You Need To Get Rid of Some Of Your Theology

135 thoughts on “You Need To Get Rid of Some Of Your Theology”

1. Pingback: Sensus Divinitatis News

2. Last month I wrote about this very thing in this blog and I was banned!
   (Probably I was misunderstood then)

   Now it seems the right thing to think!

   ¿what’s going on?

   LikeLike

3. IMonk,

   I am not trying to convert anyone to anything.

   Some bloggers have confused Van Til’s view that syllogisms can not tell us anything. I am only trying to give a correction. Van Til’s context was Apologetics! Fideism over-against evidentialism not the doctrines of scripture. Besides both Augustine and Aquinas would never say that a syllogism was meaningless.

   I cited Luther because some bloggers asserted “free-will” in a non-biblical sense and Luther although rejecting “actual atonement” did teach that “no one can come to Christ apart from the work of the Spirit.” I would also suggest Gordon Clark on refuting the non-biblical notion of free-will as well.

   [Mod edit]

   LikeLike

4. And Luther wasn’t a Calvinist and didn’t believe in a “Limited” atonement like Calvin. — IMonk (warning off Dion)

   I have a sneaking suspicion that Calvin wasn’t a Calvinist to today’s hyper-Calvinists. (They say both Darwin and Marx said late in their life “I am not a Darwinist/Marxist”; there’s a common stupid human trick to take an idea and run way too far with it.)

   My writing partner told me last week he’s encountering Hyper-Calvinists who are hyper to the point of “Socratic Atheism”, i.e. even God is under the thumb of Total Predestination and can do only what He has been Predestined to do. (“Eh, Kismet…”) At which point, Socratic Atheism kicks in; if God is subject to Predestination, then God is not God — Fate/Destiny/Predestination is. (My Church calls this “heresy”, specifically “Jansenism”.)

   LikeLike

5. Wow, I learned a lot from that, Fr. Ernesto. Thank you for sharing your wisdom. I am blessed by it.

   LikeLike

6. Dion,

   This is the last warning:

   Here at IM we do NOT attempt to convert one another. If you want to discuss the “Limited” atonement, that’s great, but please stop addressing Fr. Ernesto in an attempt to make him a Calvinist.

   You may be unfamiliar with how we do discussions here, but we do NOT attempt to convert one another. Omit the personal comments like “who told you.”

   If you persist in this tone, I’m going to ban you.

   And Luther wasn’t a Calvinist and didn’t believe in a “Limited” atonement like Calvin.

   MS

   LikeLike

7. Fr. Ernesto,

   I don’t think it can denied that Christ’s work on the cross did one of the three things I enumerated above! The fact of the matter is that the scripture leaves us with only those options and your unwillingness to deal with it is quite telling.

   Your argument assumes that the scripture teaches that Christ died (atoned) for the sin of every person.

   No offense but who told you Christ died (atoned) for the sins of the whole “world?” Please do yourself a favor and look at how that term is used in scripture. Ex. John in ch 1 uses it in three different senses in one verse! When it is used of the atonement it is never used in a universal sense sir.

   To wit, “God so loved the world” Both John Gill “Cause of God and of Truth” as well as Alfred Edersheim have pointed out that the term was used by the 1st century Rabbis as a synonym for the Gentiles! See St. Paul in Romans 10-11 he uses it in the same sense.

   Therefore your argument contrasting the nature of the Atonement with the Two Natures of Christ as as examples of a biblical “mysterium” is not sound! We have no basis in scripture to teach that Christ died ATONED for each and every person!

   Luther’s work “Bondage of the Will” should be on your reading list. Sorry about the seemingly harsh tone, but God’s truth must be upheld.

   LikeLike

8. If I was Jewsih it would be even shorter —

   “—” 😆

   LikeLike

9. Hey Surf! You might even be able to make it shorter. “I AM” 😆

   LikeLike

10. There is some scholarly consensus on the theology of the Book of Job. It is this:

    “I’m God and you’re not.”

    LikeLike

11. Back to Michael’s original post . . .

    Well said. I find it interesting and ironic that I read this from Job 42:1-6 earlier today. Apparently, Job had to discard some of his theology too. 🙂

    Then Job replied to the LORD :

    “I know that you can do all things;
    no plan of yours can be thwarted.

    You asked, ‘Who is this that obscures my counsel without knowledge?’
    Surely I spoke of things I did not understand,
    things too wonderful for me to know.

    “You said, ‘Listen now, and I will speak;
    I will question you,
    and you shall answer me.’

    My ears had heard of you
    but now my eyes have seen you.

    Therefore I despise myself
    and repent in dust and ashes.”

    LikeLike

12. I was starting to think that this thread was pretty much tapped out and getting more partisan with each post; but then Fr. Ernesto (thanks for sharing “syllogism” – a term I’d never known before) and Ron bring things back into focus. Well spoken, both.

    LikeLike

13. One item of theological trash I think should be kicked to the curb is the prevailing (though often unspoken) belief that individual church bodies, institutions, and denominations have to divide up and limit their fellowship according to theological battle lines. In my opinion, the premise that birds with identical theological feathers should always flock together leads to spiritual and intellectual stagnancy, isolationist policies, and the muzzling of free speech within church bodies and institutions. Over the last several years I’ve discovered that a reasonable degree of theological variance can be a very healthy thing for a fellowship of believers. So long as Christ is kept central and the law of love holds individual egos in check, such variance and the very interesting discussions it engenders can really raise the bar when it comes to scriptural knowledge and understanding, as well as the overall level of participation and contribution during church gatherings. Sure, there are theological extremes and errors that should be moderated or avoided, but when maintaining loving, Christ-centered relationships takes precedence over unbending theological integrity, errors and extremes can usually be addressed and corrected within the body without splits and divisions. You may not believe me, but this approach can and does work. From what I’ve read and, hopefully, understood of Scripture, Christ and the New Testament writers placed a much higher premium on unity of the Spirit in love than they did on uniformity of opinion and interpretation.

    LikeLike

14. Dion – What you are doing is posing a syllogism, and arguing that because you have set up such a syllogism that we must answer the question according to your syllogism. But, uhm, that is quite far from the truth. I need not answer your syllogism if your syllogism in, in and of itself, invalid.

    Here is a quote, “. . . the syllogistic method is competent only within a well chosen series of data in a strictly defined field of study. It is unable to manage the great facts of life and history, of which Christianity is the most outstanding.”

    In fact the Calvinist philosopher Cornelius Van Til, who trained Francis Schaeffer, strongly denies that God can be found at the end of a syllogism.

    Now, how do we see this work out in Church history? Let me give you two examples:

    1. The Scriptures say that Jesus existed from before time. The Scriptures make it clear that Jesus began his existence in Bethlehem of Judea on a certain day. The Church’s resolution was eventually found in the doctrine of the two natures in the one person of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He is eternal as respects his divine nature and was created as respects his human nature. But, most important, look at the actual words used in the definition. As regards the two natures of the person of Jesus, they are “without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.” But, notice that they do not and cannot fully resolve the mystery. They are only able to say what it is not. The two natures in the one person of Our Lord Jesus is not fully explainable by our human logic, it is only partially describable.

    2. The Scriptures make it clear that there is only One God. The Scriptures make it clear that Jesus is the Son of God from eternity. The Scriptures make it clear that the Holy Spirit is the Lord of Life from eternity. The resolution by the Church is the doctrine of the hypostatic union in the One God. But, the Church can only partially describe it; it is not fully explainable by our human logic.

    The same is true with the doctrine of free will and of predestination. Whosoever will may come to Him and He has known us from before the foundation of the world. The same is true with the atonement. Scripture makes it clear that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Scripture makes it clear that the atonement only becomes effective for some.

    The resolution of both of the above pairs of statements has never been fully possible in the history of the Church. They are not fully reducible to merely human logic. The resolution is only partially describable by us. This does not mean that there is no logical solution. But, it is to say that God’s ways are so far beyond ours that they are not able to be fully comprehended by human logic.

    In order for TULIP Calvinists to maintain the syllogism that you gave, it is necessary for them to ignore or re-interpret every Scripture that speaks of free will in such a way that it does not mean what a plain reading of Scripture would give it. Only in that way can the syllogism you espouse be made to seem convincing. That is, TULIP Calvinists are forced to reduce God’s ways to our ways.

