100 Years of Ministry
In 2029, The Sword and Trumpet monthly publication will mark its centenary. George R. Brunk I began the publication in 1929 due to concerns about liberalizing tendencies in the Mennonite church. His concerns have been realized in many cases over the last century. Those concerns were shared by the editors who faithfully continued George’s work—J. Irvin Lehman, J. Ward Shank, Paul L. Kratz, George’s son George R. Brunk II, and our current editor, Paul M. Emerson.
After almost ten decades of Bible-based Mennonite teaching, spreading across a broad spectrum of biblical, theological, social, and cultural issues, we think it will be helpful to review the Mission Statement, the essence of which is found in the second sentence: “Defending, proclaiming, and promoting the whole Gospel of our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Holy Scriptures.” Gospel fidelity is to be preserved in three ways—defense, proclamation, and promotion. We will look at each of these more closely going forward.
We remain committed to the founding vision. In the second issue of The Sword and Trumpet (published in 1929), George Brunk I wrote, “We felt that there was room and great need for a paper that would specialize in defense of our faith and expose without apologies all forms of error which threaten our Church.” This approach has often incited criticism from those who prefer the tranquility of tolerance to the tumult which invariably comes when we “contend for the faith” (Jude 3). Yet Scripture and history demonstrate that unless we defend the gospel against threats we will inevitably lose it. Exposing error is essential to promoting the Gospel, much as pulling weeds is essential to maintaining a healthy garden.
The Whole Gospel
What is meant by “the whole Gospel.” “Gospel” means good news, specifically the good news “of our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ.” That is, this is the good news of Christ—that He is the Son of God; that He came to earth as a man; that He lived a sinless life, died a vicarious death for sinners, and arose as a victorious Savior; that He offers salvation to all who accept Him in faith; that He intercedes for all His own; that He will return to reign on the earth and will make all things right again. That is the Gospel, but what is meant by “whole?” Isn’t it enough to just say “the Gospel?”
In light of the compromises of George Brunk’s day, and the ongoing adjustments to the Gospel in our century, it is imperative that we remember to hold to the whole Gospel—that is, the biblical gospel. Anything which God has seen fit to define in the Bible as a part of the Gospel deserves proper emphasis in our teaching. To do any less is to depart from our mission to uphold the “whole Gospel.”
Identifying Error
We are committed to “defending…the whole Gospel.” But that begs the question: “Defend it against what?” The Mission Statement continues: “This publication exposes and opposes doctrinal error which compromises the faith and leads to apostasy.” Doctrinal error is anything that is inconsistent with or opposed to the clear teaching of Scripture. A Christian may be rightly concerned with many good things, but we are focused on doctrines, especially those which are opposed and compromised in our day.
Here is a sampler of issues of current concern:
- Realizing the extent of human sinfulness (John 3, John 15, Romans 3, Ephesians 2).
- Remembering the necessity of the new birth (John 3:3).
- Recovering justification by grace through faith (Ephesians 2).
- Seeing the centrality of Christ in all things (Colossians 1:18).
- Emphasizing the need for all who are Christ’s to obey His commandments (John 14:15).
- Understanding the centrality and significance of the Holy Spirit for Christian thought and life (Romans 8, 2 Corinthians 2).
- Lifting our eyes from the things which are “seen” and “temporary” to the things which are “not seen” and “eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:18).
The essence of the problem is simple. We have lost our biblical referent. We retain a carcass of doctrine, but the life has left it. We have ashes, but no fire. We have a house, but the foundation is crumbling. We simply don’t understand our Bibles well enough. We need a resurgence of biblical fidelity.
Where does doctrinal error come from? This question would be unnecessary in a perfect world. God’s inspired Word is clear and sufficient, and if everyone understood and received it error would not exist. But the reality is that we will aways face some measure of error because our minds and hearts will always be tainted by sin on this side of eternity. Even those who are being renewed day by day are not fully free from the blurring and distorting effects of the fall.
Here are five sources of doctrinal error.
1. Rejecting Scripture
Some doctrinal error comes from an outright rejection of Scripture. Some people are unwilling to submit to the truth when confronted with it, totally rejecting any authority Scripture may have over them. They have no regard for truth, no regard for the claims of Scripture, no concern to submit themselves to God.
