I have changed a GREAT DEAL doctrinally over the span of my Christian life. I used to be a THOROUGH Arminian. I was educated at a Free Will Baptist Bible College. I used to be dispensational premil. I used to be King James ONLY- and I mean that in the worst sense of the phrase. I used to be a fierce preacher of IFB type doctrines and philosophies. I even helped establish a very legalistic, cultic IFB church with a friend of mine who went to the Free Will Baptist college with me. I am almost the dead level opposite now, and I thought I'd share part of the reason why. Among the cults and heresies we battle today, I noticed a common thread that tied them together. It was a total lack of concern for the historic Christian Faith. Whether it is Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, United Pentecostalism, etc... each one could not care less about what the church has always believed. They do not care that their beliefs are new (or at least have only been espoused by cults sporadically throughout history). The UPC's, for example, are convinced that we baptists are all going to hell because we have not been baptized in Jesus' name and we have not spoken in tongues. Certainly that is not exegetically supportable. But we would not even have to battle over texts, it would not have even gone that far if the people who started the UPC had stopped in the origin of the movement and said, "Wait a minute guys. So almost EVERYBODY in the history of the Christian church is in hell? And we are the first ones, besides the heretical Sabellianists which existed for a short time, to come to the truth on this? And all of those Christians- Spurgeon, Carey, Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, John Knox, John Calvin, Martin Luther, John Huss, John Wycliff, Thomas Aquinas, Augustine of Hippo, etc...- ALL of them and those that followed them are in hell!? And we alone are right??" It seems to me to be UNSPEAKABLE arrogance that moves people to keep right on preaching beliefs that undermine and even DAMN the whole history of the Christian church. How much authority must one think he has to have the right to do such a thing? So I began to seriously scrutinize anything that is new. For example, dispensational premillinealism. It is new. There is a historic premil that is old. But dispensational premil is very new (Darby established it in 1830), so I began to really question my confidence in this doctrine since I was, myself, for years a premil dispensationalist. And I concluded that this was not biblical and THAT'S WHY the Body of Christ never saw it before- it is not there. The historic Body of Christ is not STUPID. If the Church has not discovered a major doctrine with two thousand years at her disposal to do so- guess what- it probably isn't there. You and I are not more brilliant or more spiritual than the whole of Christianity put together for 2,000 years. It requires untenable arrogance to think otherwise. I think we ought to give great credence to the importance of historicity of doctrine before we embrace it. And I think we ought to examine any doctrines we hold to now, which we got in this hyper autonomous age and culture in which we live, which have no real historicity. A doctrine can most certainly EVOLVE over 2,000 years of history. That is fine and good. But when it has no roots- it is probably BAD WRONG.