    What we really have is a mystery that can only be described by a series of negatives, just like with the Person of Christ and the Trinity. For instance, one Orthodox confession says, “We believe the most good God to have from eternity predestinated unto glory those whom He has chosen, and to have consigned unto condemnation those whom He has rejected; but not so that He would justify the one, and consign and condemn the other without cause. For that would be contrary to the nature of God, who is the common Father of all, and no respecter of persons, and would have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

    That confession also says, “But to say . . that God, in predestinating, or condemning, did not consider in any way the works of those predestinated, or condemned, we know to be profane and impious. For thus Scripture would be opposed to itself, since it promises the believer salvation through works, yet supposes God to be its sole author, by His sole illuminating grace, which He bestows without preceding works, to show to man the truth of divine things, and to teach him how he may co-operate with it, if he will, and do what is good and acceptable, and so obtain salvation.”

    Can you see how the descriptions I quoted from the confession are actually a series of negatives that almost appear to contradict? Those negatives, and the negatives for the Person of Christ and for the Trinity are my answer to your syllogism.

    LikeLike

15. Jesus never once condemned or negated the necessity of understanding and obeying God’s living word. He condemned the pharisees because they taught it but did not obey it, and He condemned them because they misunderstood it and hence, taught it wrongly.

    Don’t confuse theology with God’s word. Jesus Himself attested that we should live be every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. Yet he condemned giving equal or greater status to the traditions of men, which by and large is what theology is.

    I guess in short, don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater by turning away from the Bible’s simple truths when doing some necessary theological housecleaning.

    We can’t know Jesus by feelings or inclinations alone. This approach leads us into conditions such as “ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” and “I never knew you. Depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

    LikeLike

16. IMonk,

    Tired verses? I understand what you were saying in your blog, but in my view it seems like your in a difficult state. You are tired of theology but please remember that “Jesus loves me is also a theological claim!”

    John Owen pointed out that a rejection of “actual” atonement leads to universalism!

    Either Christ died for all the sins of all people or all the sins of some people or some of the sins of all people. If the last statement is true then no one is redeemed.

    If the first statement is true then why aren’t all people saved? Because of unbelief? Is unbelief a sin? If it’s not why are people condemned for it? If it is a sin then it is a sin Christ atoned for and therefore all people are redeemed! So because the scriptures do not teach universalism the first statement is false. Therefore the second statement is true. Still waiting for an answer to Owens arguments…

    I love Luther but you and I both know he would not quarrel about a christian claiming to know something he didn’t, if it could be proven from scripture.

    LikeLike

17. What seems clear to me is this:

    The Pharisees put doctrine and rules before people and needs. Jesus didn’t like that.

    LikeLike

18. it’s interesting to me how those with bad theology are the ones trying to get everyone to agree with them… (i’m generalizing here based on three or so people in my life who are like your calvinist email friend.) it’s as if deep down, they really aren’t that secure in their positions because they need validation from others.

    i could be totally off-base here. just a theory.

    LikeLike

19. I don’t know if anyone else is having this particular “theological” experience:

    It occurred to me a while back how “strange” it is that we Christians worship a Jewish man, read the words of Jewish religious men in a Book we consider to be the Word of our God that in our houses of worship that almost exclusively, and yet instead of us becoming more “Jewish” in this process, the more we do it, the less Jewish these people become in our minds.

    So the when I now contemplate Our Lord as a Jewish man my spiritual focus is much clearer and the boundaries of my experience broadened. I have many times had an almost “Transfiguration” kind of enlightenment when I think to pray this way.

    (go ahead and email this to whoever you like — I make a living catching fish, not men — they could care less about my theology… :-))

    LikeLike

20. Bob Sacramento:

    I know that. I think the difference between that post and this one is this.

    One just becomes another chance to grouse at me for not being (Catholic or Calvinist or Baptist enough yada yada) i.e. it’s boring.

    The post I’ve written leaves a person unsettled a bit, maybe even irritated, but thinking.

    Making it about me takes the leverage off. Letting it be a bit of provocation keeps the creative tension going.

    I have a young Calvinist who is emailing my stuff around to friends making the case that I am a heretic. He wants me to blog the twenty things I believe that he does so he can feel better.

    He needs to read this piece twice.

    🙂

    peace

    ms

    LikeLike

21. God is weird, really weird. I don’t understand Him. I mean, I love him a lot, more than I thought I was able to love. He’s great. But He’s really completely not like any human I have encountered. Except maybe Jesus. One thing for sure, I don’t put too much past God anymore. He really really really can’t be boxed in. And another thing, and this is not at all sacrilegous… It’s not funny either until maybe six months later. When I get all full of myself, sure God could send angels and flaming swords and stuff, but usually a well placed traffic jam + “you need to go to the bathroom… right……. NOW” and that’s enough to get me begging and off my high horse. Yeah, all it takes is a good case of gastric distress to bring me to my senses. What’s funny (later) is how predictable it can be. I’m angry at God and insisting on my way and being hateful all day? I can guarantee on my commute home being struck with a case of you know what. Sure God can do anything. What’s really amazing is when God uses the simplest things to thump me upside the head when I need reminding not to order God around or put God in a box.

    LikeLike

22. Michael,

    For what it’s worth (proabably not much) I think maybe some people would be more comfortable with a post like this if you explained in some detail what parts of your theology you jettisoned and what you have kept. Just a thought.

    LikeLike

23. Rick,

    You seem to place a very low value on direct experience with God. Am I understanding you correctly?

    If so, how do you explain what happened to Thomas Aquinas? He wrote one of the most comprehensive documents on theology, his Summa Theological.

    Yet, after an encounter with God, he was unable to touch it again.

    Don’t get me wrong. I think that theology has a firm and necessary place in Christianity. But, direct encounters with God also do. Even though they tend to be scary, aweful (spelled on purpose) and humbling.

    LikeLike

24. The difference in Eastern and Western religions is that in the East it is an impersonal god — or gods — who embody everything — good and evil, darkness and light, life and death. But they do speak and have quite a lot to say.

    Our God is quite different, of course. But I don’t see anywhere in out tradition where it is taught that you can just walk out of the worldly cultural mindset — especially now — and be in a state where you can just read the Scriptures and theological treatises and have the mind of God. There is an immersion process of prayer and fasting. In that the two traditions are quite similar in many ways.

    LikeLike

25. Rick — I’m not a Buddhist – but from my understanding of its traditions nobody spoke more than the Buddha. Men crowded around him with whatever they wrote on waiting to write down word for word what he said, and he usually talked incessantly. The one exception was when he taught the Zen which took awhile to catch on and not with his own Countrymen in India but with the Chinese who have genetic predisposition for abstract thinking.

    Moses didn’t just start chatting away with the Supreme being. He was fasting and praying for forty days. Paul was in the desert for three years in quiet meditation shedding his set-in-stone cognitive process in order to be able to converse with God as an Apostle.

    And if you can see Job’s experience as a thought form — well I will withhold further comment …. 🙂

    LikeLike

26. >When you understand the nature of Christ’s work then you’ll understand the extent of that work.

    Dion,

    I was a Calvinist for over a decade. It’s because I understand the L that I don’t believe it. I could teach the L to any group in America, quite convincingly.

    Please don’t assume that you understand more than those who disagree with you.

    These “only Calvinists understand” discussions are tedious, to say the least.

    We understand differently. There’s no need to toss the same tired array of verses at one another.

    You understand the atonement better than Luther?

    ms

    LikeLike

27. IMonk and others,

    I would never think of telling you what to believe. I am only communicating the biblical data. When you understand the nature of Christ’s work then you’ll understand the extent of that work.

    Anna, this is my point, Christ did fulfill His intended purpose! Didn’t He atone for all sin? Is unbelief a sin? If not, then why are people punished for it? If it is a sin then it must be one of the sins Christ atoned for! As for making a “choice” for Christ remember His words:

    “No one can come to ME UNLESS the Father grants it to HIM.” John 6:65.

    LikeLike

28. iMonk:

    I did not say that you advocated Eastern religion.

    The fact that your suggestions and the Eastern tendency have some aspects in parallel does not mean that you advocate the Eastern view. I’m sure advocacy was far from your mind.

    What I’m saying is that the attention paid to thought-forms in our religiosity – speech, sentences, the “hearing” of the Word – is part of our Western and Hebraic tradition and is different in that way from the Eastern emphasis on mysticism or trained states of attention.

    Therefore we have a good ground on which to argue for theological discussion and mental ideas as being fully a part of our Christian spirituality.

    Rejecting the mind’s participation in spirituality because it is mental, on the other hand, reminds us of Eastern approaches to these questions.

    Surfnetter:

    Moses did not have the scriptures, of course, but God spoke to him, had conversations with him. On Mount Sinai God talked and Moses wrote down words. Abraham also heard God speak and command him what to do. Job’s spiritual trials can be seen as a great conversation with God. Thought-forms associated with speech and ideas predominated in the relationship between God and humans – despite there not being scriptures available at the time.

    The point is not that only written scripture or widely available oral traditions can be our guide (though I think they are most of the time), but that the forms of thought represented in the mind as speech patterns and mental ideas have been at the foreground of our relationship with God and how we should live our life.

    LikeLike

29. We’re not going to debate Limited Atonement on here.

    I will not post any further discussions of the topic.

    Calvinists telling me I’m not a Christian if I don’t believe in the L is more than I can take.

    LikeLike

30. Dion,

    How can you not be bothered by the idea that Christ’s death on the cross is not suffienct for what its intended purpose? That is what you are saying when you are talking about limited atonement.

    And just because the full debt for our sin was paid, does not mean that everyone chooses to accept the gift. People can and will reject God and His mercy.

    Surfnetter, I do like your statement about it being on a need to know basis.

    LikeLike

31. Dion — “Question: Did Christ actually take away the sin of all humans or did He just take away the sin of some?

    Answer: If He removed all sins from all people why is anyone going to spend eternity away from God? Therefore He removed the sin of some i.e. particular atonement.”

    Maybe it’s not that He didn’t die for those who don’t get the benefit of it — but that you have to believe in it to get it.

    Thing is — everybody believes in something. It’s the standard “benefit/detriment” analysis: you made a contract of faith in something because of how it benefits you. But when the detriment of the agreement comes your way, you get to swallow that to. Maybe in the end, everyone gets the results of their choices.

    But that’s all really God’s business and not mine. I think I’m on a need to know basis with that stuff — and I don’t think I need to know that. I do need to know that I’m not to judge anyone else’s attitudes or actions but my own, and nor am I to withhold the gift of His love deposited in me from anyone — regardless.

    Why should I even consider such a thought that there are some of my neighbors who cannot benefit from His merciful kindness? How could such knowledge possibly help me …?

    LikeLike

32. To MS, Rick is correct! Our First principle is that God communicated in Christ and Christ through the Apostles to us. Without an objective source (bible) for revelation I can believe anything and attach it to the christian faith.

    Scripture either teaches “limited/actual” atonement or it doesn’t! Most people who reject it do so on a purely subjective basis: they don’t like it…it is “unfair.”

    Question: Did Christ actually take away the sin of all humans or did He just take away the sin of some?

    Answer: If He removed all sins from all people why is anyone going to spend eternity away from God? Therefore He removed the sin of some i.e. particular atonement.

    The problem is not with “Limited atonement,” but with your understanding of what Christ actually accomplished and the nature of the Atonement itself.

    LikeLike

33. Sue — I’m right there with you.

    And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. Matt. 16:17

    Wherever you are with the results of Peter’s faithful proclamation, the blessings came precisely because he didn’t listen to what his human intellect and experience was telling him about the Lord. He heard and believed what only the Heavenly Father could reveal to him. Every example of the heroes of Faith in Scripture follows this same template.

    It doesn’t take any faith to believe what makes sense to us.

    LikeLike

34. God is no thing. Not created. So any theology is difficult for the created creatures, created by this God of nothing created. One of the reasons for Jesus.

    What you are writing about is the difference between the head and the heart. We need something in our head but if it doesn’t get to the heart it as good as trash.

    LikeLike

35. Great post!

    LikeLike

36. Rick –‘Meditative or visionary states are not required. Special personal revelations or experiences are not needed.”

    Everyone you would cite as a theological source gained the knowledge you would call your own through special revelation. Even the Apostles who lived and walked and talked with the Lord in the flesh for three years had to wait until they received special revelation from the Holy Spirit before they understood what He was doing and what He was talking about.

    No one can barge their way into the Kingdom of God’s Truth through literary study alone. It all comes through prayer, meditation and revelation.

    Some people have to read about it first, it seems.

    LikeLike

37. “But this is not a practice of theology that is supported by any of the great theologians” – Rick

    Saying that theologians support the practice of theology is like saying gun ownership is supported by great hunters.

    This discussion has not been solely about the abusive use of theology, but also about whether or not some theology is in and of itself garbage.

    I’m guessing that Martin Luther and John Calvin might make your list of great theologians – but there are plenty here who’d say their theology wasn’t so great.

    LikeLike

38. Michael, I like the idea of “Easter Consciousness” always aware of the Resurrection and its consequences in our lives and in the lives of those whom we touch.

    But, you are right about not advocating “Eastern consciousness”, you are NOT doing it.

    GRIN, sometimes typos can make good sense.

    LikeLike

39. >Turning onto the road of Eastern consciousness leads to a rather bleak and empty search for the “real” experiences – ….

    Rick Penner:

    Your conclusion that my suggestion to throw out bad theology is an advocacy of Eastern religion at its worst amounts to one of the most bizarre misrepresentations of my writing in the 8 years I’ve been at this. Talk about running down a road I was nowhere close to! This is “Ken and Ingrid” analysis at its best.

    You make some good points, but putting me into an advocacy of Easter consciousness is an absolute invention.

    ms

    LikeLike

40. Rick — “Therefore, theology is an important component of the Western religious experience. It is a basic belief that God’s revelation to us appears in narrative forms of human speech and thought – whether oral tradition or in writing – and that this communicates spiritual truth.”

    And what did they spend all that time in the desert doing — reading treatises on the Torah …? Moses didn’t even have a Torah or anything else to read. When “Elijah” comes and “turns the hearts of the children back to the Fathers” just which Fathers is being referred to — Aristotle and Plato …? Augustine and Aquinas …? Luther and Calvin …? Or is it Abraham, Isaaac, Jacob and Joseph, who had nothing but the still small voice of revelation that they alone heard and followed. Jesus Himself spent forty days fasting in the desert. What — does that mean He only went to scholarly Christian blog sites on His Ipod for all that time …?

    “The East’s greatest thinkers did not study nature or human activity with the intention of applying ideas or observations to changing or improving the present or to applying the results to mental learning. Instead, they sought to “go beyond” the everyday reality and find enlightenment or release in internally-based journeys that dissociate the individual from ego-consciousness.”

    In the context of a person who has had the True Law of God written on his or her heart and whose soul has been baptized and filled with the Holy Spirit this “going beyond” definitely is the way to go. I could back this up with plenty of Scripture, but I’m going back to bed to see what dreams God gives me, if He so chooses.

    LikeLike

41. One of the historical differences in spiritual practice between the Christian West and the Hindu/Buddhist East has been the West’s attention and appreciation for the mind as a tool to be used in the search for spiritual, scientific, and cultural truth.

    This is different from the East’s emphasis on inner experience and visionary or meditative sensibility as the primary guide to deep reality.

    In the East the tradition has preferred quests that “quiet” or “stop” thought so that pure “being” or “the void” will predominate in trained states of attention and guided action. Zen Buddhist tradition, for example, denigrates scriptures and books; the emphasis has been on direct master-to-student relationships in the learning of spiritual practice.

    The East’s greatest thinkers did not study nature or human activity with the intention of applying ideas or observations to changing or improving the present or to applying the results to mental learning. Instead, they sought to “go beyond” the everyday reality and find enlightenment or release in internally-based journeys that dissociate the individual from ego-consciousness.

    Meanwhile in the West the major Western religious leaders in the ancient world and the Middle-Ages supported intellectual study and the application of training of the mind to invention, the study of the past, of nature, to building cities, to building ships and roads, and eventually to science itself.

    The West’s spiritual heritage derives originally from the cultures of two sources, Jerusalem and Athens, and it was further guided by the Roman emphasis on law and organization. Plato and Aristotle were essential ingredients in the mental arsenal — where Greek thought joined Hebrew respect for scriptural revelation. This support for mental reasoning and the mental construct of imaginative literature and scriptures lead to the Christian sensibility of the use of the mind to the flowering of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment.

    Therefore, theology is an important component of the Western religious experience. It is a basic belief that God’s revelation to us appears in narrative forms of human speech and thought – whether oral tradition or in writing – and that this communicates spiritual truth.

    Moses heard God speak from the burning bush. God called prophets with his voice. Jesus himself spoke. His words were meant to be listened to and pondered. The kind of lives we lead in response to Christ is the whole point — but we can’t begin them without first hearing him speak to us. The gospel writers wrote. The message must be delivered to us because we don’t have it naturally within ourselves.

    Meditative or visionary states are not required. Special personal revelations or experiences are not needed.

    “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). “Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night” (Psalms 1:1-2).