This is exemplified in Paul’s interaction with the governor Felix as recorded in Acts 24:24-25. “Felix…sent for Paul and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. Now as he reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and answered, ‘Go away for now; when I have a convenient time I will call for you.’” Felix was curious about the truth and asked Paul to come and tell him about “the faith in Christ.” But when Paul spoke the truth clearly and it began to make demands on Felix’s life, he rejected it. He would not listen to the truth—though he understood it—because the price was too high. In the end, he rejected salvation. Felix was of the type described in Romans 2:5, those who have hard and impenitent hearts and are “treasuring up…wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.” This is open-faced opposition to biblical truth.
2. Distorting Scripture
Some doctrinal error comes from an intentional distortion of Scripture. This is perhaps the first thing that comes to mind when we think of doctrinal error—those who willfully twist the Bible to make it say things God never intended it to mean. They abandon the clear meaning of the words and all sensible hermeneutics, choosing to squeeze Scripture into their preconceptions rather than conforming their ideas to the word of God. Peter identifies them in his second epistle: “Untaught and unstable persons [who] twist (the Scriptures) to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16). They may sprinkle Bible verses through their teaching to validate it, but they are out of step with what the verses actually mean. J. C. Wenger said, “It is sometimes said that one can prove anything from the Bible. This silly statement is true only if people sufficiently depart from sound principles of interpretation.” Much error stems from deliberately disregarding the actual content of the Bible.
3. Lopsided Bible Knowledge
Some doctrinal error comes from lopsided Bible knowledge. When this happens, certain truths of Scripture are pushed while others are neglected. A perennial example of this is the tendency to juxtapose God’s righteousness and His love. Sometimes God’s perfect character is so emphasized as to leave sinners helplessly distant from God’s mercy toward them even in their imperfections. They know that God is holy, and that they are not, and they either futilely attempt to be good enough for Him or they collapse in despair. Likewise, God’s love (defined merely as His leniency toward sin) can be emphasized so that the sinner feels he does not need to repent of his sin in order to experience God’s favor. Distortion in either direction (toward God’s love or toward God’s righteousness) constitutes grave error.
It is rightly said that most heresy results from pushing one truth to the extreme to the exclusion of all other truth. Universalism (the belief that all men will eventually make it to heaven) makes much Paul’s words in 1 Timothy 2:4: “God desires all men to be saved.” Rob Bell famously asked, “Does God get what God wants?” If God gets what God wants, and He wants all men to be saved, doesn’t that mean that everyone will eventually make it to heaven? This idea makes sense if this verse is isolated from other relevant passages. But it falls apart when we take it alongside the manifold passages which make plain that only those who believe in Christ will be saved. The rest will depart into everlasting torment, from which no second salvation exists. “It is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment” (Heb. 9:27).
4. Underdeveloped Bible Knowledge
Some doctrinal error comes from an underdeveloped understanding of Scripture. Those who fall into this error sincerely want to be faithful to Scripture, but they (for various reasons) have not correctly understood what the Bible says. As compared to the previous reason, these people are not deliberately distorting Scripture, but they have misunderstood it nonetheless.
We see an example of this in Acts 18:24-28. Apollos, a Jew described as eloquent and mighty in the Scriptures, comes to Ephesus. He “spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord.” Yet it was necessary for Aquila and Priscilla to take him aside and explain the way of God to him “more accurately.” We aren’t told exactly what was deficient in Apollos’ preaching, though we can surmise that it had to do with his understanding of Christ. When he came to Ephesus, he taught the things of the Lord—probably deduced from the Old Testament. But when he travelled on to Achaia after Aquila and Priscilla explain the gospel to him, we find him “showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.” Apollos needed to have his doctrine corrected and expanded in light of the New Covenant. So too, sometimes we need our errant understandings—even those which stem from a sincere study of Scripture—to be corrected and expanded.
5. Improper Teaching
Some error results from receiving improper teaching. God has in His wisdom appointed spiritual shepherds for His people. All believers are expected to live under not only the authority of the Bible but also under the authority of God’s appointed leaders. The reality is, sometimes these shepherds mislead their sheep. Sometimes they intentionally distort the truth, other times they replicate their own errant understandings. In either case, trusting church members are taught to believe things which are out of step with scriptural truth.
