"Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.  He said to the woman, 'Did God actually say, "You shall not eat of any tree in the garden"?'  And the woman said to the serpent, 'We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, "You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die."' ... But the serpent said to the woman, 'You will not surely die.  For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.'" [Genesis 3:1-5; ESV]

Genesis 3 records the first lies told in human history, fittingly told by the deceiver himself; the "father of lies".  Satan knows very well that God did not forbid Adam and Eve from eating "of any tree in the garden", just one tree in particular; however, that doesn't stop him from planting the seed of doubt.  He then goes on to tell his second lie; that they will not die.  In Genesis 2:16-17 God tells Adam in the plainest of terms that he will surely die if he eats of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  But Satan, having already planted the seed of doubt in Eve's mind, follows up with his death-blow -- a blatant contradiction of God's word.

It is clear from the wholesale rejection of God's word by the church as well as the secular world that the lie is still effective today.  "Did God actually say . . . ?"  What better way to sow the seeds of doubt, especially when combined with the lack of discernment by Christians regarding false teaching, the attitude that all beliefs are equally valid, and a general lack of knowledge regarding what God actually did say.

It is very popular today to call doubt a virtue; to say that questioning everything is good and that to accept anything at face value -- to "blindly" believe -- is bad.  But is doubt a virtue?  Is questioning everything, simply for the sake of questioning it, good?

Now, I am not talking about saying something like "I doubt that it is going to rain today."  Or "I doubt that he will follow through on his promises."  These are statements of opinion based on experience.  In the first case we know that the weather man is often right, but is just as often wrong about the state of the weather.  We can tell by looking out of the window that a sunny sky is not likely to yield rain.  In the second case the speaker is simply making a judgement call based on past experience; he usually doesn't follow through, so he probably won't this time, either.  These are examples of doubt that are backed by experience, knowledge, or simply a gut feeling.  However, they are concerning things that are not established as authoritative.

What I am talking about here is nothing short of unbelief -- blatant rebellion against the God of the Bible who is our ultimate authority.  I am considering statements such as calling the penal substitutionary atonement of Christ on the cross a case of "cosmic child abuse."  Or influential pastors who refuse to take a firm stand on things like the doctrine of salvation through Christ alone, or the sin of sodomy.  Not to mention whole denominations who believe that the murder of the unborn can be considered "an act of faithfulness before God."

Here are men called by God to shepherd His sheep who are saying that it is okay to question things that are of eternal importance; which have been established as truth by God Himself.  Just try to call their teachings into doubt, though, and you will be called intolerant, smug, self-righteous, fundamentalist, or Bibliolater.  "Who are you to challenge me?" they cry.  "After all, we need to be tolerant of all views."  But, at its core, is "tolerance" not just another word for "doubt"?

Who are we to question these men, indeed?  Consider the following from Acts 17:

"The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue.  Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.  Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men.  But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was proclaimed by Paul at Berea also, they came there too, agitating and stirring up the crowds."  [Acts 17:10-13; ESV]

The church at Berea was not content to just accept whatever was taught to them, but searched the scriptures to make sure what they were being taught was true.  Would that we had the same desire to test all teachings today; even if it were preached by the Apostle Paul himself.  Too often we are more like those described in Ephesians 4:14, "tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes."  We accept the word of these wolves over the Word of God and "go with the flow," never bothering to check to make sure that what they say is really what the Bible says.

Certainty is self-righteous smugness, but doubt is humility -- never mind that the thing we (as the Bereans) are claiming certainty in is the truth of God's Word.  Dogma is to be avoided at all costs, replaced by a humble uncertainty.  As the prophet Isaiah says, "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil."