Posted on 01/10/2005 5:15:03 AM PST by HarleyD
What Shape is Your Theology?
"I’m no theologian." Oh, yes you are.
Everyone is a theologian. Are you human? Then you are a theologian. Every one of us is a natural-born theologian. This accounts for the tremendous variety of religions among us. From Animism to Zen, from Zoroastrianism to Atheism — everyone is a theologian.
Theology is nothing more than ideas about God. Everyone has ideas about God. Everyone is a theologian.
But that doesn’t mean that everyone is a good theologian. In fact, by nature, we are all lousy theologians. St. Paul puts it this way in the first chapter of Romans:
What may be known about God is plain to [all men], because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-- his eternal power and divine nature-- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
We are natural-born theologians. But we are fallen people; and so our theology is fallen too. Paul continues: Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Man-shaped, bird-shaped, animal-shaped, reptile-shaped theologies; this is the shape of our fallen theology.
And what do all those theologies have in common? Paul says, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him… [but they] exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images.
Paul is saying that instead of giving Glory to God as God, fallen man seeks that glory for himself. It began in the Garden of Eden. You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God…" In all of his fallen theologizing, man seeks but one thing for himself: the glory that belongs to God alone. This is the Theology of Glory.
The Theologian of Glory vs. the Theologian of the Cross.
Scripture says, There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death. The way that seems right to a man is the theology of Glory. We are all natural-born theologians of Glory. A theologian of Glory believes that:
1. God’s ways can be generally understood by human reason;
2. God’s favor is manifested in the circumstances of life, in particular, life’s successes and victories;
3. God is pleased by sincere human effort.
All the religions of the world, except for Christianity, are theologies of Glory. Whether it manifests itself as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism or some strange cult, it is all essentially the same theology and it is all the theology of Glory. The theology of Glory is the way that leads to death.
But Christian theology is fundamentally different. Christianity is not a theology of Glory, but a theology of the Cross. This is how Paul contrasts the two:
The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
In complete contrast to the theologian of Glory, the theologian of the Cross believes that:
1. God’s ways are paradoxical and hidden to human reason;
2. God’s favor is manifested in Jesus, in particular, His suffering, death and resurrection;
3. God is pleased only by Jesus.
The theology of Glory and the theology of the Cross are mutually exclusive. They are two completely different ways of understanding God. One is false, the other is true. One leads to death, the other to life.
The God Who Hides Himself.
Regarding the theologian of Glory, Martin Luther wrote:
That person does not deserve to be called a theologian who looks upon the invisible things of God as though they were clearly perceptible in those things which have actually happened.
What are the "invisible things of God"? This question brings us back to the first chapter of Romans:
What may be known about God is plain to [all men], because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-- his eternal power and divine nature-- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made.
Virtually every religion acknowledges that their gods possess certain characteristics: life, wisdom and power. Many further speculate that their gods possess qualities like justice, love and mercy. However, God’s true disposition remains completely hidden from them.
How is God disposed toward me? Is he pleased or displeased? To answer this question the theologian of Glory must speculate based upon his own life’s circumstances. If things are going well in his life he concludes that God is pleased with him.
Why is God pleased with me? The theologian of Glory speculates further and draws the only conclusion that his theology will allow:
God is pleased with me because I have pleased Him.
But if things are not going well, God must not be pleased, and more effort to please Him is required.
Isaiah writes, Truly you are a God who hides himself, O God and Savior of Israel. God’s gracious disposition toward us is not revealed in the visible things God has made —it remains hidden— leaving the theologian of Glory to speculate. The theologian of Glory wrongly believes that he can discern God’s disposition from the world around him. The god he invents is a god whose disposition can be manipulated with human works.
But if God is really a God Who hides Himself, then why does God hide Himself? The answer is a paradox. God hides Himself in order to reveal Himself.
Where does God hide Himself? The answer is another paradox. God, Who is all-powerful, hides Himself in weakness. God, Who is all wise, hides Himself in foolishness. God, Who is living, hides Himself in death.
Here is where the theologian of Glory begins to object. God is not weak, foolish or dead! And here the theologian of Glory shows his true colors. Luther rightly diagnosed the problem:
This is clear: He who does not know Christ does not know God hidden in suffering. Therefore he prefers works to suffering, glory to the cross, strength to weakness, wisdom to folly, and, in general, good to evil. These are the people whom the apostle calls "enemies of the cross of Christ" [Phil. 3:18], for they hate the cross and suffering and love works and the glory of works.