This is complex, and I must be careful. There is something intrinsically good about pastors who diligently lead their people and Christians who obediently follow them. Yet we cannot deny that much of the error which roams among us results from pastors who have either preached error or have failed to guard against it. Even men who are regarded as trustworthy ministers of truth may be found to minister a partial gospel or an adjusted gospel rather than the “whole Gospel of our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ.” Those who believe what they are taught by these men may be led to believe things which are out of step with “the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).
The solution is not to dispense with biblical leadership but rather for these leaders to recover the biblical gospel, then to lead their people into it. We need a revival of Bible-saturated, Christ-centered, Gospel-focused shepherds who love the Word and love the Christ of the Word.
The Standard of Truth
Before error can be rooted out it must be identified. And that requires a standard which we can use to measure truth and error. The Bible—the inspired, infallible word of God—is the authority by which all claims to truth must be measured. We must not determine error by popular opinion, nor by who agrees or disagrees with it, nor by what is most palatable or rational, nor even by tradition. Rather, Scripture is the sole authority by which we detect error.
This is vital. If we gauge error by another standard, we risk calling error truth or calling truth error. Some ideas we hold near and dear may actually be out of step with Scripture; others we reject may in fact be what the Bible teaches. It is possible to think a concept is “the traditional view” when it may in fact only be the consensus of the generation before you. Any approach which dislodges Scripture from its place as the ultimate authority will in the end produce faulty diagnoses of truth and error.
This is not to displace historical analysis. We do need to consult historic writings, confessions of faith, etc. to be aware of what Christians have believed—and how they have handled particular errors. Many controversies have been settled by Christians of the past, and we are helped if we consult with them. These controversies do not need to be resurrected for another full debate. But these conclusions serve only as a supplement to the authoritative Scriptures—not as a replacement.
Exposing Error
Having identified error, we need to expose it. This starts by defining the problem. This means understanding the questionable doctrine on its own terms. Any respectable critique must avoid caricatures, straw-men, and other misrepresentation. We should aim to define the view as well as its proponents can. We need to understand the main arguments and the motivation for making them.
Then we need to compare the view to Scripture. Does it contradict any Scripture passages? Which Scriptures seem to support it? We should not act on a general feeling that a view is wrong. We need to be able to point to specific Scriptures and explain why they mitigate against the errant doctrine. And if there are passages which seem to support the error, we need to know how those passages have typically been understood by believers and whether or not they are being understood correctly by those promoting the error.
If we have understood the doctrine in question, and we have compared it to Scripture and determined that it is errant, we need to expose it by publicly identifying the source of the error. This is the hardest and least popular step. But unless we make the source of the error clear, we leave others vulnerable. If it is a minor doctrinal issue, it may be wise to address the problem generally without identifying its source. But if it is a first degree issue, we need to be willing to point fingers and name names. The editors of The Sword and Trumpet have always been willing to do this if necessary, and it was never popular. But it is increasingly unpopular in 21st century America, where being nice is preferred to “speaking the truth in love.”
We are in good company, though. Jesus and His followers (Paul, Peter, James, John, Jude) were all willing to point directly to the problem and its proponents, naming names when necessary. Paul withstood Peter to his face when he was in error (Gal. 2:11-13) and warned Timothy that “Alexander the coppersmith did me much harm” (2 Tim. 4:14), that “Phygellus and Hermogenes” had turned away from him (2 Tim. 1:15), and that “Hymenaeus and Philetus” had strayed concerning the truth (2 Tim. 2:17).
None of this countenances unloving behavior toward weak, struggling individuals. The same Paul who called out erring men by name said we should “comfort the fainthearted, uphold the weak, be patient with all” (2 Thess. 5:14). Jude says we are to have compassion on some, “making a distinction” (Jude 22).
It is a bad day when a shepherd beats as sheep because he confuses it for a wolf. George Brunk I said, “We intend to make due allowance for ignorance and weakness in people.” That is to say, there are those who hold error because they have been mistaken or mislead. They need the truth as much as anyone, but how we administer it will be different in that case than in the case of blatant and determined error. We need to be humble, gentle, kind, and patient.
Some who have adopted error must be led out with patience and compassion. Others must be warned (cf. 2 Thess. 5:14) and saved with fear (Jude 22). Given that some heresies are damnable (cf. Gal. 1:8-9, 1 John 4:3), no temporal pain should be spared in attempting to save such a person from the eternal fires of hell. Biblical love requires speaking the truth—even when its painful—sincerely hoping that it will be received and that repentance will follow.
