

This includes everything we “feed” to our minds. (Where does the Bible say this? We have noted several undocumented claims in a row. Now, the Bible may indeed teach these things, but the author is obligated to tell us where in the Bible they are.)

If I know a teacher is false, (Whoops. New subject. The author has not discussed false teachers until now; therefore, she must make the connection that failing to teach with 100% purity is the same as being a false teacher. She will not do this.)

it is my responsibility to walk away from this teacher. Paul says we are to mark and avoid them and John says we aren’t to allow them into our homes or even greet them (Romans 16:17; 2 John 7-11). (Let's quote the verses, since the author doesn't:

Ro. 16:17 I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

2Jn. 7-11 Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. 9 Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. 11 Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.

Romans 16:17 is not about false teachers, it's about those who cause divisions. And we should note that the context is within the local church. There is no way the author can "keep away" from someone who is is already not at her church.

2 John 7-11 contains more than one subject. It first mentions deceivers, antichrists, who deny a specific doctrine. Second, John tells his readers to be careful in order to receive full reward. Third, he warns about running ahead and not continuing in the teaching. The fourth admonition about someone who has not continued in the teaching should not be welcomed in. Again, the author does not have the opportunity to deny hospitality to someone who is not even in the same city as she.)

That is pretty strong language, isn’t it? Instead, many would tell us to dig for the gems that can be found among the dung heap. (The author has changed the analogy from meat and bones to gems and a dung heap. Do we really need a different analogy to explain the analogy?)

But the Bible makes it clear: If we know a teacher is false, we should run (not walk) to the nearest exit! (Again, is a person who teaches something wrong the same as a false teacher? It's an important distinction.)

Second, I just don’t know my Bible well enough. The “eating the meat, spit out the bones” approach has a pretty important presupposition that cannot be ignored. It presupposes that I know my Bible well enough to spot any and all false teaching. But here’s the problem: I just don’t. (What? The author's own ignorance is a reason to not be discerning? She does not know enough to be able to listen to teaching or read a theological book to determine if it's true? This is truly bizarre.)

The incident with the book on prayer was just a confirmation of what I already knew to be true. And although I have spent many hours studying the Bible, I do not consider myself even close to where I would need to be to approach any book with an “eat the meat, spit out the bones” mentality. I just don’t know enough. I don’t think I ever will, no matter how much I study. (So she relies upon her pastor brother, who apparently does know enough, or upon teachers she likes, because they know enough. But how does she know to trust them? How does she know they are not false teachers? 

Where is her confidence in her faith? At what point will the author decide that her knowledge of the Bible is sufficient to be a discerning person? Or will she always be too ignorant to trust what she's learned? 

The author has created an inescapable scenario. She will never know enough about the Bible to know if she's being taught falsely. She will always need to depend on those who know more, but she doesn't realize that she will never be able to tell if they are false, either.)

Third, my flesh is drawn towards the wrong things. My “human nature” draws me towards those lovely experiences and supernatural signs that give goose bumps and wow me. (The author again points to her own inadequacies as excuses.)

I didn’t think it was but then I read that book and I realized how susceptible I am (and I even know to be looking for these things so how pathetic is that?) (It isn't pathetic so much as it is misguided. The author has set up a no-win scenario. She thinks she's so easily deceived, despite all her years of Bible study. She will never obtain her own standard of 100% purity, let alone adequate knowledge to recognize false teaching. Therefore, she's a failure, naïve and easily manipulated.

Yet in her blog she represents herself as a teacher of the word. How can a teacher of the word lack such confidence in what she has spent years studying? Where does this condemnation come from?

Most importantly, discernment is a spiritual gift. It is a Holy Spirit empowerment. Discernment can be honed and matured (He. 5:14), but it is still supernatural. The author thinks endless Bible study yields maturity in discernment, but the writer of Hebrews tells us that the "constant use" of discernment is what trains a person "to distinguish good from evil." Being constantly discerning hones discernment.

Notice also that discernment is not necessarily distinguishing good doctrine from evil doctrine, but rather "good from evil." Again, discernment is supernatural, because all spiritual gifts are supernatural.)

It made me realize once again the power that is in experience. This is why mysticism is so very attractive today. It is why churches and individuals are leaving the Bible and objective truth by the droves and chasing after it. It makes so much sense. It is also why we must guard our hearts and protect our minds from anything that would lead us a wrong direction. I am not so much better or stronger than the one who has traded in the Bible to be wooed and wowed by experiences, now am I?

Fourth, it’s a waste of time. Let’s just say that I believed I did know my Bible well enough and I wasn’t prone to fall for accounts of “experiences”, does that make it wise to choose this approach? I don’t think so and here’s why: Why would I waste my time? There are so many great books and preachers out there who aren’t compromised. (How does she know?)

Why would I bother to waste my time and energy on ones that I know are compromised? It just doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. Paul tells us twice to “redeem” our time (Ephesians 5:16; Colossians 4:5). This means we should think carefully about how we spend our time. (Sigh. This is simply not true. The word "redeem" is exagorazó, to buy up, ransom, to rescue from loss. "Time" is kairos, an opportune or seasonable time. So the idea is to not allow an opportunity to pass by and suffer loss.)

Is a book that we know to contain falsehood a wise way to redeem our time? I have decided that, for me personally, it is not.

****

So this is why I choose not to “eat the meat and spit out the bones”. But before I close I do want to answer a question that may be in your mind as you read this:

What about disagreement on “secondary” (non-Gospel) issues?

I’m obviously not going to agree 100% with any author. (So, these are also bones.)

So how do we handle this?

While I don’t actually believe there are “secondary” issues when it comes to interpreting scripture (there is one RIGHT interpretation), (Definitive assertion...)

there are issues and areas on which disagreement would not keep me from reading a book written by them. For instance, most of the Puritans were wrong in their eschatology (the study of the last days) (...almost immediately contradicted...)

but I have learned much in reading works written by them regarding living the Christian life. (...yet despite the false teaching she has been able to eat the meat and spit out the bones. Hmm.)

I would not, however, read a book that they wrote about the subject of eschatology, as it would not be biblical. (The author has now ceded her entire argument. Why did she write this article?)

Another principle I have regarding this specific question is to avoid any work that would direct its reader towards mysticism (which ultimately renders the Word of God irrelevant to one’s relationship with God). There has been a horrible abuse of the Holy Spirit, in which it is taught and practiced that His work in our lives is divorced from Scripture. This is not a biblical concept whatsoever. This is an absolute deal breaker for me. I will not read or listen to anyone who would lead me in this direction.

And one final principle I personally follow is to avoid anyone that I know to be compromised in how they live their lives and in their associations– even if I agree with what they say or write. This hypocrisy — to preach one thing but to live another– is also a deal breaker for me. And so I generally refuse to read or to promote anyone who I know to be compromised in this way.

I know that many of you will not agree with me on this but I thought there might be a few of you out there who might find these thoughts helpful as you navigate the mine field of “Christian” material available to us these days. This is my own personal approach and it is what I have chosen to do in order to protect myself as best I can against false teaching.

But, that being said, as I recently learned, it can sometimes slip in even through an old book written almost a hundred years ago. We can never let our guards down. We must test all spirits (I John 4:1) and we must test all things (I Thessalonians 5:21). We cannot let ourselves be distracted by the exciting or the unusual or the fascinating. But, instead, we must hold firmly to the truth of scripture at all times. To lose our grasp on that is to lose our grasp on the anchor that keeps us moored safely to our God. And that’s where we want (and need) to be at all times. (But the author has already discussed her lack of adequate Bible knowledge, which means she lacks this safe moorage. Ho-boy.)