To know Jesus Christ is to know God hidden in weakness, foolishness and death. Luther writes: He deserves to be called a theologian, however, who comprehends the visible and manifest things of God seen through suffering and the Cross.
Rather than looking to the circumstances of his life to decipher God’s disposition, the theologian of the Cross looks to the suffering and death of Jesus to know God’s disposition. Rather than speculating that God must be pleased by human effort, the theologian of the Cross sees in Christ crucified the One who has pleased God once and for all. Life’s circumstances, whatever they might be, are now comprehended in the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus.
The theologian of Glory defines God according to human concepts of power, wisdom and reason. The theologian of the Cross allows God to define Himself, regardless of how paradoxical, weak and foolish it may appear.
The Cross is Our Theology
Here I must sadly note that Christians are not immune to the theology of Glory. The glory of works outshines the shame of the Cross in many churches today. Pulpits free of paradox proclaim the Christian rather than the Christ. God is presented as easily understandable and easily pleased. This is a god who does not require a Cross or a dead Jesus.
In short, the Church seems anxious to exchange the shame, weakness and foolishness of the Cross for human glory, strength and wisdom. To a group of Christians who seemed anxious to do the same Paul wrote, God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ…
What is Paul saying? He is saying that the Cross isn’t just a part of our theology; the Cross IS our theology. The Cross permits no speculation about God or His disposition. There, written in the broken body and shed blood of Jesus His Son, is God’s final word.
Something I've found interesting in regards of how people question God's actions.
The cross is such an interesting thing. The tool to kill slaves becomes the symbol of hope and salvation - it is truly for Christians a place where Heaven and earth come together in the loving self-sacrifice of Jesus. On it, our Emmanuel, God With Us, Jesus, stretches out his arms in a loving embrace to all of humanity. His own blood stains the lintel of this new Passover, and God the Father does what he did not require Abraham to go through with, the sacrifice of his son. Timeless, this one cross becomes a beacon, a sign of foolishness to the unbeliever but the very source of light and life to those who answer its call.
Like Paul, I will glory in nothing except Christ crucified.
At The Foot of Your Cross
Lord,
here I am,
once again,
at the foot of your cross.
All around me are the howling winds,
the darkness.
Like the Magdalene,
I cling to your cross,
my only anchor,
and press my cheek
against its rough
and bloodstained wood.
Here is the only shelter I know
as the hurricane blows.
Here,
I look up into your eyes,
eyes filled with such an intensity of love
that I cannot fathom it,
and all the tears of my misery
pour out,
grief and guilt and remorse and sorrow,
for what we have done to you,
what I have done to you,
and what you have chosen to do for love.
What have I to give
equal to the glory of your love?
naked as I feel
beneath the light of your love,
Yet I wish to give it all -
my aching and sorrow, my hope,
my wisdom, my voice, my everything
all for you -
such a small offering in return
for what you have given,
but like the widow's mite,
thank you for letting me offer it.
Here,
at the foot of your cross,
let me make my stand,
now, and always.
or change the music too radically, either...You want to get complaints, pick the wrong songs...
" treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these." 2 Tim 3:4-5
Sadly our congregations don't seem to care in avoiding these things.
Oh, ow.
Dan
My only quibbly little gripe: always source quotations!
Dan
Biblical Christianity web site
Biblical Christianity message board
Biblical Christianity BLOG
This verse has been running in my mind a lot lately...so much shallowness in the name of Christ...
You are so right. There is much shallowness. It makes it so difficult to keep focus that nothing we do can please God. It is only what the Christ has done and we must be driven by Him.
Just because the laws of physics apply to everyone, doesn't make everyone a physicist. That is not to say that every human cannot learn how to run, walk, jump and throw.
1. God’s ways can be generally understood by human reason;
1. God’s ways are paradoxical and hidden to human reason;
What may be known about God is plain to [all men], because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-- his eternal power and divine nature-- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
The Cross permits no speculation about God or His disposition.
I'm not sure if I want to wrestle with the author on this one.
As I hear Paul, Romans specifies two things natural revelation will tell us: God's existence, and His power. Beyond that, we're cast back on special revelation.
