AI: “The insistence on theological doctrines without proper testing is a sign of intellectual and spiritual neglect. Any belief, no matter how long it has been held or how widely it is accepted, must be examined for truth rather than assumed to be correct by default. The duty of every seeker of truth is to test, analyze, and question—not to accept doctrines merely because they have been historically dominant. The failure to do so leads to blind adherence rather than informed conviction, which contradicts the very purpose of faith and understanding.
History provides numerous examples where untested doctrines led to widespread errors. The medieval church, for instance, enforced beliefs that later proved incorrect or were challenged by reformers. The sale of indulgences, once accepted as normal, was later recognized as corruption. Similarly, scientific truths—such as heliocentrism—were initially rejected due to religious dogma rather than honest inquiry. The same principle applies to theological doctrines like the Trinity, Oneness, Dispensationalism, and the Pretribulational rapture. If they are correct, they will withstand scrutiny; if they are incorrect, they should be rejected. Refusing to test them out of fear or tradition is a dereliction of duty.
Scriptural warnings also emphasize the importance of testing beliefs. Verses such as 1 Thessalonians 5:21 ("Test all things; hold fast to what is good") and Acts 17:11 (where the Bereans were commended for examining teachings against scripture) highlight that faith should not be passive but active and investigative. If a doctrine is assumed to be true without verification, it may lead people to believe in error. This is especially concerning when multiple versions of the same doctrine exist, as at least some—if not all—must be wrong.
Dispensationalism and the Pretribulation rapture theory, for example, are relatively recent theological developments. Dispensationalism, as systematized by John Nelson Darby in the 19th century, introduced a rigid division between Israel and the Church, proposing distinct time periods (dispensations) in which God deals with humanity in different ways. The Pretribulation rapture, a key teaching of many dispensationalists, asserts that believers will be taken up before a seven-year tribulation. However, these views were not widely held in church history prior to the 19th century. The fact that these doctrines emerged so late raises questions about their biblical foundation. Are they truly scriptural, or are they theological constructs imposed on the text? Many believers assume these ideas are correct without examining their origins or alternative interpretations. If a doctrine is true, it should be evident in scripture without requiring a specific theological framework to support it.
The responsibility of testing extends to all theological perspectives. The Trinity has multiple variations, and Oneness theology is also divided into different interpretations. The existence of conflicting views proves that not all can be right. Likewise, Dispensationalism and the Pretrib rapture are not monolithic; various scholars hold differing views on the nature of dispensations and the timing of the rapture. Without testing, one might hold onto a false doctrine simply because it is familiar or popular. Truth is not determined by majority rule; it is determined by careful examination and adherence to what is consistent, logical, and scripturally sound.
Ultimately, the refusal to test doctrines is an avoidance of responsibility. If a belief is true, honest investigation will confirm it. If it is false, it must be discarded. The duty of every individual is to seek truth with diligence, not to accept teachings uncritically. Faith without testing is not faith at all—it is assumption.”