    Therefore, I think your attack on theology is overblown and even impractical. Yes, people will abuse anything, and sometimes they will abuse theology – arguing over intellectual points without respect for the search for truth and how we ought to live and be. People will let their egos drive their argumentation to ridiculous heights — sometimes trying to “win” over obscure points in unimportant ways.

    But this is not a practice of theology that is supported by any of the great theologians.

    It is good that we study and ponder and lovingly pour over the scriptures and discuss their meaning with others.

    It is good that we ruminate and brood over the meaning in these texts and even find disagreements with others and listen to other points of view. There is nothing wrong with theology if we keep ourselves humble and do not use our study to “fight” others.

    It is good that we think about the words of Jesus and the prophets and the Psalms.

    Sinking ourselves into the Scripture, in this way, is a wonderful way to live.

    I respectfully disagree with your de-emphasis on theology. Turning onto the road of Eastern consciousness leads to a rather bleak and empty search for the “real” experiences – and these only confirm one’s ego but do not provide the content of narrative richness of the scriptures and thinking about the scriptures and conversation about the scriptures.

    We aren’t so pure and dynamic and Christian that we can live the right life just by trying all by ourselves. Though that is the offer that post-modern reality constantly presents: you can think it all through all by yourself!

    We need the words of God in our hearts to keep us going day and night.

    Rick Penner
    Burbank, CA

    LikeLike

42. Kenny Johnson
    Do I have a “theological system”? Good question. I really do not know for sure right now. For many years I held to a Reformed covenantal system of theology (classical Calvinism/17th cent. English Puritanism Westminster Standards). About six or five years ago I realized classical Reformed theology was unbiblical on its understanding of covenant, Torah and sacraments-I tell people these days when they ask me if I am Reformed, that I am Pauline/New Covenant. I am not a Baptist. I seek to follow the teachings of the Bible-I seek to live a life of prayer-I am an evangelical-I believe God is bigger than a theological system-I like the Eastern Orthodox view of God-I like reading St. John of the Cross and John Owen. I am seeking to follow the Lord Jesus. I want to be holy as God is holy.

    LikeLike

43. “Our goal is to be like the planet Mercury, to have the closest orbit around the Son of God.”

    Last time I checked, Mercury was too hot to sustain life. I guess all analogies break down at some point.

    ; )

    LikeLike

44. The trouble behind the distinction between Truth and theology is that, given what is normally said, then one has no way to know Truth. All we know is what was reported to us by the Old Testament prophets, the Apostles, the assorted writers of the epistles, and the Tradition received by the Church. Unless one claims direct and immediate knowledge of God, then everything one knows about God has been given to them by human beings. They were inspired of God to write Scripture and pass on the Traditions, but they were still human beings.

    Even if one throws out the Tradition received by the Church, one still has the problem of Scriptures which, as St. Peter said, the unstable distort. One cannot describe Jesus, who He is, whether He is God, and the Holy Trinity without resorting to theology. One has to further resort to theology to defend the New Testament as over against the Old Testament. Even stringing together a set of verses is to leave out another set of verses.

    That there is a Truth that God knows perfectly is accurate. That is not the problem. The problem is that the minute one preaches the Gospel, how to come into a relationship with God, and the implications for your life, one is theologizing, that is one is stringing together verses from disparate books in order to make a logically consistent message. That is theology.

    To say that, in theology, only God knows who is theologically close or not is to say that we cannot know Truth. It is true that some of the Eastern Church Fathers would agree, in a sense.

    It is, however, true that we cannot know who is relationally close the God and who is not. Someone might have a deep hidden serious sin and be very capable of hiding that sin. We can appear to be holy and yet be whitewashed sepulchres with death inside of us. But that is a different matter than theological knowledge.

    LikeLike

45. I do wonder though.. if we were to throw all theology out the window (I know you are not advocating this Michael) and just listen to ourselves (or at least what we perceive to be the Holy Spirit), I wonder how long it would take before we had a Christianity that was unrecognisable to us? (My bet is no more than two generations tops). Opening a can of worms here…

    LikeLike

46. Good post. I think God gave us all brains, and He wants us to use them. Thinking, asking, questioning, being skeptical, is all part of us being smart. God wants us all to think, and question everything. It’s certainly would be no fun being a robot.

    LikeLike

47. As a yet-to-be-former-Calvinist, I hear every word you wrote, Michael. My “Limited” layed down, and i felt I was freed to love more. It’s a scary thing to lay down long-held beliefs, yet very freeing. I can now chase after the Jesus that loves me with swifter, unshackled feet. I look forward to more that He has for me to release, in spite of the grimace on the faces of others whom I still love.

    LikeLike

48. “And I am here to sing, not study music.”

    Beautiful. Simply… Beautiful.

    This essay sums up what I have been thinking and doing over the past few months much more eloquently that I could have ever written. It sums up why I have left the SBC and moved to a Lutheran church.

    LikeLike

49. An hour before Jesus came upon the Jacob’s Well would any “theologically correct” person been able to predict that the Samaritan woman was about to bring the message that saved the town …?

    LikeLike

50. Fr. Ernesto — I like the image, but not as picture of “theology.” Theology is the human understanding of God. The Truth is God’s understanding of everything including we humans.

    Only God knows who is the “mercury” and who is the “pluto” and who is the asteroid who is claiming to be a planet but is just about to burn up in of his or her own friction with the atmosphere of real humanity.

    I know that the real Understanding exists — but I hope I never again claim to come close to apprehending it.

    LikeLike

51. H U G

    Becasue none of those guys can do those things, but God can.

    LikeLike

52. Larry Geiger,

    How do you know that going out and serving instead of studying is the right thing to do — without theology? How do you know that following Christ’s words to serve is what we’re supposed to do without theology?

    I understand your point. But we can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. As I already said. We all have theology. The question is… Is it good theology or is it bad theology. How do you know?

    LikeLike

53. I stopped attending Sunday services about a year ago, in part after the declaration by a guest speaker that our physical ailments were God “busting us in the gut” for our sins. — Ed

    Then back in November 2006, God went all Chuck Norris/Samoa Joe on me when my Diverticulosis infected into Diverticulitis and perfed into Peritonitis? Something the abdominal surgeon in the ER told me was 100% fatal before the 1930s and even in 2006 gives you a semicolon?

    How does THAT differ from Zeus sending down a thunderbolt? Or Chalchiuhtotolin striking you down with disease? Or Karma or Kismet doing the same?

    LikeLike

54. Whenever I get to feeling bogged down by too much Theology (either uninvited or self-imposed), I do a quick test: Would this knowledge be useful if I was dropped in the middle of a jungle in New Guinea and had one week to witness to folks who had never heard of Jesus?

    Don’t get too analytical about the analogy. It’s just a device I use to pull myself out of a broken man made cistern that won’t hold water.

    LikeLike

55. Theology doesn’t work.
    Faith does.
    Theology can guide us to a path but our faith must be worked out. If you are throwing theology out, then that theology has never been worked out in your life. Theology illuminates our life but it is not life.

    We need to spend more time outside books and blogs and more time with people. Theology is dead, of no avail, when it does not intersect life. If we spend too much time reading, studying, theologizing, then we are upside down and there is a bunch of stuff in our brain and not much in our heart.

    All good theology, all true theology becomes crystal clear when we are serving someone. Limited atonement is irrelevant theology most of the time. God did not ask us to judge who we serve, but to serve those in need. Regardless of their theology or our belief about their salvation. As a matter of fact, he commands us to serve those (our enemies) furthest from atonement.

    The only theology that will be real to you is the theology that has been worked out in your life.

    “There are many times when I have told people to put down the theology books, internet, etc, take out the Bible, read, pray, worship regularly , commune, go to confession, and leave some of the unsolved problems for another day.”

    To this I say put down the theology books, internet, Bible, worship, communion, confession, and put on your shoes and go serve. Do you need the address of a nursing home, soup kitchen, pregnancy counseling center, hospice, scout troop, little league team, prison? Someone nearby will be glad to help you find it. Just ask. Solve some problems today.

    LikeLike

56. Ed,

    Sometimes, but certainly not always, our physical ailments can be God busting us in the gut for our sins. The bible has examples of that, but I agree, being “right” wouldn’t excuse a person from great suffering. the bible is full of “good” people who suffered horribly.

    LikeLike

57. Jonny Keen,

    Everyone has a theological system. Even you. The question is… do you have a good one or not? If you have an idea about who God is, who Jesus is, whether the Bible is inspired word, etc. You have theology. Even if you don’t believe in God, I believe you have theology.