Isn’t all this a bit inconvenient and unkind? Why would we bother to interfere in someone else’s matters? Why not leave well enough alone?
The Bible gives several reasons why we should expose error. First, because God has commanded it. Titus was appointed to pastor a church which was being influenced by “many insubordinate [people]…whose mouths must be stopped.” What were Paul’s instructions? “Rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith” (Titus 1:10-13). Titus, as leader of the church, needed to rebuke those who were in error (and those who were being misled) in order to preserve the purity of the church. Jude stands as an example of one who “found it necessary to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. For certain men have crept in unnoticed…who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Second, we need to confront error because we love others. Rebuke isn’t enjoyable, but without it we aren’t actually loving others. “Whom the LORD loves He chastens” (Heb. 12:6). If we are concerned for someone’s eternal destiny—and not just their temporary happiness—we need to speak the hard truth. As we find in James 5:19-20, “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.” If conviction is heard, we may in fact be a part of saving that person from eternal death.
Third, we need to confront error because we love God. This is the most necessary of the three, though it is the most neglected. We attack error and defend the truth because we love God. Jesus’ love for the glory of the Father motivated Him to cleanse the temple: “Zeal for Your house as eaten Me up.” (cf. John 2:13-22). If we truly love God, we will hate the error which tramples His glory into the mud.
Opposing Error
But it’s not enough to identify errors and expose them. They need to be actively opposed.
In 2 Corinthians 10, the apostle Paul describes how he opposes false teaching. “The weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (vv. 4-5). This is true spiritual warfare.
Paul’s spiritual warfare includes several components which he lists in vv. 4-5:
- Pulling down strongholds
- Tearing down arguments
- Tearing down every high thing raised against the knowledge of God
- Taking every thought captive to make it obey Christ
Each of these helps us understand how we ought to oppose error. This focuses our attention on the specific issues which are central to spiritual warfare.
1. Pulling Down Strongholds
Paul speaks of pulling down strongholds. “Strongholds” here refers to systems of thought built in opposition to the gospel. This describes more than a few errant ideas. Rather, these are entire systems of belief that are built as rivals to gospel truth. In our day, this could be other un-Christian religions (Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) or perverted Christian religions (Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses). Or, as in Paul’s day, it could be something that presents as authentic Christianity and appears genuine in some areas, but is in fact contrary to the truth.
Paul faced those who were redefining apostolic authority, claiming they were themselves invested with divine authority though they were not called by Christ to that task. Paul, as a true witness to Christ, was obligated to defend his own apostleship for the sake of the gospel. It was an issue of authority, an issue at the very bedrock of the gospel. These false apostles laid another foundation, building a “stronghold” which was opposed to the true gospel. They asserted their own authority against the authority of Christ’s chosen apostles.
The issue of biblical authority is not merely relegated to the first century church. It has always been relevant. The central question is, “Who or what defines the truth?” Is the true gospel defined by God’s revelation through His appointed representatives, or can it be reinvented by others who claim divine authority? This is a war between the Bible’s authority and every other truth claim. Will we live in full submission to the Word of God, or will we incorporate other authorities alongside or above it? How we answer this question will define how we think about everything else.
Paul opposed the strongholds (systems of thought) which threatened the true gospel. Sadly, there are many such structures even within conservative Anabaptism—systems of thought that are internally consistent and overlap with Scripture in some areas yet are not in harmony with the true gospel.
Rival systems which compromise this gospel must be “pulled down.” As Paul explains in 2 Corinthians 10, these strongholds are destroyed by (1) tearing down arguments, (2) tearing down arrogance, and (3) subjecting every thought to Christ.
2. Tearing Down Arguments
The first in this three-pronged attack is tearing down arguments. The word translated “arguments” is logismós, which describes a logical proposition (notice the root logos, which is behind the English word logic). These are ideas which are inconsistent with or opposed to biblical truth. This is a broad category and includes many errors. The central takeaway for us is that spiritual warfare includes intellectual arguments. The Christian responds to errant arguments by counter-arguments, demonstrating its biblical and rational inconsistencies.
