Is Dr. Dobson a Sinless Perfectionist?

Years ago, I visited the web site of Gil Moegerle, who worked for many years with Dr. James Dobson in Focus on the Family. Due to a variety of factors, Moegerle became embittered with Dr. Dobson, and he wrote a book with the subtle title, James Dobson’s War on America.

One thing that Moegerle claimed on his web site was that Dobson is a sinless perfectionist. In Moegerle’s eyes, that’s why Dobson is so judgmental and self-righteous. It’s part of his Nazarene heritage.

I first heard about the Nazarene doctrine of sinless perfection from a high school English teacher. She was a Baptist, and she and I disagreed on eternal security. One day, we were discussing salvation issues and comparing denominational notes, and she told me that the Nazarenes believe a Christian can arrive at a state of sinlessness. I had a math teacher who was a Nazarene, but I didn’t ask him if that was true.

But what Moegerle was saying about Dobson did not sit well with my spirit. Dobson did not strike me as a person who considered himself sinless. In the 1990’s, I heard him say about his wife, Shirley: “You know, the wonderful thing about marriage is that your spouse accepts you, while knowing about all of your flaws. That’s the way Shirley is with me.” In that statement, he admitted he had flaws. On a program about a couple that was doing good, Dr. Dobson said: “You know, we’re saved by grace, and so you don’t have to do any of this to earn God’s favor. And yet it’s wonderful when people like you choose to make an investment in the lives of others.” He kind of sounded like a free gracer there–like a Zane Hodges and Charles Ryrie type, as opposed to a John MacArthur “Lordship salvation” advocate. And so he did not strike me as a sinless perfectionist.

Dale Buss’ book, Family Man: The Biography of Dr. James Dobson, presents some of Dobson’s religious beliefs–in his own words. Here are some quotes, and I’ve emboldened the parts that I want to stand out:

“[A] notion that has shaped much of Dobson’s philosophy and life is…complex, and its complications come largely from the particulars of Nazarene theology. Because of its emphasis on individual free will, explains [H.B.] London (himself a former Nazarene pastor), his denomination believes in a ‘theology of standing’ in many ways: ‘It means you can lose your salvation. You’re constantly striving to measure up. [Our] definition of sin is that it’s a willful transgression of God’s law. And salvation isn’t automatic as in the Calvinist viewpoint. As a result, not only is there guilt but also pressure to measure up.’

Dobson stresses that salvation is a gift of God and can’t be deserved by anyone. ‘If we could have earned our salvation, we wouldn’t have needed a Savior,’ he says. Nevertheless, Dobson believes that the Christian’s part of the ‘contract’ also calls for heartfelt repentance and right living after embracing salvation. The doctrine was strongly developed in the eighteenth century by John Wesley, the British founder of Methodism, and later further shaped by the Nazarenes. ‘There is a call on our lives to be as clean as possible with the help of Jesus Christ,’ Dobson says. ‘We fall short; we sin. But we seek forgiveness for sin, and it’s very much a part of our theology that we’re obligated to live as holy a life as we can.’

“‘I do believe someday I’ll kneel before the Lord, and I want to hear him say, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant!’ What I do and how I live is important. In Matthew 7, Jesus said there will be those on [Judgment Day] who confess him but whom he never knew. Why? Because they didn’t do–D-O–the work of his Father. It’s an emphasis on attempting to walk the talk.’

Dobson is hesitant to discuss this aspect of his beliefs in public because some people misinterpret his holiness doctrine as an assertion that, with enough effort, a person can lead a truly sinless life. Nobody, he affirms, can avoid sinning in the sense of having shortcomings, faults, and other flaws that display our mere humanity. ‘But from the Wesleyan perspective, sin is a willful disobedience or defiance to a known law. When you refuse to do what God tells you, you know it and understand it. The apostle Paul writes that we have a conscience within us, so that none of us has an excuse. The concept of sanctification is that God gives humans the ability, through the Holy Spirit, to live without deliberately defying God.

“‘Just look at Hebrews 10:26,’ which promises God’s vengeance on those who insist on sinning after learning the truth of the gospel, Dobson says. ‘That’s interpreted very differently from my Calvinist friends. But I don’t believe you can disobey God deliberately, do all kinds of heinous things, and then just go sweeping into [God’s] kingdom.