    LikeLike

58. >>It’s less like what you think it is and lot more like something you never thought about.

    THANK GOD!! If Jesus wasn’t then I wouldn’t have stepped within a 100 yds of church ever again. Sometimes it is the very perceptions that I once had of God, either through my own bad theology, or someone else’s that keeps me from conciously stepping into the Gospel with every breath.

    LikeLike

59. I am just wondering about something here. II Timothy 3:7 speaks in a very negative way about certain people that are “ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

    Doesn’t that imply that it is certainly possible to come to a knowledge of the truth? That is not saying that we are there yet! But to just say that there is way too much mystery and not even trying to reach that point doesn’t seem to me to be the answer at all either.

    LikeLike

60. Radagast, in regard to teaching your class: the best instruction I ever got (as in the most helpful in a concrete sense) was when I was twelve years old and preparing for Confirmation – we were taught the Ten Commandments and how they applied.

    Things like “How would you break the Eighth Commandment (Catholic numbering) “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour”?”

    That it wasn’t just telling lies, or committing perjury – how many of us are going to be in the position of standing in a witness box in court, after all? But things like gossip, rumours, back-biting; even remaining silent when others were doing these things was agreeing with them. Either speak up in defence of the person or leave, but don’t just sit there and let it go on.

    You could do a heck of a lot worse than to make sure your students know the Ten Commandments and get examples of how we can break them, even if we think we’re not doing so.

    LikeLike

61. May I suggest an image?

    Think of theology as a solar system. In the middle of the theological solar system is the Son of God.

    The Nicene Creed and the Ecumenical Councils function as the limits. If you “exceed” those limits with your theology, you reach escape velocity and move away out of the “solar” system and are no longer Christian, even if you use the name Christian. For instance, think of the Unitarian/Universalists, etc.

    That leaves quite a few possible orbits around the Son of God. Some of them, like Pluto, are so far away that they are in danger of leaving Christianity and their “orbits” are eccentric. Yet, everyone who has not reached escape velocity is still within the radiance of God’s mercy.

    Our goal is to be like the planet Mercury, to have the closest orbit around the Son of God. Hopefully our lives are lives of learning and growth, and we are moving slowly closer to the image and likeness of Our Lord. But, even if we move away in our theology, that does not mean that we have “left the solar system.” In a sense, to mimic the child’s game, it only means we are getting “colder” instead of “hotter.”

    Now, this image leaves a lot of things out. In a sense, the Holy Spirit is the centripetal force that tries to pull us in. And, it does not take into account humility, good works, faith, correct disposition, etc. But, maybe is is a helpful image that gives us the freedom to do theology.

    LikeLike

62. This all makes me think of Jesus fully revealing Himself — for the first time — to the Samaritan woman at the well — one of those who worshiped what they “did not know.” And after telling her that, and that the Jews knew what they were talking about theologically, He told her that even His own “theologically correct” people were coming to the day when they would be on the same level playing field as everyone else of having to “worship God in Spirit and in Truth.”

    In the adulterous state she was in — I believe she even thought Jesus was hitting on her at first — without changing a thing on the outside, became the most successful evangelist in the Gospels; the whole town came out and believed.

    I am floored by the story — always have been. But where’s the systematic theology …? I’m sure someone has one that they think fits, but I beg to differ.

    LikeLike

63. AnnaA, struck me more as leaving the Dominicans for the Salesians 😉

    Michael – argh. Do these people not have the Book of Job in their copy of the Bible? Did they somehow miss the moral of the story, whereby God says “Suffering in life NOT = My wrath and righteous punishment of eeeevil sinner-type person”?

    Seriously, at times, the worst enemy of Christianity is Christians.

    LikeLike

64. ” Words strain,
    Crack and sometimes break, under the burden,
    Under the tension, slip, slide, perish,
    Decay with imprecision, will not stay in place,
    Will not stay still. ”
    Burnt Norton, T.S.Eliot

    We can know things and stake our lives on them, but I suspect Godel’s theorem applies to theology too; and all of our models have gaps here and there.

    Must we be baptized, take communion, trust in Jesus as the second Person of the Trinity, etc? If we know these things, yes, but one of my favorite people in the Bible is the thief beside Jesus, who couldn’t do anything anymore but trust the helpless man next to him.

    Our big problem is that the world is full of nonsense that will pervert the gospel message and warp the practice of the faith. If we pare theology down to the barest minimum (a kind of “thief on the cross” theology) what seems to take its place in worship and practice is the culture’s current fasions. The “Prayer of Jabez” stuff is consistent with some “bare minimum” theologies in use; which may be indictment enough. And we’re warned to watch out for wolfish false teachers.
    So a bare minimum theology winds up with some addons.

    But if we don’t keep a reign on our models they accumulate cruft and, relying on slippery words, become confusing. And of course, they help supply reasons why “so-and-so is not a real faithful Christian.”

    I suspect that no theological model or attitude will dispel this tension, and we’ll eventually find ourselves screwing up in one direction or the other. “Do our best to understand, do our best to love, do our best to obey, do our best to be humble, and pray for mercy when we get the “season” wrong.” (That’s a model too 🙂 Addons are an exercise for the reader)

    LikeLike

65. “After this year, if I still have a theology at all, I’m hopefully addicted. I only want to abandon all theology after talking to the Lutherans about the sacraments.”

    I was hoping to see a smile after that remark. Lutheran sacramental theology and piety is among the simplest and most devotional in Christendom. It’s as simple as the little word “is.” We draw our identity from our Baptism which is our rebirth and renewal in Christ; and we draw strength, comfort, and hope from the Supper which is our Lord’s sacrificial Body and Blood. We actually do very little theologizing on the sacraments, and when we do, it’s only in the face of denials.

    To the OP: There are times for a tough-minded faith, and then there are times for a tender-hearted faith. There are many times when I have told people to put down the theology books, internet, etc, take out the Bible, read, pray, worship regularly , commune, go to confession, and leave some of the unsolved problems for another day.

    In this regard, you have given some sound advice, Michael.

    LikeLike

66. Hi I-monk,
    I don’t know if this relates, but I love a comment
    from Fulton Sheen, in his book, Lift up your Hearts. “Faith is like a microscope, in that it enables us to perceive deeper meaning in truths which we already know; it gives a new dimension of depth to our natural knowledge.”
    I think as our faith grows, we grow up in our thinking too. A lot of times, it means going away from our safe “literal” understandings, and letting
    our faith go deeper. It’s like when we grow in our knowlege of the world, we throw away some of our old theories, and grow in our understanding. I think God is pleased.

    LikeLike

67. This whole thread annoyed me last night and I couldn’t figure out why. I went to bed annoyed about the blog post itself and all the comments I read and really couldn’t put my finger on what was annoying me. I then thought of something that C.S Lewis said about how people were eating food long before they understood how food satisfies the hunger and helps the body. I will tell the truth that I’m not much convinced that we have that information now, which is why I am immediately suspicious of scientist who are too confident of themselves or what they have discovered. I am later further annoyed at them when I find out that something that they have been confidently promoting for years turns out to be nonsense.

    It seems to me that this whole thread was running along that line of people talking about how they were so sure of something and out there convincing people that they had that answer and now have come to a point of saying ‘Well we really don’t know what we’re talking about.’ I will distinguish you guys from the scientist in saying that at least you are admitting it, the scientist never will. I will also confess that I am just as guilty as anyone else.

    We really are the dufflepods you know.

    Lost in the wilderness

    LikeLike

68. I couldn’t explain your post… so I threw it away.

    LikeLike

69. Thank you SO much for posting this. I’m glad I’m not the only one. I came to many of the same conclusions just a couple days ago.

    LikeLike

70. I gave a big AMEN early in the discussion, and I stand by that. But as Tevia said in Fiddler on the Roof “On the other hand”…

    Our faith, how we choose to relate to Jesus, the things we do in his service, depend on our theology. Our theology determines whether we see God as a loving father or masochistic coach. Our theology determines whether our evangelism means building Hell Houses for teens, or living among the needy. Our theology about theology determines what kind of blogs we write and how we relate to those we disagree with.

    I think one key is knowing what are the core issues to hold firmly and what can be held loosely. Maybe this is another instance of the weak conscience and the strong conscience. Those with a weak conscience are easily offended by much those with a strong conscience have no problem with. This situation is like the ethic of tolerance in secular society – the hardest thing to tolerate is intolerance. And it’s hardest to be gracious and humble with the proud and intolerant.

    I apologize for meandering a little. But what we know and believe, our theology, does matter. So does what we do with our theology.