Spiritual warfare has less to do with power struggles and more to do with ideas and beliefs. So Paul encourages Timothy to “correct those who are in opposition…so they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil” (2 Tim. 2:25-26). How has the devil ensnared these men? By dulling their senses and blinding them to the truth. Timothy’s pastoral duty required him to show his opponents their error so they could know the truth and escape demonic bondage.
So we conclude that there is great need for biblical literacy and theological conviction in our circles. Without these, we are vulnerable to Satan’s deceits. We need to know biblical doctrine so we can dismantle the arguments which compromise the gospel and jeopardize our salvation.
3. Tearing Down Arrogance
Second, Paul says he tears down arrogance. Now, this is not exactly what the text says, so I will explain myself. In 2 Corinthians 10:5 he says he “casts down…every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God.” “Every high thing” in the NKJV can also be translated “every lofty opinion” (ESV) or “every arrogant obstacle” (NET). This speaks of the attitude of those who oppose God’s truth. While “arguments” refers to unbiblical ideas, this refers to unsubmissive attitudes. I think Paul is describing a rebellious person, one who refuses to accept God’s definition of reality.
Since “casting down” applies both to “arguments” and to “every high thing,” I have applied it to this second aspect of spiritual warfare. Thus Paul “tears down arrogance.” He opposes not only unbiblical ideas, but also unbiblical attitudes.
Specifically, this is the attitude which refuses to submit to Scripture. He says these high things are exalted “against the knowledge of God.” Now, “knowledge of God” here speaks of relationship with God and experience of Him, but we understand that this kind of knowledge (experiencing His person) can only come with a cognitive understanding of who God is. And this comes through God’s self-disclosure in Scripture.
This arrogance suppresses true comprehension and experience of God. The Corinthian super-apostles thought they were high up on the spiritual ladder, but they were not submitted to God. They rejected God’s authority and posited their own. We learn from this that it is possible for someone to think he is spiritually significant when he is actually opposing the truth.
And there’s something for us to learn in contrast. True spiritual warfare is waged in humility. It’s not about who is the smartest or most educated, but rather about who is most in line with God’s truth. The servant of God must “correct those who are in opposition,” but he must do so “in humility” (cf. 2 Tim. 2:25). Humility is not about our mannerisms or our appearances, but is instead about our attitude toward the truth. One may appear to be humble while being a very proud person in his heart. True humility is submission to God. Ironically, true humility often produces the greatest boldness, as seen here in the apostle Paul.
4. Subjecting Every Thought to Christ
The third prong draws together the first two. Paul wages this spiritual war by “bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” In this we see both the intellectual aspect (“every thought”) and the spiritual aspect (“into captivity to the obedience of Christ”). The “thoughts” here are the ideas and propositions spoken of earlier as “arguments.” Every conceivable idea is brought under Christ’s authority. Human philosophies and experiences are submitted to His dominion. This again brings us back to the centrality of Scripture, since Christ rules His church by His written word. Every idea—whether from a sincere believer or from a counterfeit—must be subjected to the authority of the Bible.
It's interesting how this connects back to verse 1. Paul pleads with them “by the meekness and gentleness of Christ.” He is not asserting his own authority or compelling them to follow him. Rather, in meekness and gentleness he seeks their good. He is humble, leading according to biblical truth and not according to his own personality. The super-apostles asserted themselves, but Paul said, “We do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus’ sake” (2 Cor. 4:5). He does not fight fire with fire, but rather responds to the arrogance of the super-apostles “by the meekness and gentleness of Christ.” He does not lead by force of personality, but in humble submission to God’s truth. True spiritual leadership is service under the Lordship of Christ.
How does he move from gentleness and meekness to tearing down strongholds and casting down arguments? He does so because he himself is submitted to the authority of Christ. And because he is submitted to Christ’s truth, he opposes all those who seek to undermine it. He is not spineless. Paul opposes those who attack the gospel of Christ. But he is not concerned with his own reputation. Rather, as a servant of the church, he defends the only gospel which can reconcile people to Christ.
Promoting the Gospel
Though we have often needed to oppose doctrinal error, our primary motive is not to eradicate falsehood but rather to make much of the truth. Error is concerning because it threatens the truth. It obscures the gospel and distorts our perception of Christ. Though it can seem like we’re being crotchety and critical, we oppose counterfeit depictions of Christ because we love who He really is. We are willing to do the unpleasant work of wiping off the mildew and dusting away the cobwebs if that’s what it takes to see Christ’s picture more clearly.