Dan
True but we're not talking about physics. Everyone has some sort of concept of God (even atheists) and that, by nature, makes them a theologian. Christians would be hard press to argue that they should NOT become well verse in theology when it is through theology we understand God. The issue becomes whether our theology is correct.
Of course this has been debated and discussed at great length over the centuries. Consider that great apologists -and the scriptures they employ- have shown belief in the One True God to be reasonable. I'm not convinced that reason is the villain it is sometimes portrayed to be, but rather the soul that uses/misuses it. Thus spiritual things are not nonsense (or paradox), but nonsense to the natural man. Adam's fall did not affect the transcendent God nor did it affect the laws of logic. It did hamper the ability of man to use it.
>> Everyone has some sort of concept of [physics] (even [Luddites]) and that, by nature, makes them a [physicist]. [Scientists] would be hard press to argue that they should NOT become well verse in [physics] when it is through [physics] we understand [the physical universe]. The issue becomes whether our [physics are] correct. <<
:^)
I whole-heartedly agree with the notion that all Christians should study theology, just as all scientists should study physics. My point was to emphasize the fact that just ahving some vague notion of the laws of the universe (whether physics or theology) does not make one either a physicist or a theologian.
Just like physics, there is one truth in theology. Just like physics, many essentials required for living a decent life can be readily discerned. Just like physics, this common-sense experiences can cloud larger truths. Just as a man would be a fool to listen to a sicentist who told him that the laws of nature had been changed, and he may now safely walk off ledges, a Christian must rely on his own wisdom when theologians tell him to do evil things. But just like physics, one must study with academic rigor, and become more knowledgeable than the past experts before he can teach his findings as truth.
Universal truth lies in our intellect, not in our feelings, althogh our feelings can sustain our inquiry. Yet, the various bishops and preachers of the world are like mere teachers; it is the great saints who are our engineers in the science of God. We do well to learn as we are taught, but we should not fancy ourselves all to be experts, substituting our own thoughts for the wisdom of the great saints, for they have read the same book we have, and have mastered its lessons far better.
If we fancy ourselves as experts then we commit the first "sin" of the "Theology of Glory"; "1. God’s ways can be generally understood by human reason;" . I’m sure we would agree that when we look to those who have mastered the lessons far better than us; it’s those people who walk the talk in a spirit of humility with God. Teaching doesn’t always happen in school.
***substituting our own thoughts for the wisdom of the great saints***
Then who defines who the great Saints are?
(I have a feeling I know who you will say)
Who are the great saints? Those who most resemble Christ in their living and loving. Most of them are never known, but God has let a few of them stand out as inspirations and models to the rest of us...
One of my favorite hymns:
Beneath the cross of Jesus I fain would take my stand,
The shadow of a mighty rock within a weary land;
A home within the wilderness, a rest upon the way,
From the burning of the noontide heat, and the burden of the day.
O safe and happy shelter, O refuge tried and sweet,
O trysting place where Heaven’s love and Heaven’s justice meet!
As to the holy patriarch that wondrous dream was given,
So seems my Savior’s cross to me, a ladder up to heaven.
There lies beneath its shadow but on the further side
The darkness of an awful grave that gapes both deep and wide
And there between us stands the cross two arms outstretched to save
A watchman set to guard the way from that eternal grave.
Upon that cross of Jesus mine eye at times can see
The very dying form of One Who suffered there for me;
And from my stricken heart with tears two wonders I confess;
The wonders of redeeming love and my unworthiness.
I take, O cross, thy shadow for my abiding place;
I ask no other sunshine than the sunshine of His face;
Content to let the world go by to know no gain or loss,
My sinful self my only shame, my glory all the cross.
This is a beautiful hymn of the faith and one of my favorites.
Not looking through the prism of Catholic or Protestant, but in the name of Christian love, I'll pick on us Proddies.
qUESTION: who is the greater modern saint:
or
My point here being, we must guard our hearts against false doctrine and nor look at those who are easy on the eye, or preach a seductive doctrine of health and wealth. We must have a strong enough sense of sound doctrine to detect manure when it is packaged in a seductive manner.
Great comparison.
Yep...you know the teaching, by your fruits you will know them -
I was thinking of Bonhoeffer, myself...who worked so hard do do the right thing during WWII and was martyred because he loved God more than his own life. I believe he was Lutheran.
And Francis of Assissi, another person deeply and totally in love with God.
And the lady at a local church who supervises the Altar guild (it's a Lutheran church), and radiates love of God.