    LikeLike

71. Michael,
    Thank you for the examples.

    I stopped attending Sunday services about a year ago, in part after the declaration by a guest speaker that our physical ailments were God “busting us in the gut” for our sins. Guilt as a motivator – what fun. I couldn’t believe all the head nodding that was going on when he said it either.

    I still maintain a strong personal relationship with one of the pastors and some of my old choir-mates. During this time, I’ve gotten rid of some of my theological garbage, and in discussing these things with my friends, I’m struck by THIS piece of theological trash: Let go of a belief generally accepted by your denominational friends, and you are looked upon as broken and in need of repentance.

    Nothing that a good old book from Lifeway can’t fix (and I’ve been given three so far).

    Oh, and as quid pro quo for what I asked of you:
    I’m a former US Army officer, but I cannot abide the intertwining of the Christian faith and patriotism as theology.

    LikeLike

72. …….go toward the light michael!…go toward the light………….!

    LikeLike

73. Again, beautiful thoughts.

    Following Jesus is less like math and more like white water rafting.

    We fall into the trap of thinking the Bible is to be viewed as a prescriptive rule book. But it’s not. Not in any way. Just as the Son of God was incarnational as fully God and fully man, so the Scripture is incarnational in being fully from God and fully from man. And that is beautiful – God telling His story through humanity to capture the heart of humanity. It’s all God-breathed and infallible, but not a rule book. It’s poetry, drama, story, wisdom, and God doing quite scandalous things.

    I think one great writer said it this way one time – Aslan is no tame lion.

    LikeLike

74. Anna A – Thanks, that helps! 🙂

    iMonk – I’m sorry, and am not trying to push any agenda. I wrestle with knowing – then acting on – what is good theology, because I see wildly contradicting teachings on what I would think would be the most basic of Christian beliefs, and the consequences are all over the map.

    Joseph – Your point is spot-on. I do believe that there is truth that we can have (even apart from the Bible) and it’s important to know it. But when we make the statement that God would make his truth perfectly clear to us, we have to ask why there are so many of us that contradict one another. Is it where/how we look for truth or is it our own blindness/sin?

    So maybe I’m using the word “theology” wrong. I would boil it down to simply having a right belief in God, which should result in our living a more holy life. Unfortunately one doesn’t necessarily lead to another, but I take comfort that I’m still in the midst of my journey.

    “Common human courtesy is defined by your adherence to my version of Calvinism. Deviate, and you’ll be shunned.”

    I get your example, but is it the belief in Calvinism that’s wrong, or is the person just a jerk? I know many Calvinists that are devout and wonderful people. But does that make Calvinism (or any other theological belief) true?

    Okay, I’ll shut up now. Thanks for hosting the discussion, iMonk.

    LikeLike

75. Ideally, theological matters should be approached with humility — meaning that we should grant ourselves the simple mercy of being wrong now and then (or if we’re really humble, more often than not). When theology is coupled with intellectual arrogance and a control-aimed agenda, what we get is religious dogma and a man-made image of God fashioned after flawed human logic. There is no way we are ever going to wrap our finite minds around the whole council of God, and to claim that one has encapsulated all truth within a theological framework is either the peak of vanity or the utter depth of insanity.
    But we can know God as a person named Yeshua (or Jesus if you’re Greek), and we can enjoy the inexplicable mystery of His Spirit living inside of us. I’m not saying that we don’t need theology at all. At best, theology gives us some rational points of reference to link with the spiritual reality of Christ within us and a way to communicate that reality to others. At worst, it replaces that reality with religious systems of thought control.

    LikeLike

76. I love systematic theology. It’s been my favourite subject at university but it hurts my head and it hasn’t done my grade average any favours. Maybe I just love an argument. It has also shown me that the more I know theology, the less of an understanding I really have. A few pieces of jigsaw coming together simply reveals that the picture is far bigger than I had realised.
    It has helped me though. It has helped me define my faith and my approach to ministry. But it only does so in dialogue with scripture and other believers (eased with a liberal dose of prayer). Whenever my ‘certainty’ has become too much, someone or something has come along to remind me that my understanding is severely limited.
    And sometimes I get prompted to just stand back and say, “Praise God!”
    Another great post Michael.

    LikeLike

77. I’m just finishing up my first year at seminary. I love this post, because it gets at what I’ve been feeling here. One of my favorite classes is Systematics I. I spend nearly 3 hours on Friday mornings debating out some of the more mundane and useless things I have ever encountered, and come to the conclusion daily that there is virtually no one in my current congregation who would be interested in having a conversation about perichoresis and its ramifications for Latin American political structures. But this class, because it is so exhausting and mind boggling at times, drives me right back to Scripture. Over and over again, in the papers I write, in the comments I make in class, I find myself appealing to Scripture, to the actions and character of Jesus, and of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob witnessed to in the Old Testament. Anything that drives me to Scripture like this class does gets high marks from me!

    LikeLike

78. “It’s less like what you think it is and lot more like something you never thought about.” – that’s a Gem!! 🙂

    If it helps, T.F. Torrance gave me the best answer (so far) to the whole “Limited Atonement” mess and a history lesson to boot.

    http://cruciality.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/an-introduction-to-torrance-theology-a-review/

    LikeLike

79. I am thankful I can read my Bible and know the Lord will speak to me-I do not need a theological system-I am thankful that when I pray I know the Lord hears me-the Lord is good.

    LikeLike

80. Isn’t God the great iconoclast, continually shattering all our images of Him, every time we try to confine Him to our own pet theories. The only defining limits we are allowed to put on Him, ultimately, are the ones that He Himself has given us in His own self-revelation. Anything beyond that, any system we try to put together to make the pieces fit more neatly is just our best guess, and while we need those guesses to try to make sense of it all (and to realise that some people have actually changed some of the pieces), we need to know, always, that He is bigger, more good, more loving and harder to comprehend than any of the systems we try to confinr Him to.
    Now we know in part ..

    LikeLike

81. Andrew said, “I’ve been encouraged by the concept of the church Fathers that a ‘theologian’ is not someone who has amassed a great deal of information about theological topics, but someone who has the true knowledge of God that comes from holiness and prayer. I think that this is what we’re getting at here. Less ‘theology’ and more true theology.”

    Brother Lawrence comes to mind. True theology is where we live, not how well we can argue a position.

    And there is no “theological extortion scheme” in the presence of God.

    LikeLike

82. I although think of theology as a lens to help us understand God. Some lenses are better than other–none is perfect. But it’s when we mistake the lens FOR God that the trouble begins.

    A nice quote from Soren Kierkegaard’s Provocations:

    “Christian scholarship is the Church’s prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Oh, priceless scholarship, what would we do without you? Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament.”

    LikeLike

83. When i get so full of my theology that i quit seeking Jesus. i lose.

    LikeLike

84. “I only want to abandon all theology after talking to the Lutherans about the sacraments.”

    I’d like to hear more about this. Lutherans do theology seriously because God’s Word is serious. Your way, often found in evangelical churches, just avoids talking about Scripture when it’s hard to understand. Lutherans delve in, but stop at God’s Word, and where Scripture leaves mystery, Lutherans leave mystery. They try very hard to avoid the infiltration of worldly reason (sin) into theology. Sacraments are a great example of this.

    Jesus says: “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God [be justified] unless he is born of water and the Spirit” and go and baptize in the name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit. Lutherans do that. We believe it conveys grace [justifies] because Christ said it does. Not because of the water, but because of the mysterious power of the Word. Without the Word, it is nothing. With the Word, baptism is a work of the Holy Spirit conveying grace and grow in faith.

    Same with Communion.

    Jesus says: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood(CC) has eternal life, and(CD) I will raise him up on the last day [is justified]” and to take and eat, this is my blood shed to forgive your sins.
    There it is, real presence, giving grace by eating, all because of the power of the Word. So powerful, that taking it wrongly caused Corinthians to get sick and die.

    It is weird, shocking really, to human reason. But it’s a beautiful thing with the Word.

    LikeLike

85. Very nice post, IMonk. There is something absolutely refreshing about hearing someone say “I don’t know it all – and neither do you.” We see through a glass darkly, and to try to pretend otherwise is foolishness.

    Rock on!

    LikeLike

86. Lately I’ve come to believe less (as expressed in the creeds) more firmly and held on to the periphery with a sometimes firm and sometimes looser grip. I wonder if sometimes don’t construct hard theological structures to keep us from dealing with the center. He is after all the still point in a turning world.