The characterization that is made by people who don’t misunderstand it is that Wesleyans think they’re perfect or that they think they can live without any shortcomings. That’s crazy. But I try real hard not to shake my fist in God’s fist and defy him, and God gives me the encouragement and the strength through the Holy Spirit not to violate a known law. And that’s very important to me.’

“It’s clear, London says, that ‘a large part of the pressure that [Dobson] puts on himself to be such a perfectionist and to achieve may come out of his theology, or at least out of the inward pressure that we Nazarenes put on ourselves to be loved and appreciated–to be the best at what we do.’

“This also helps explain the high expectations that Dobson places on others in work, in relationships, and in life. And if the heresy of fist-shaking at God sounds familiar to his fans, that’s because Wesleyan theology also, as Dobson puts it, ‘influences my approach to child rearing. I’ve talked about having a three-year-old son, and if you tell him to go open the door and he misunderstands it and he closes it instead, he’ll never be aware that he’s done the opposite of what you just asked him to do,’ Dobson explains. ‘But when he stomps his foot and says, ‘I won’t do it,’ that’s when he’s most likely to face the consequences.’

“This worldview has influenced ‘nearly everything about me,’ Dobson says. ‘My teaching all comes out of my theology'” (23-25).

According to Dobson, Christians can arrive at a state where they do not commit deliberate and willful sins, even though they may still have flaws. But what is a “willful sin,” and what is a “flaw”? For example, are shyness and introversion “sins”? I know that God wants me to reach out to others and not be self-centered. But I have a lot of social anxiety, so I often don’t follow that command. Am I deliberately sinning? I doubt that Dobson would think so, for he has stated that some people are just naturally quiet, and he has tried to teach us quiet types how to have a conversation. And, yet, aren’t I violating a known law?

How about lust? I know that Jesus equates lust with adultery in Matthew 5:27-28. But I have it anyway, and I enjoy it. I don’t understand how Jesus can command us not to have sexual desire (if that indeed is what he’s doing), since it’s such an integral part of the human condition. Of course, Dr. Dobson has a looser attitude on this than many evangelicals, for he says that parents shouldn’t try to stop their kids from masturbating. In a book of his that I read many years ago, Dobson says that his dad told him not to worry about masturbation. “You can masturbate, and that won’t hurt your Christian walk,” he said. Dobson said that his dad was a conservative Nazarene, yet he was willing to make concessions to human nature. I can understand Dobson being real here, but how’s that mesh with his view that Christians shouldn’t deliberately sin?

There are some sins that I don’t want to do, but I can’t exactly shake them. I know that God equates hatred with murder (Matthew 5:22), for example, yet there are still people I hate. I don’t want to see them dead, mind you, but I just have a lot of anger towards them. I would prefer to have inner peace, but I can’t shake my ego, or my disappointment, or my sense of having been wronged, or my jealousy. At times, God’s known will appears unattainable.

And there are times when Dobson appears more compassionate and pastoral than the above quotes seem to indicate. From the above quotes, you’d think that a Christian puts himself on dangerous ground whenever he deliberately opposes God. But, in When God Doesn’t Make Sense, Dobson acknowledges that people may have legitimate reasons to be mad at God, for horrible things happen in life. But he says that we should bring ourselves to forgive God, which is not to say that God has done anything wrong. It just means that we should let go of our anger towards him. Here, Dobson recognizes that even Christians are human–with all of the imperfections that humanity entails. But how’s he reconcile that with his belief that Christians should be perfect, in the sense of avoiding deliberate disobedience or bad attitudes about God?

I agree with Dobson that being a Christian should make a difference in one’s life. The non-Lordship types act as if Christians are God’s children even if they live in sin, whereas Dobson seems to think that deliberate sin can disqualify a Christian from salvation. I wonder if there can be a middle ground between the two positions, one that stresses the need for holiness while preserving a God of unconditional love.