Indeed, we prefer to speak that which edifies. Jude had this attitude, as we see in the opening verses of his epistle. He says, “I was very diligent [eager] to write to you concerning our common salvation.” His primary desire was to glorify Christ for graciously saving sinners. He preferred to celebrate the gospel, but he “found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” We aim to lead The Sword and Trumpet this way—exalting Christ always, and opposing doctrinal error when necessary.
It becomes necessary when false teaching leads people away from Christ. Our mission statement emphasizes that we expose and oppose doctrinal error which leads to apostasy. Errant teaching “spreads like cancer” (2 Tim. 2:17) and can kill the faith of believers. Individual souls go to hell when they are led away from Christ by false teaching. If we are at all concerned about the eternal state of others, we must be concerned about the error which obscures the gospel. Love for others compels us to oppose “the various forms of error that contribute to apostasy from the biblical faith.”
I want to urge church leaders to be willing to confront threats to the gospel in order to protect their sheep. Of course, this requires being familiar enough with the gospel that we can identify true threats. Though all forms of error are serious, not all forms of error are damnable. We need to acquaint ourselves with Scripture to know when to extend grace and when to hold the line. Anywhere the Bible is clear, we need to be willing to stand firm.
But we should do more than oppose false teaching. Leaders also need to teach the truth so their people are not “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine” (Eph. 4:14). The healthiest Christians are those who fix their eyes continually on Christ. The best antidote to false teaching is a steady diet of the real thing.
When the gospel is blurred, Christ Himself is obscured. A gospel which does not display the “light of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor. 4:6) is not a saving gospel. Only the true gospel can lead people to Christ.
Love for people leads us to want to tell them the truth. In Ephesians 4, Paul encourages the Ephesian believers to “speak the truth in love.” This guides us toward the necessary mix of speaking the truth and speaking in love. All truth and no love only tears people down. All love and no truth makes people feel good, but it does not lead them to Christ. The gospel of Christ must be truly proclaimed, and those who proclaim it should speak in such a way that their hearers receive it as a message of love.
Orthodoxy, Orthopraxy, and Orthocardia
We aim to promote the health of the church by defending the gospel and by proclaiming and promoting the gospel. To these latter ends, we publish articles that teach fundamental Christian truths, emphasizing biblical doctrine and practice. We want to be known for what we are for, not just for what we are against.
We hope that as you read The Sword and Trumpet that:
Your love may abound still more and more in knowledge and all discernment, that you may approve the things that are excellent, that you may be sincere and without offense till the day of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness which are by Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.
— Phil. 1:9-11
Like the Apostle Paul, we want our readers to grow in knowledge and discernment, so that love abounds and holiness and purity increase until Christ returns for all of His own. We want to see more lives transformed by God’s grace. And with Paul, our desire for grace-filled people flows from our greatest desire—that God be praised and glorified. The more God’s people know and love Him, the more He will be glorified in them. Holy people make much of a holy God.
So we proclaim and promote the gospel and all the doctrines that undergird it. In the spirit of the Apostle Paul, we manifest the truth (cf. 2 Cor. 4:2) so God may shine into our hearts and yours to “give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor. 4:6). We believe God is pleased when His people take His Word seriously, believing and knowing Him according to His written revelation and responding with love and obedience.
We want to match the Bible’s emphasis on clear doctrine, but along with that we want to show how good doctrine transforms Christian living. We want more than orthodoxy; we want orthopraxy. Knowledge does no good if it only foments pride (cf. 1 Cor. 8:1). Rather, as indicated in the above passage from Philippians 1:9, God intends increased knowledge to coincide with increased love. As Paul says to Timothy, “The purpose of the commandment is love from a pure heart…” (1 Tim. 1:5). The “commandment” mentioned here probably refers to Paul’s exhortation in verse 3, where he tells Timothy to “charge some that they teach no other doctrine.” Why oppose wrong doctrine? This “other doctrine” causes disputes rather than godly edification. Paul wants doctrine that will build up Christians. Paul is concerned that good doctrine be maintained, in order that love from a pure heart could grow in the hearts of believers.