    LikeLike

87. When I am teaching classes at church, I tell people when they are judgmental or critical of other viewpoints, or act like they understand it all, that “we are created in God’s image, quite trying to make Him in your’s”. If they don’t get it, I normally press them to explain how quantum mechanics relates to the physicality of God and the scriptural aspect of his omni-presence. It normally doesn’t take too long of me explaining it in great detail to a very blank face before they realized that everything might not be as simple as they think.

    LikeLike

88. I confess I like theology, and spend time in my own western catholic space, and affectionately in the eastern catholic (and orthodox) space, and by curiosity in the arminian, calvinism, lutheran space and in bewilderment in those spaces that are loosely held together. Sometimes it’s like a hobby, where I feed my head, other times its like spiritual food where I feed my soul. I see it sometimes as a tool box – I have a bent toward christian mysticisism as an example, but its part of the toolbox. Go too far and it turns into Quietism.

    Now I can pick out the bad theology in others eyes, dispensationalism, prosperity gospel, etc but I have a harder time seeing the plank in my own. Maybe because I think of it as a toolbox, or maybe I’m just blind. I can see it in my own faith formation, but again as it happens to others…those that go too far in ritual, those that follow too exclusively the messages of private revelation, those that spend too much time in legalism. So folks pray that I can see my own bad theology and pray I am not spreading it around too much and warping someone’s mind (especially the eighth graders I teach in faith formation class).

    LikeLike

89. back and surfacing again. Question: do you think that our potholed theological road has been formed by the need to have “modern” or “advanced” beliefs? Is one of the corrupting forces the desire to change for change’s sake?

    LikeLike

90. I’ve been encouraged by the concept of the church Fathers that a ‘theologian’ is not someone who has amassed a great deal of information about theological topics, but someone who has the true knowledge of God that comes from holiness and prayer. I think that this is what we’re getting at here. Less ‘theology’ and more true theology.

    LikeLike

91. I’ve seen some garbage in the thinking of a recent correspondent.

    But my garbage isn’t your garbage.

    But try this….God is playing a game with me. He will answer my prayers when I finally do the right thing.

    Cruel. Toss it.

    Or this: Common human courtresy is defined by your adherence to my version of Calvinism. Deviate, and you’ll be shunned.

    LikeLike

92. I’m dutifully sharpening my pitchfork and assembling rotten fruit, but without specifics, I can’t seem to work up the necessary lather to use them.

    Perhaps you could be more specific on a few ares of theology you classify as garbage? THEN, maybe we’ll see the predicted angry mob form.

    Sorry to poke the bear, but I like a good, uh, discussion 🙂

    LikeLike

93. Anna A said, “Let me try, in a hopefully light-hearted way to explain what Michael is doing. He’s trying leave the Jesuits and go to either the Benedictines and/or the Franciscans.”

    I like that, Anna! 🙂

    LikeLike

94. …..I have long come to the conclusion that men may be more systematic in their statements than the Bible, and may be led into grave error by idolatrous veneration of a system ……

    Bishop Ryle (speaking about a specific theology, but it applies to many/all)

    LikeLike

95. Great Post.

    I find it amusing that some theologians (ironically those with a high view of depravity), have a incredibly sense of certainty about their theology. As if our depravity has not touched our theology…

    LikeLike

96. Grateful for Graces,

    Let me try, in a hopefully light-hearted way to explain what Michael is doing.

    He’s trying leave the Jesuits and go to either the Benedictines and/or the Franciscans.

    To Michael, I’m always glad to read that others have trouble with Limited atonement. That has always bothered me.

    GRIN, but if you want some more theology books, I have a few by Cardinal Dulles, I’d be willing to give.

    LikeLike

97. The study of God does not equal God. But sometimes it becomes an idol. I’m thinking, maybe we need a dumpster.

    LikeLike

98. Imonk,

    I totally understand your stance on Limited Atonement; I’m in the same position. Trust, I tried so hard to believe it at the behest of my devout Calvinist friends…but I just couldn’t!!!

    “The best theology would need no advocates; it would prove itself.”
    ~Karl Barth

    LikeLike

99. Here’s a statement that makes me cringe: “The Bible says X, Y and Z… unless you believe there’s no absolute truth.”

    I’ve often wondered, if the Bible is the literal word of God, how can there be some many denominations, so many positions, so many arguments on what it says?

    Don’t we think that if God commands us to do something, He would make it perfectly clear to everyone? If I tell my kid to clean her room, it’s very clear what I want.

    I am not sure how theology draws anyone closer to God. It may exercise the brain, but I’m betting we’ll find as many people who know nothing about it in heaven as we do esteemed scholars who’ve written book after book.

    I think too much thinking and not enough feeling can even be harmful to a person’s walk with God.

    God would still exist if there were no Bible, and He would still speak to us.

    LikeLike

100. Tom: After this year, if I still have a theology at all, I’m hopefully addicted. I only want to abandon all theology after talking to the Lutherans about the sacraments.

     Gratefulforgraces: What shall we do if we disagree? Read the comments of this blog for the past few years and see for yourself.

     LikeLike

101. Michael:

     I reread your post and see your point; I assumed too much. My bad, and thanks for helping me see that. I hope you will do a follow-up post. Entitle it “replacement theology” and you’ll probably gain some new readers! 🙂

     Thank you for your (too) kind words. All of us have problems with our theology…we just don’t see them yet. True communion of the saints helps with that.

     Grateful for your friendship,
     ta

     LikeLike

102. By definition, theology is the study of that which is beyond all human comprehension, anyway. 🙂

     …let God be true, but every man a liar … Romans 3:4

     LikeLike

103. Grateful for Graces:

     Just a note to remind you that I do not post comments that are invitations to be evangelized into the RCC. We don’t go there, or vice versa.

     peace

     ms

     LikeLike

104. There’s something about this post that is disquieting to me, and I’m not sure I can put my finger on it. Maybe it’s the RC in me that I believe that God is the author of Truth, revealed through the apostles, scriptures and teaching authority of the Church. It’s up to me to submit to revealed truth,regardless of how I may personally feel about it at any given time.

     “I believe what Christians believe. It’s what my life is founded on.”

     I’m not trying to be a smart-alek here, but which Christians? Which beliefs? The differences can have great consequences.

     “It’s about the shape and flavor of truth, not about who wins the debate.”

     So iMonk, it sounds like you might believe in objective Truth. You say that “his song has to ring true,” but how are you the final authority? If something rings true for you, but not for me, what do we do with that?

     I do like what you say about tossing out what takes you away from Jesus, and I believe that good and true theology draws you inexorably toward him. But do we each have to figure it out on our own, or is it already there for us?

     Still mulling this over.

     LikeLike

105. Thank you, iMonk.

     What I’ve been re-discovering is that God wants it to be about faith, not about being certain we’re right about everything. Uncertainty is part of the human condition. I believe that’s by design.

     Too many times I want to *know* when God just wants me to *trust.*

     LikeLike

106. “It’s inside of me that, ultimately, his song has to ring true. If you can’t hear it, that doesn’t mean I don’t. Having everyone else tell me all about the music was taking away my desire to sing. And I am here to sing, not study music.”

     +++++++

     What a beautiful post. Thank you brother for sharing this.

     This relationship with Him DOES change. It is mere human twaddly ego that makes us think we have all of the answers. What a blessed relief when we are able to throw off those shackles – for others around us also. Christians who have all the answers really are some of the ugliest people on the planet.

     LikeLike

107. Thank you for the breath of fresh air.Wouldnt it be great if we just LOVED one another? Pretty simple theology that Jesus left with us.

     LikeLike

108. It is a stark realization when you understand at a visceral level that many “orthodox” Christians are motivated more by a desire to win people to their “side” or “spin” or “faction” than anything else. This is not to denigrate or abandon orthodoxy. But to affirm that bad motives corrupt good theology. May God break our hearts and convince us it is the fame of Jesus and the love of sinners that we should be about.

     LikeLike

109. And now for the invitation…every head bowed, every eye closed…

     I will be first at the altar.

     LikeLike

110. yes, Yes, YES!!! Wildly applauding here. I’ve been beating my head against the wall with “my theology” and finally figured out that all it was giving me was a headache.

     LikeLike

111. Some very wise thoughts posted by Wade Phillips here on 30 Apr 2009 at 5:27 pm. Thanks, Wade.

     And John…I had to look up “antipodean.” Good word! I like to learn new words. We are having Spring here so you are into late Fall weather, I would guess, huh?

     LikeLike

112. The most common emotions I feel when I visit some theology blogs are frustration and anger. (The curator of one them was URL-linked from your home page a few days ago, I’m glad it’s no longer there) I am not accustomed to being as deeply moved as I was after I read your post. It is reminiscent of Solomonic reflections (a la Ecclesiastes). Is there a way we can force-spam it into those ‘prominent’ theology sites around the blogosphere??? They can all do with a good dose of this honesty.

