Approaches to Theology: Ecclesiastical Theology

            Why do you believe what you believe? How did you come to the conclusions that you have about God, the Bible, salvation, the church, and the end of time? Most religious people would attribute their faith and practice to the teachings of the Bible. But with so many churches teaching and practicing different things, how can they all be following the same instructions? There are four common approaches to faith that ultimately define what people believe and why. Over the next four issues, we will examine each of these methods in light of the scriptures. In this installment, we will examine the ecclesiastical approach to theology.

            Some religious people base their faith on the teachings of their church and its hierarchy. Catholicism is the best illustration of this approach to theology. The Roman Catholic Church determines the faith and practice of its members. The pope is Christ’s representative on earth, and the Church, under the pope’s leadership, speaks with the legislative authority of Christ. What the Church says is equal to divine law. To remain in good standing with that Church, you must accept its religious positions and policies.

Many religious people have an ecclesiastical approach to theology, even if their church teaches otherwise. A person may accept whatever their denomination says in its conferences or whatever their preacher says without bothering to test those statements by the scriptures. Their faith is determined by their connection to a particular denomination or their affection for a particular preacher. They may believe many things that are correct about God and His will, but they believe these truths for the wrong reason. They have accepted certain things as true because their church or preacher has said them, not because the Lord has said them.

Jesus did not empower the church to legislate divine law. The law of Christ has been determined by Christ, and it was revealed in its totality by the apostles and inspired writers of the first century (Mt. 18:18; 1Cor. 14:37; Jude 3). There is no further revelation to be made by the church, nor are the words of men a sufficient basis on which to rest our faith and hope. Men can be deceived. Men can misunderstand.

The believer’s obligation is to “test all things; hold fast what is good” (1Th. 5:21). The apostle John said, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1Jn. 4:1). Later in that same passage, John told the brethren that religious teachers could be tested by evaluating whether their doctrine agreed with that of the apostles (4:6). Like the Bereans who put the teaching of Paul to the test, we ought to “[search] the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things [are] so” (Ac. 17:11).

            It is foolish to place our confidence in men or in any organization made up of men. A religious association cannot determine truth, neither can a religious official. Lately we have seen religious groups redefining morality and the conditions for acceptance into the ministry. The Episcopal, Presbyterian, and Methodist churches have all wrestled with these issues in recent years. Sadly, the trend has been to accept a more politically correct stance on these questions than they would previously allow. The word of God has not changed its position and policy on these or any other issues since it was written almost two thousand years ago. If we wish to have a correct concept of God and to have our worship and service accepted by Him, we cannot rely upon an ecclesiastical approach to theology. Instead, the Bible must be accepted as our sole source of authority, and we must test the teachings of men by the pure and perfect words of God. –JME

Editorial: Character

What would you do if you knew that nobody would ever find out? Would you cheat on your taxes? Would you cheat on your spouse? How far would you be willing to go if you had no fear of being caught? It has been said that a man’s true character is known by what he would choose to do in such a circumstance. The man who is morally good simply because he fears exposure and the indignity of transgression will likely indulge in vice when he finds an opportune moment. He may walk the line as long as the eyes of others are upon him, but he has no core convictions that would keep him in line regardless of the situation. A man’s character defines who he really is; it is the moral fabric from which he is made, and the strength or weakness of his character is manifested at times when he believes he is unobserved.

While a slave in Egypt, Joseph was presented with an opportunity that seemed too good to let go. Far from home, living in a foreign land, without a friend or confidant in the world, Joseph must have been tempted when Potiphar’s wife invited him into her bed (Ge. 39:7). Joseph’s agreement would have been at least understandable, if not excusable, but the young man who had been sold by his brothers and seemingly abandoned had the integrity and courage to say, ‘No.’ Joseph told his would-be seductress, “Look, my master does not know what is with me in the house, and he has committed all that he has to my hand. There is no one greater in this house than I, nor has he kept back anything from me but you, because you are his wife. How then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?” (Ge. 39:8-9) Joseph’s father would never have known whether he slept with Potiphar’s wife or not. The affair might have happened with Potiphar none the wiser. But Joseph knew that his behavior would not escape the notice of God. It didn’t matter how lonely Joseph might have been, or how tempting the offer appeared to be, or how great the assurance of secrecy was –- Joseph’s character would not permit him to betray the confidence of God.

Unfortunately, when he refused Potiphar’s wife, Joseph was indicted as a would-be rapist and sent to prison. His reputation suffered for a time because of his commitment to morality, but his character remained unblemished. A man’s reputation is what others think of him. It may be good or it may be bad. But his character is what he truly is. Sometimes a wicked man will have a good reputation; other times a righteous man will have a bad reputation. But God looks at the heart. He doesn’t judge us on the basis of what others think about us. He judges us on the basis of what we truly are and what we choose to do when we think no one is watching. –The Editors

Giving People What They Want

Psychiatrists tell us that most people who are deceived WANT to be deceived.  At least their mind is set to try to believe a certain type of message.  This is the advantage of the false teacher when he says what is pleasant and desirable to his hearers.   Some are indeed powerful and persuasive, but the real deception is not in that ability so much as it is to understand and pander to peoples’ wants and weaknesses.  King Jereboam of Israel is a perfect example of this.  He succeeded over the time of a single generation to bring about a drastic and popular change in the religious devotions of an entire nation.  The worship he instituted included his own appointed places (Deut 12:14; 1 Kings 12:28, 29), images, date, priests, etc., that he “had devised of his own heart” (Lev 23:34, 39; 1 Kings 12:33)

Every aspect of this new worship was radically different from what these people had observed for generations.  How did he accomplish this?

1. He appealed to comfort, convenience and self-indulgence.  “It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem.”  (One of these places was Bethel–only 12 miles from God’s place of worship, Jerusalem).1 Kings 12:28 No doubt many whose faith was weak were glad to hear a powerful and forceful KING say it was “too much”.  He understands; and who would be so narrow-minded as to say that God would condemn worship in Dan but accept it in Jerusalem.

2. He appealed to their sense of piety and worship.  “Behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” (1 Kings 12:28).  Cleverly, he did not change their “god”, so much as give them what many wanted, a tangible representation of their deity.

3. He appealed to their pride.  They had angrily left Judah after Rehoboam’s rash threats, saying, “what portion have we any more in Judah?...) (1 Kings 12:16) Yes, Judah offers us nothing! Lets go home!   Jereboam offers them holy places in their homeland.  Israel is as good as Judah.  Sectional pride can run strong.

4. He appealed to their “sense of history” and patriotism.  The cities chosen had played prominent roles in the story of God’s people.  These are “our cities”.

5. He implied that “all is well”.  This is merely the “old” worship provided for those who want nothing more of Judah and their establishments.  What he said, they liked and wanted to believe–and DID believe!  Deceived, and in error, all the while thinking all is well, and we serve God.  All successful innovations are thus tied to popular taste, convenience, pride, apparent innocence, and piety.  Despite the apparent success of this religious movement, it led eventually into the downfall of Israel, and the removal of Jereboam and his seed from the throne and even the earth.

Have you examined carefully the foundation of YOUR religion? –AcBelue

Back to Newsletter Archive                           Home