Some years ago, after preaching at a Sunday gathering where I had been invited, someone approached me and asked a question that, although innocent, left me taken aback: “Is the doctrine you preach sound doctrine?”
I looked at him for a few seconds, trying to decipher what lay behind his words. Finding nothing hidden, I asked him: “What exactly do you mean?” He explained with humility that he had read someone on the internet using that term and, although it sounded clear in itself, he didn’t quite grasp its meaning.
In recent years, I have visited churches of various denominations: Baptist, Vineyard, Pentecostal, Methodist, non-denominational, and several others. And I have encountered the same question time and time again—sometimes transformed into comments charged with judgment.
The Biblical Origin of the Term
The term “sound doctrine” appears explicitly in the Apostle Paul’s pastoral letters. In 1 Timothy 1:10, he speaks of that which “is contrary to sound doctrine.” In 2 Timothy 4:3, he warns: “For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” He instructs Titus: “You, however, must teach what is appropriate to sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1), and exhorts him to “hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it” (Titus 1:9).
The Greek word translated as “sound” (hugiaino) literally means “healthy” or “promoting health.” Paul uses it nine times in the pastoral epistles, five of them in Titus. The emphasis is not on abstract theological correctness, but on teaching that produces healthy spiritual life, which edifies and results in practical holiness.
When Doctrine Becomes a Weapon
The Pharisees in Jesus’ time were the most zealous defenders of doctrinal purity within Judaism. They established 248 precepts and 365 prohibitions that constituted the oral tradition, creating “a fence around the Law” to prevent its transgression.
However, Jesus confronted them harshly: “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to” (Matthew 23:13). He called them “blind guides” and “whitewashed tombs,” which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean.
The Pharisees’ problem was not their doctrine per se—many of their beliefs coincided with those of Christ, including the resurrection—but their hypocrisy and their use of doctrine as a tool for exclusion and control. In John 9, when Jesus healed the man born blind, the Pharisees expelled him from the synagogue simply for testifying about Christ, prioritizing their traditions over the evident work of God.
Paul: The Correcting Apostle
Paul’s apostolic ministry was marked by the constant need to correct doctrinal deviations. In his first letter to Timothy, he charges him: “As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith” (1 Timothy 1:3-4). These false teachings were not only erroneous but provoked controversies instead of edification.
In Galatians, Paul faced one of the most serious doctrinal conflicts of the early church: did Gentiles need to be circumcised to be saved? With extraordinarily severe language, he declared: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!” (Galatians 1:6-8).
The Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 shows how the early church handled this controversy. After a “sharp dispute,” Peter stated: “No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are” (Acts 15:11). The decision was clear: do not impose unnecessary burdens on the Gentiles, establishing that salvation is solely by grace.
Paul also warned the Romans: “I urge you, brothers and sisters, 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. For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people” (Romans 16:17-18).
The Authority Lacking Today
Here arises a modern paradox: there are groups of churches that deny the existence of apostles today, yet they attribute to themselves the role of correcting others without having either spiritual authority or, worse yet, relational authority. Two things that Paul did have.
Paul’s apostolic authority was not merely positional or doctrinal, but deeply relational. In 1 Corinthians 4:15, he writes: “Even if you had ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.” Paul not only founded the church in Corinth but developed a spiritual fatherhood relationship with them. This fatherhood granted him legitimate authority to correct and form.
In contrast, many today self-attribute authority to correct churches and leaders with whom they have no foundational, pastoral, or mutual submission relationship. They did not plant those churches, they have not served them sacrificially, nor do they have the kind of relationship that would legitimize correction. Paul warned against those who wanted “to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm” (1 Timothy 1:7).
The Irony of “Sound Doctrine”
Unfortunately, this term is frequently used in Reformed or more traditional circles of the Church. And it is ironically harmful to think in that manner.
Every time I see pastors speak about sound doctrine, they are speaking about their own. Ironic, isn’t it? I doubt anyone says: “I am a preacher of unsound doctrine.”
When they ask me if I preach sound doctrine, my answer will always be yes. I preach and teach what I am fully convinced the Bible teaches, faithfully believing before God that I do so from the correct lens and the correct interpretation. Can I be wrong? Of course! Can I not err in interpreting the Bible? Am I going to ignore Church history and how it reflects both errors and successes? Of course I can be mistaken, but I am sure before God that I do the best I can to form myself, equip myself, learn, and study to avoid it. However, we all make mistakes.
In most cases, “sound doctrine” is a term used to say in a subtle and elegant way: “I am right, you are not,” or “People and the church must believe what I believe, because for me that is what is correct.”
Be humble and hold your tongue.
So, What is Doctrine?
The word “doctrine” (didaskalia in Greek) literally means “teaching” or “instruction.” In the New Testament context, it refers to the coherent body of apostolic teachings regarding Christ, salvation, the Christian life, and the church. It is not a set of abstract theological propositions, but a teaching that transforms lives and produces godliness.
Sound doctrine has specific characteristics according to the New Testament:
It is grounded in Scripture and centered on Christ.
It promotes holiness and spiritual maturity, not just intellectual knowledge.
It builds the community in love, it does not divide it.
As Paul writes: “The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith” (1 Timothy 1:5).
Now, it is important to clarify: seeking something “sound” does not make you religious (in a negative sense). We are all called to pursue a model of church and Christianity that is healthy. The correct question is: What does a healthy church look like? What Christian practices are healthy?
The Fruits of a Healthy Church
A healthy church is not defined solely by the precision of its doctrinal formulations, but by the fruit it produces. Sound doctrine must result in transformed lives, communities that reflect the character of Christ, and an effective witness of the gospel. As Paul wrote to Titus, sound doctrine teaches us “to say ‘No’ to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age” (Titus 2:12).
Healthy churches are characterized by unity in essentials, liberty in non-essentials, and love in all things. This phrase, frequently attributed to Augustine of Hippo but actually originating from 17th-century theologians, remains deeply wise: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.”
Final Reflection
Regrettably, most people who enter the discussion of “sound doctrine” seek to convince others that what they believe is correct and healthy, and therefore must be accepted. Let me tell you something:
There is nothing less healthy than that.
I am always open—and I encourage you to be as well—to revisit any topic from the Bible, and to be okay if no agreement is reached.
True sound doctrine is not a weapon to divide, but a foundation to unite. It is not a tool of control, but an instrument of freedom. It is not an end in itself, but a means to know God more deeply and love Him more completely. As John warned: “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” (2 John 9).
The greatest danger is not the honest theological error of one who sincerely seeks to understand the Scriptures, but the arrogance of one who uses “sound doctrine” as a pretext to judge, exclude, and dominate.
The Pharisees had impeccable doctrine in many aspects, but Jesus called them blind. In contrast, the blind man of John 9, with limited understanding but a sincere heart, confessed: “Lord, I believe,” and worshiped Him.
I will stick with that wisdom attributed to Augustine:
“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.”
May the Lord give us grace to discern the difference between these categories, humility to recognize our own limitations, and love to treat one another with the same spirit of grace with which Christ has treated us.