Personally, I assume that God is patient with me. He wants me to be better than I am right now, but that doesn’t mean that I have to stress out in an attempt to be morally sinless, all to preserve my salvation. In the words of the promises of Alcoholics Anonymous, “We seek spiritual progress, not spiritual perfection.” I still think that the goal is some form of perfection, however, but that’s the result of growth, not me deciding to do everything right at the present moment. And God is with me on this journey of growth.

About jamesbradfordpate

My name is James Pate. This blog is about my journey. I read books. I watch movies and TV shows. I go to church. I try to find meaning. And, when I can’t do that, I just talk about stuff that I find interesting. I have degrees in fields of religious studies. I have an M.Phil. in the History of Biblical Interpretation from Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. I also have an M.A. in Hebrew Bible from Jewish Theological Seminary, an M.Div. from Harvard Divinity School, and a B.A. from DePauw University.
This entry was posted in Alcoholism, Bible, Books, Church, James Dobson, Life, Matthew, Radio, Religion. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Is Dr. Dobson a Sinless Perfectionist?

  1. Ryan says:

    << “This also helps explain the high expectations that Dobson places on others in work, in relationships, and in life. And if the heresy of fist-shaking at God sounds familiar to his fans, that’s because Wesleyan theology also, as Dobson puts it, ‘influences my approach to child rearing. I’ve talked about having a three-year-old son, and if you tell him to go open the door and he misunderstands it and he closes it instead, he’ll never be aware that he’s done the opposite of what you just asked him to do,’ Dobson explains. ‘But when he stomps his foot and says, ‘I won’t do it,’ that’s when he’s most likely to face the consequences.’ >>

    I have a much greater respect for Dobson after reading all this and I think he is encouraging the right things, though perhaps not explaining it to everyone’s satisfaction.

    It is true that when children (and we are children of God) defiantly say “I will not do it” that this is bad behaviour which cannot be passively allowed to continue. You must put a stop to it, but you don’t do it by pulling out a gun and shooting your 3-yr old!!

    Jonah did this very thing. So let’s look what God does and maybe we’ll learn something. Which, by the way, is an excellent way to come to understand God’s Word; look at how He puts it into action and you will gain understanding into what He means. Jonah flat out rebelled and he did so because he knew that God was gracious and merciful and he didn’t think it was fair. Did God strike him dead? No. Why not? First things first, God isn’t a machine looking for the first transgression in order to mete out the required punishment. Paul says that we are to consider his patience as salvation. If He wasn’t patient with us, we’d all be dead!

    So what does God do? He lets Jonah run away. He then controls his environment and sovereignly puts him in a situation where he is given a chance to repent, and he does so. When my child is defiant, I put him in the corner and give him 5 minutes to think about what he has done. Perhaps when his anger subsides, he will become convicted of his transgression and be repentant. If not, and this is not the first time this behaviour has been displayed, I increase the heat. He stays longer in the corner, or loses his favorite toys, or other blessings and privileges. All is an attempt to bring death to his fleshly outbursts. Why? Because I know this: if I allow them to continue, I am raising an ungodly child who has not learned to love and obey, and second, I am an unloving father.

    What is surprising about Jonah is he preaches out of spite or lack of concern and people get saved all around him! The people in the boat view the signs that are unconcerning to Jonah and they fear God and repent and are saved! The short words he speaks to the Ninevites, perhaps his cavalier attitude seems to reinforce the truth in some strange way, are taken to heart — they had heard of the Hebrew people and the works of their God and they believed him at his word and repented… but Jonah harbored a hard and unmerciful heart. And God still showed mercy on him by giving him signs to see his folly and giving him time to “see the light” and repent of his hard-heartedness. What are we to make of this?

    God’s ways are higher than our ways!

    Like

  2. James Pate says:

    Hi Ryan! Yeah, something similar was going through my mind. When our children are defiant, that doesn’t mean they’re not our children anymore. But we do have to discipline them, and that’s an act of love (Hebrews 12:6). Yet, even this analogy may have its limits. There are children who continue their rebellion into adulthood, and a lot of times they alienate themselves from their parents. The relationship may not go on, since the kids no longer live them.

    I wonder if there’s light that this can shed on the who eternal security debate. There are plenty of passages about God’s love for his children. Yet, there are also warning passages, some of which seem to say that a Christian can lose his salvation. People wonder how both can be true, but, in some situations in real life, it is true.