     So if I hear you correctly you have entertained more ‘epistemic humility’ lately and gone to the next step of house cleaning. You’ve reconciled with the life shattering notion that some of your past theology may not be as airtight or hermetically sealed as you initially thought. How can that NOT be healthy?

     Some of the toxic theology you described has so over-intellectualized and academized (my spell checker doesn’t like it but I’m using it anyway) the Christian faith, that has totally dehumanized Jesus and his gospel. It is refreshing to read a phrase like prefer a big hug to a good Systematic theology lecture.

     I’m gonna save this post and savour it for a while. It’s like the fragrance of freshly ground (Fair Trade Certified:) ) coffee early in the morning. YOU HAVE TRULY MADE MY DAY!!!!

     With antipodean appreciation.

     John

     LikeLike

113. “Wonder”, “Amazement”, “Astonishment”, “Marvel”- All of these speak of my God. These words are full of questions, not answers. And I find personally, that there are less and less answers and more and more questions. Sometimes the questions are painful, because they reveal my own ignorance. They shake my world in ways I wasn’t expecting. And all this doesn’t fair well with the prideful “me” that I am. Yet in all the questions, painful as they may be, God reveals Himself as being sooo much bigger than I first thought, or second thought or third thought… and so I think it will be throughout the ages. Knowing more? – yes, but seeing more clearly the infinite.
     So yes, there is a lot of trash Theology here too. God forgive me of the pride of having it all figured out.

     LikeLike

114. “I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. ” 1 Corinthians 3:2

     Apparently, the amount of food isn’t what changes but rather, the consistency of it. Might take a little longer to chew.

     LikeLike

115. For me the epiphany of “theological trash” came when I began to see theology, from Reform to Conservative to Liberal, as only a “best guess” from the theologians. They read scripture, studied the world around them and then presented their “best guess.”

     Martin Luther offered his “best guess” as do the expounders of Calvinist, Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Feminist, Socialist and Neo-Orthodox theologies.

     Once I stopped equating my “best guess” with truth, I began to discover who I truly was as a person and even began to understand who God is through Christ.

     It has been humbling.

     LikeLike

116. I’ve made a specific effort to go to a church in which I’m not in complete agreement with most of the leadership and membership theologically. Nothing major or heretical, but enough that I have to sit on my hands and keep my mouth shut sometimes.

     I’ve done that so I won’t go overboard, so that I’ll learn to keep my mouth shut and listen sometime, so that I’ll be in a place that will challenge my thinking and force me to reexamine myself regularly. Doing that has prevented me from teaching some things I have believed and do believe. But it has also prevented me from teaching some things that I did believe and no longer believe.

     I think any time we gain some new theological knowledge, we should keep it to ourselves for a while. Study it more, read more about it, listen to opposing viewpoints, and just sit on it. See if it sticks. See if it’s more than a passing fad or thought. Don’t be so quick to jump on the train. And don’t be so slow to throw it away if we need to.

     LikeLike

117. It’s funny that one hears, “I am put a humble sinner, viewing God as through a glass, darkly… but here is EXACTLY what God wants us to do and what you HAVE TO BELIEVE.”

     Perhaps more emphasis on humility would make in-roads but perhaps not. Many seem expert at holding conflicting views in their heads at one time. Once again, the best strategy may be witnessing by action. When asked about a contentious issue, respond with, “I don’t think that we can know the answer to that?” Hopefully, the inquisitor would not simply turn to Rick Warren for answers.

     LikeLike

118. Michael said, “And I am here to sing, not study music.” Me too, Michael! May God help me (and all of us) to trust in the love and mercy of God, to not be afraid, and to sing for all we are worth. Jesus has shown us that we are worth very much.

     LikeLike

119. Tom A:

     I did a search to make sure I never told anyone they needed less. I said they need to dispose of some of what they have. Whether they need to acquire more/better is another post.

     I sat with a fellow today whose theology is literally destroying him. Every Calvinist I know would tell this fellow to hit the trash can with what he believes God MUST do.

     If I had determined that everything I believed 2 years ago was equally essential and healthy, God knows what I would be.

     You, my friend, are the finest example I know of theology doing someone good. Have mercy on those of us who are not quite that good an example. Some of us have acquired some theology that needs to be shot and removed asap.

     I always found the theology of the Founders to be the good stuff. (Except for the L, but small difference) 🙂

     peace and great respect

     mspencer

     LikeLike

120. “Jesus is less like math and more like white water rafting”
     Really liked this line. Gonna go chew on it like a Redman plug.

     LikeLike

121. Another big AMEN! Your journey sounds similar to mine – Free Methodist -> Charismaniac -> Calvinist -> ???. I’ve had more than one of those “I don’t know who I am” moments, but I survived – and learned that God is bigger than my theology, or who I think I am, or what I believe. The older I get, the less I know, the less I’m sure of.

     One of the biggest things I’ve drawn from Calvinism is grace – I don’t have to think perfectly, do perfectly, believe perfectly for God to love and accept me.

     As I get less concerned with having my theology and behavior right, I’m discovering more how little I know Jesus himself. The next step looks like some kind of “Jesus Shaped Spirituality” …

     LikeLike

122. Many will say “well said and true”, including me, and yet we are the same ones that type mile-long responses as we debate issues like complementarianism.

     LikeLike

123. And the hits just keep on coming!!

     Tough to hear…tougher to do!

     This is why I keep coming back to hear what you have to say…it’s also amazing how often I hear Father talking at the same time.

     The thing I appreciate the most is that you did not provide a list for me to consider!

     Godspeed…

     LikeLike

124. Yikes! Even this RC can feel that bite. Maybe I’ll go sit in the corner for a while and think about how I might walk humbly with God.

     LikeLike

125. So, we find ourselves with our feet planted firmly in midair. There, the only thing to do is trust God, follow Jesus in what we know about him today, and let the Holy Spirit continue to work–or maybe better, try to discern where the Holy Spirit is indeed at work. We all may be, or need to be, more agnostic than we ever believed that we would be. We simply don’t know nearly as much as some of our more/most certain brothers/sisters do. But we do know Jesus!

     LikeLike

126. I know that I can get arrogant about some of the things I believe. God is usually quick to humble me though. I do try to though be “always reforming.” That is, I think my own understanding of things needs to be fluid — or better yet, malleable. However, I need to anchor it also, so that it doesn’t move too far from the truth.

     I know that I need to not hold on to things so tightly, because if I’m wrong, then who can ever move me to the correct place?

     LikeLike

127. Michael:

     Much of what you write here resonates with me. But what I have found to be the antidote is more, not less theology. With more comes (hopefully) better that exposes the bad and not only forces it out but replaces it. In one sense it could be argued that your unreplaced theology is itself theological. The theological task is unavoidable to believers.

     Press on,
     tom

     LikeLike

128. “I don’t recommend my path be your path. I only ask if you’ve opened yourself to the possibility that a spiritual renovation in your life can’t keep all the old junk.”

     determining what is and what is not junk is the hard part.

     LikeLike

129. And therein, Michael, I stand, my theological/religous house of cards down in a heap all around me. Almost went athiest over it all–more agnostic and skeptical, now.

     What gives? Where do we go from here?

     LikeLike

130. This is great way to explain the difference I spoke about regarding a first order reality and a second order reality in the previous post.

     Thanks Imonk!

     LikeLike

131. Yes and amen. Thank you for saying what I’ve felt for a long time. And I think many more people need to come to this conclusion. It would cut down on the arguing. In addition to some of our theology, we need to also put down some of our labels. We get much too caught up in proving that we are conservative or orthodox or evangelical or postmodern or emergent…you get my point.

     LikeLike

132. You are right.

     Many of you need to alter your theology as it is not biblical as I see it, and if not actually heretical, is contrary to what I as a good Berean know. I am so glad I am not like so many of you who are Pharisees in your theology. I know MY eschatology, soteriology, beliefs on baptism, creation, politics etc. are correct. Why can the rest of you not drop your incorrect beliefs and be more like me.

     At this point I will turn off my SARCASM.

     I need to examine my theology and be more aware and understanding of, even if not agreeing with, others who also believe the basics of Christianity.

     LikeLike

133. wow

     LikeLike

134. Sometimes what I think is Godly turns out to be crap, and what I think is crap turns out to be Godly.

     LikeLike

135. And all God’s people say AMEN!

     LikeLike