This cuts two ways. One, it reminds us that doctrine is meant to be practical. If it isn’t practical, we’re doing something wrong. Two, it reminds us that love is undergirded by good doctrine. If we want to be loving people, we need to know the truth. “Love from a pure heart” follows doctrinal fidelity.
In addition to orthodoxy (right belief) and orthopraxy (right practice), we want right affections. We want orthocardia. It’s not enough to have good theology. It’s not even enough to have good theology and moral lives. God wants renewed affections. Christianity is about more than belief and practice; God wants our hearts to be aflame with love for Him. Until our doctrine has made it into our hearts, we have work to do. True ideas about God are insufficient. True affections—produced by true ideas—are what God wants.
It is foolish to think that we can love God if we don’t know Him. This is why doctrine is important. But it is equally foolish to think that knowing facts about God is the same as knowing Him. As I think about the current and future ministry of The Sword and Trumpet, I want to see us continue to provide resources that will help God’s people know Him better, obey Him more faithfully, and love Him more deeply.
Present Weaknesses
I think the emphasis of our mission statement remains relevant. I doubt I’m the only one who’s noticing the many challenges facing the conservative Anabaptist church today, both from the outside and from within. I would like to suggest one reason which I believe is at the bottom of these issues: our total dependance on divine revelation. Scripture is necessary for us to understand any of the truths of the gospel, and thus our understanding of it (or lack thereof) has seismic effects through the rest of our lives.
Too often, we are weak in our understanding of the gospel because we have neglected robust Bible study. We are content with trite, shallow views of God, sin, Christ, propitiation, justification, faith, sanctification, and so forth. As a result, many of our people (and pastors) have a fragile theology that is ill-suited to bear the weighty issues of life. I’m not saying we don’t use the Bible regularly, nor that we are unfamiliar with many of its verses. Rather, I’m saying that we don’t know how the various truths of the Bible fit together to build something much greater. We have not dug deep in order to build on the rock.
We are weak in a couple of areas: (1) knowing how the various concepts of Scripture fit together into one cohesive whole, and (2) knowing how that body of truth makes a difference in our daily lives. Behind the first weakness is the tendency to read the Bible in isolated segments, cherry-picking verses without realizing the big picture the author is intending to communicate. We treat the Bible like a collection of disconnected pithy maxims, nice nuggets that we try to appropriate without seeing the reality the biblical author intends us to see. Sometimes I think it would be good if we tried reading the Bible like a normal book, reading sequentially and in big enough sections that we can see the main point.
Behind the second weakness is, in part, a tendency to read the Bible merely to extract principles and commands, and not to see and know God. Or we could say, we read the Bible experientially (with our perspective and lives at the center) rather than theologically (with God and His glory at the center). We think reading the Bible “practically” means dismissing theological complexities and paying attention only to portions that tell us what we must do to live a better life today. As a result, we often miss those “impractical” portions which, in truth, are necessary to reorient us at the most fundamental level.
We need to ask questions like, “Why did God make me?” We can answer this in a variety of ways. Are we here to have a good time? To make a lot of money so we can be as comfortable as possible? To be good people and leave the world a better place? The Bible helps us understand that, most fundamentally, we exist to know God, enjoy Him, and glorify Him.
How we answer this question is important! Every decision you make today will be affected by what you believe is God’s purpose for you. This is not peripheral or optional. This will fundamentally change how you live in every area of your life. How can you live for Him if you don’t know true things about Him? How will you please Him if you don’t know what He loves and what He hates? If we don't know who we are in our vertical relationship with God, we will waste our time trying to please Him horizontally in our daily lives. We need a vision of Christ—His goodness, His grace, His glory—before we can rightly work out the practical sections as He intends us to.
A right understanding of God is not a mere appendix. It is the main argument of the book, and everything else hangs on it.
My point is this. When we read the Bible merely to know God’s will, and not to know God, we miss God’s central purpose in revealing Himself to us. Too often the Bible is treated as a rulebook which must be followed if we want to stay out of hell. But God intends to communicate Himself to us through it. Yes, that includes commands, but those are God’s directions for how we can display our love for Him, not for how we earn it. Ultimately, He desires to be known. How can we know Him if we ignore what He says about who He is?