    Like

  3. Anders says:

    Hello! My name is Anders Branderud and I am from Sweden.

    Actually they have copycatted the term Nazarenes. Netzarim describes Ribi Yehoshuas Orthodox Jewish followers.

    “Of 31 instances of “Nazareth” in the Greek source texts of the NT, only 12 properly refer to Ναζαρεθ (Nazareth) – Nâtzrat. Yet, of the remaining 19 instances, which properly refer to Nәtzarim – Ναζωραιος (Nazoraios; from which gentile sects derived ‘Nazoraeans’ or distorting Pâqid Ya•aqov ha-Tzadiq Ben-Dâvid to be a Nâzir) and Ναζαρηνος (Nazareinos, from which the English “Nazarene” derived), Christian versions typically render only 2 passages faithfully as “Nazarene” (Mt. 2:23 & “Acts” 24:5).

    Ha-Neitzer is the title of historical Ribi Yәhoshua and the plural describes his original Jewish followers, including the first 12, who were specifically identified in NT by the name Nәtzarim (cf., for example Ma•avâr 24:5, but also the numerous additional instances in the earliest Greek below).

    The original Hebrew term derives from the נצר “Neitzer” of Yәshayâhu 11.1 and 60.21.
    Neitzer was de-Judaized (Hellenized) by the post-135 CE Christian NT redactors — unsupported by LXX — to Ναζαρηνος (nazareinos) and Anglicized to ‘Nazarenes.’
    The plural, Nәtzarim (referring to his followers), was de-Judaized (Hellenized) in the NT to Ναζωραιος (nazoraios) where it is clearly translated as “Nazarenes” in Ma•avâr 24:5 (as well as confused, elsewhere, with Nazoraeans / Nazirites).
    “ (source: http://www.netzarim.co.il)

    I am a follower of Ribi Yehoshua – Mashiakh – who practiced Torah including Halakhah with all his heart.
    He was born in Betlehem 7 B.C.E . His faher name was Yoseiph and mother’s name was Mir′ yâm. He had twelve followers. He tought in the Jewish batei-haknesset (synagogues). Thousands of Jews were interested in His Torah-teachings. The “Temple” Sadducees (non-priests who bought their priest-ship in the “Temple” from the Romans, because they were assimilated Hellenist and genealogically non-priests acting as priests in the “Temple”; they were known by most 1st-century Jews as “Wicked Priests.” decided to crucify him. So they did – together with the Romans. His followers were called Netzarim (meaning offshoots [of a olive tree]) and they continued to pray with the other Jews in the synagogues.

    Christianity does not teach the teachings of Ribi Yehoshua. Ribi Yehoshuas teachings were pro-Torah.

    If you want to learn more click at our website http://www.netzarim.co.il — than click at the lick “Christians”; click at my photo to read about what made my switch religion from Christianity to Orthodox Judaism.

    Anders Branderud
    Follower of Ribi Yehoshua in Orthodox Judaism

    Like

  4. Ryan says:

    Hello Anders,

    I take it that you didn’t come here to talk about the Nazarenes per se, but how Christianity has a false messiah. I don’t want to de-rail the original discussion too much (though I fear I might), but I’m interested in clarifying your views concerning the person whom Christians call Jesus (referred to as Yәhoshua Mashiakh in the Hebrew).

    First, Christianity teaches that Jesus practiced the Torah perfectly. Without this fact, He would not be the spotless lamb pictured by the Jewish sacrifices required for the atonement of the sins of humanity. Do you trust the accounts of the words Yehoshua spoke in the gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

    Like

  5. James Pate says:

    Hi Ryan,

    Anders has commented here before, though this last message may be automated. He actually does not believe that the New Testament Gospels are reliable.

    Like

  6. Ryan says:

    Thanks, James. This being true, I wonder that since he claims he is a follower of this Rabbi, where does he get His teachings from? Anyways…

    Like

  7. James Pate says:

    That’s a good question, Ryan. His web site may explain some of that. I took a class a few years ago on Jewish Christianity, and the church fathers criticize many of those sects for using a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, which had ideas they deemed heretical. But I don’t think that book has survived.

    Like

Comments are closed.