And a person I know in Pakistan, where being Christian is almost equal to saying "Martyr me!"
And this dear man, working with the poorest of the poor, rag pickers' children, to teach them something about God and Jesus where the workers are far too few and the harvest is huge.
They're there - those who love the Lord with all their heart and all their soul and all their mind, and their neighbor as themselves.
They've all figuratively stood beneath that cross of Jesus, and looked up at those eyes of love, and falling to their knees, clinging to that cross, say, "Thank you, Lord" and sometimes, often quietly, move mountains out of that love, for they are doing it for their beloved.
It's hard for a big-name preacher to sometimes reach or stay at that place. Yet, they reach so many people, and open the door for a lot who might never hear the word and take it to heart at all, that all I can say is let God be the judge. John Osteen preached some sermons that helped me on my way to where I am....and I might have had trouble making it if it hadn't been for some of these televangelists.
God's willing and will use all of us as much as we're open to him.
Yet watered down gospel is at the root, I believe, of a lot of stuff nowadays. It's thin gruel where we need to get the meat of the Cross, and what it really means.
Lord,
teach us to stand brave,
filled with your spirit,
under the banner of your cross,
unashamed,
ready to be your witnesses,
this day,
and always,
Amen.
I'll leave it to Protestants to decide how they want to determine who constitutes a great saint. Any answers a Catholic maight provide would seem triumphantalist, or reference articles of faith you don't believe in.
[OK, I'd like to keep these issues seperate, but these are the issues I have as a Catholic trying to address that question. The magisterium in the Catholic Church is not any given person, although the Pope represents it. Rather, it is the consensus that the Catholic saints have come to. Historically, there seems to be a lack of consensus among Protestants about key doctrines, besides simply agreeing that Catholics are wrong. However, to the extent that any such consensus does exist, it provides a good example of what I'm putting forth: the adherence to and elucidation of an "orthodox consensus."
With this established, it becomes more possible to discern those whose faith yields miraculous signs (Fatima, for instance) apart from the charlaitans and crackpost (Bayside, for instance). Of course, the best accompanying sign is a resurgence of religious dedication. Again, this has to be distinguished from a religious fad through the lens of history and orthodoxy. Obviously, however, what consititutes miracles and orthodox adherence will be an inevitable source of disagreement.]
Bernadette Souborous, because of her unswavering loyalty to the message given to her, and her undying faithfulness to God - she refused to be budged, even with all the pressure to recant, or change her story, or make a big name for herself.
She is one of my heros - and a great role model, not for what happened at Lourdes, but for how she lived long after it was over.
St. Therese of Lisseux, because of her incredibly deep love of Jesus and the desire not to be big, but to put up with all sorts of irritations and trials in daily life, so she could love God all the better, and who taught us her little way of doing little things with great love, in the name of Jesus.
St. Jean Vianney, who, although a poor student who barely passed out of seminary, loved God with a flame in his heart that was obvious to all around. Just a simple parish priest whose greatest wish was that he could go be a hermit and pray for his sins, he had such a ferverent love of God that people came from all over France to have him hear their confession, and he converted many, many to living as a true child of God.
These people have several things in common: They loved Jesus with all they had, followed where he led.
We should all have such a personal relationship with Jesus.
Of course I realize I did treat your question as if it were rhetorical. Joel Osteen's web page and ministry certainly seems all glitz. That is not a critique on his role as a teacher. But the great Catholic saints have tended to eschew worldliness in a way Osteen doesn't seem to have done. Remember how I lumped "bishops and preachers" together as mere teachers? That wasn't to disdain their roles, but it was to acknowledge the great saints are set apart from them.
I don't mean to assert that Protestantism doesn't have its humble, un-worldly, "doctors of the faith," like Therese of Lisiuex, Catherine of Sienna, or Francis of Assissi, or even the likes of Padre Pio, Faustina of Poland, or Maximillian Kolbe. I have not learned of these saints through the secular press, so even if I were a neutral observer who did not think Catholicism to be the true faith, my own ignorance alone could account for why I have not heard of such men and women among Protestants. (I'm hoping you'll realize why I don't compare them to such figures as Jonathan Edwards or John Calvin.)
I wish I had remembered Jean Vianney when I was composing the message I had just posted!
If one can have a falling in love with a saint experience, I had one with the St. Jean Vianney...what an example of putting God before self, and being a true shepherd of his flock.