The gospel is known through the Bible. And that gospel is, above all else, about lost sinners being reconciled to God so that they can enjoy fellowship with Him and thereby glorify Him. In the gospel, we get God. Let’s not settle to know only what He wants us to do. Let’s dig deep into the word so we can know Him, and by knowing Him, can enjoy Him.
Our Ultimate Authority
I want to draw your attention to one more aspect of our mission statement. We are committed to the “gospel as revealed in the Holy Scriptures.” We take the Bible as our ultimate authority, over all philosophy and every tradition and system.
The Bible defines the gospel we proclaim. It is not one of our own making. With the apostle Paul we preach the “gospel [which] came through the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:12). The true gospel is not one we invent or discover, but instead is one we receive from God through revelation. That is to say, that without the Bible, we cannot know the gospel, and therefore cannot know God.
It’s true that we can know about God’s existence through the created world (cf. Rom. 1), but we cannot know our terrible plight as sinners, nor know God’s grace through Christ, unless God tells us about it. Holding to the true gospel requires recognizing that we depend entirely on God’s self-disclosure to know the gospel at all. We need divine revelation to know the gospel.
The Bible is not only necessary for us to know the gospel, it is also the ultimate authority regarding the substance of the gospel. God’s divine word—breathed from the mouth of the one who upholds all reality—defines reality. So any detraction from what Scripture tells us about God’s redemptive purposes is a diminishment or a distortion of the true gospel. Only the biblical gospel is the true gospel.
As we press into this, we should ask ourselves if we are drawing our understanding of the gospel from the Bible, or if our view is merely compatible with it. It is surprisingly easy to assume that our view is the biblical view. I have often been surprised and convicted when I compare my assumptions of the gospel with what the Bible teaches. We easily imbibe certain assumptions from our Mennonite tradition or American culture without realizing that we have adjusted the gospel in the process. We need the continual “reproof” and “correction” (2 Tim. 3:16) that Scripture provides so we can turn from wrong ideas and more accurately believe what is right.
Sometimes we can think our understanding of salvation is biblical because it overlaps with the Bible or because it agrees with the Bible on many points. We know of verses that support our beliefs, so we assume that we are holding the biblical gospel. If we want to be faithful to the true gospel, we must labor to make sure our beliefs are more than compatible with the Bible. We need to draw everything from the Bible. To put it bluntly, every truth and every presupposition must be grounded on the clear teaching of the word of God. If our beliefs are not drawn from Scripture, we are on shaky theological ground.
Martin Luther said that the Bible is the norma normans non normata. It is the norm of norms that cannot be normed. It is the authority over all other authorities, and no authority will ever supersede it. And since it is the ultimate authority on all matters of truth, we subject ourselves entirely to it. We are willing slaves to the Bible. Our future faithfulness depends on it. If The Sword and Trumpet ever promotes a gospel other than the one “revealed in Scripture,” we have ceased to be useful in God’s kingdom.
We seek biblically-grounded gospel fidelity. Why? Not merely to be “right,” nor to foment pride through theological precision, but because the eternal destiny of real human souls depends on us getting this right.
While it is true that we are not saved merely by having correct doctrine, it is also true that many people are damned because of false doctrine. The apostle Paul declared a curse against those who pervert the gospel of Christ by teaching that salvation partially depends on Christ’s work and partially depends on our obedience to the law (Gal. 1:7-9). The apostle John said that those who deny that Jesus is the Christ are liars and anti-Christ, clearly indicating that they are not saved (1 John 2:22-23). In the former case, wrong beliefs about salvation by grace are in view. In the latter, it’s wrong views about Christ. Both are damnable. In each case, someone’s doctrine determines their eternal destination.
It is important to restate that no one is saved merely by having the right doctrine. Yet unless someone knows who Christ is and what salvation entails, how can he believe and be saved? Right doctrine precedes faith and salvation. The mind must comprehend sin, judgment, and the offer of salvation (biblical truths) before the affections are stirred and the will can act to reach out in faith to Christ. It may be that an overemphasis on doctrine can lead to stale or dead Christianity. Yet there can be no living Christianity at all apart from right doctrine.
We aim to defend, promote, and proclaim the gospel as God has revealed in the Bible. We don’t want an innovative gospel, a popular gospel, or a therapeutic gospel, but rather the gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Written by Julian Stoltzfus, Editor in Chief. Adapted from an editorial series originally published in 2024-2025.