For those that don't know, he was a peasant who got a chance to go to school, and barely passed, and got sent to a ticky little backwater town that hadn't had a pastor since before the French Revolution, which had been several years before, and turned it around from a mostly Godless (or, much like today, where God isn't in the equation for a lot of people, although they like him) community, into a thriving holy place. He had the gift from God to help people see and face their sins and ask God's forgiveness, and he would counsel people for hours and hours every day.
He gives me hope as an example of what impact that people who are radically committed to the truth of Jesus can do...
But without the Cross, without the truth of Christ crucified, you can't have this. Pray, my friends, for more truly committed people who will be like lamps filled with Christ's true light in the midnight.
I concur Dataman. I don't necessarily agree with the statement made by the author:
1. God’s ways are paradoxical and hidden to human reason;
Certainly, there are aspects of God that are paradoxial and difficult to comprehend (Jesus wholly God and wholly man, etc.). But there is nothing that defies logic in God or His character. As a matter of fact, God is a God of reason and this is one way that man is made in His image. If we espouse to the world that they must throw out reason and follow Christ, we have started down a very slippery slope!
Thanks
Noted.
If you are so inclined, look for Joel Osteen on TV sometime. Cook up some popcorn and be prepared for something that looks more like an Amway convention and sounds like a motivational speeck.
You won't hear Christ preached. (Christ born, died, rose again, your sin, faith, etc) What you will hear, week after week, is that God wants to bless you. If you aren't blessed, it's because you don't want it enough.
Yeah, I've heard him; not so much that I'd want to pass judgment on him; I haven't heard any particular heresies, but the focus did sorta seem off. One of the errors of popular-notion Catholic-school-nun Catholicism (as opposed to the real thing) is that if you're not broke and miserable, you're doing something wrong*. He sorta came across like the opposite extreme, and no more centered on the Word than Norman Vincent Peale or Steven Covey.
(*There are several notions of Catholicism which Catholic-school students have a fairly twisted sense of. They were taught very adult spirituality as children, then when they hit the adult years, the AmChurch went juvenile on them, so they never came to understand the adult teachings. Hence, the saints' joy in suffering and renunciation of worldly goods came across to many as if it were saying that God wanted Catholics to be poor and miserable.)
On some thought, I wanted to do more than simply say "thanks." I wanted to appreciate your beautiful writing on this thread. It's beauty is than its exceptional eloquence, but actually its substance as well.
2Co 6:8-10 " by glory and dishonor, by evil report and good report; regarded as deceivers and yet true; as unknown yet well-known, as dying yet behold, we live; as punished yet not put to death, as sorrowful yet always rejoicing, as poor yet making many rich, as having nothing yet possessing all things.
That is very kind of you...
One of the things I like to say is when they come to take away the Christians, I don't want anybody to be confused about where I stadn...so I do what I can to stand for Jesus and him crucified, because I truly believe.
No spun sugar theology for me. I take my stand at the foot of the cross.
Good observation suzy. By the way, I think your "about" page has it right on target...
Since, therefore, the natural man is at a greater disadvantage, it is not reason that is at fault, but the condition of his unrenewed mind. Again, The first 6 chapters of I Corinthians reveal the two types of wisdom (or, in the case of the world, "sophistry"). Another problem we discover is that many of the first principles of the world are also false. If they are false, the conclusions based on them are as well.
It becomes clear why the secular idea of autonomous reason (Rousseau) is impossible. Human reason does not exist outside of the human mind; it is dependent on it. Various minds have various abilities to employ reason. The perfect mind does not exist and has not ever existed in humanity save Christ's. Therefore reason is dependent on a flawed human mind. Anything dependent is not autonomous.
Hmmmm...I see your point.
I just finished reading a very good book that dwells on this issue a bit. The title is "How Should We Then Live" by Francis Schaeffer. He spends a good deal of the book discussing world views and how a world view philosophy that omits God is untenable.
Dataman's point that human reason cannot look beyond man himself is echoed by Francis Schaeffer. The book highlights the circular nature of these philosophies and their ultimate failure
I highly recommend the book.
Schaeffer wrote that book while I was just finishing college. I owe much to his influence, and was fortunate to have heard him speak before he died. I would echo him, but he didn't even know of my existence. Dr. Nancy Pearcy was one of his converts. If you liked How Then, you'd like her Total Truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.