Approaches to Theology #4: Biblical Theology
We’ve come to the final installment in this series on how men come to religious convictions. We examined the ecclesiastical approach to theology where men allow a religious institution to act as the voice of God in determining their beliefs. We considered the systematic approach to theology where men allow a series of preconceptions about faith and religion to act as a filter by which they interpret the Bible. We also surveyed the subjective approach to theology where men allow emotions and subjective impressions to direct their faith and practice. These three categories summarize the theological methods of most religious people, but we have seen that they each fall short of providing a reliable guide to divine doctrines and duties. How then are we to determine what we should believe and observe in order to be the people of God? What we need is an objective standard, untainted by men. What we need is a Biblical approach to theology.
Most churches today profess some adherence to the writings of scripture. Even the most liberal religious groups will claim to be following the sense of scripture in pursuing their humanistic, socio-political agendas. The difference between a Biblical theology and the others already mentioned is not a professed love of the Bible. The difference is in how the believer’s positions and actions are related to that Bible, or rather, how the Bible is related to those positions and actions. In the ecclesiastical method the church or church hierarchy ultimately determines what the truth will be. They alone hold the key to understanding, interpreting, and applying the word of God. In the systematic method one’s preconceived ideas about what is true ultimately determines how the Bible will be understood. The sacred cows of one’s preferred theology cannot be set aside no matter how often Biblical texts may refute them. In the subjective method emotion reigns supreme and the Bible occupies a decidedly inferior role. It doesn’t matter what the Bible says; what matters is what it says to me, and how I feel about its message; and that message always ends up making me feel good about who I am and what I want to do. But in the scriptural method the Bible speaks for itself and determines upon careful reading and analysis what the believer will think, feel, and do.
No preconception is safe; every popular position is subject to review. The Reformation’s cry of sola scriptura (scripture alone) captures the essence of Biblical theology, inconsistently applied though it may be.
How can we ensure that our theology is guided by scripture and not by another, inferior, method? By reading the text thoroughly and frequently. By looking at it with a fresh perspective as though we have never seen its words before. By waiving our rights to every position and practice we have held dear, making them subject to the careful criticism of scripture and willingly discarding those ideas that do not pass its test. By consciously setting aside our emotions, preferences, and prejudices in favor of the Spirit-filled word and its work within our hearts. By being willing to be cut by that word, offended in our sensibilities, and rebuked for our misunderstanding and misdeeds. By having an open, honest, penitent heart that comes to scripture to learn what to think and do, not to justify one’s positions. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). “Your word is a lamp to my feet / And a light to my path” (Psalms 119:105). “Speak, LORD, for Your servant hears” (1Samuel 3:9). –JME
Editorial: Real Security
Last month the world was once again reminded, as though there were not already enough evidence, that evil exists. The Virginia Tech massacre demonstrated yet again that evil is real and that it threatens to strike at any time. We cannot have total safety and security on earth. Life is dangerous. There are wicked men who seek to do others harm. There are deadly diseases that afflict our bodies indiscriminately. There are even accidents that happen every day and rob unsuspecting souls of their lives.
In the wake of the Virginia Tech murders, many analysts are asking, “What could have been done differently? How can we prevent this type of event from ever happening again?” There is some value in these types of questions, but we must never forget that evil and danger are unchangeable facts of life. Human beings will never rid the world of wickedness, and there is no perfect safeguard against every form of hurt, harm, and danger. Perhaps we can make universities more secure; perhaps not. Regardless, there will still be threats to the welfare of our children. Disaster will still touch us and our families from time to time.
The question is not, “How can I protect myself and my children so that nothing bad will ever happen to them?” The question is, “What security can be found in a world that is fraught with danger and uncertainty?” The answer is, “Jesus Christ.” He provides safety and security for the human soul, protection that extends beyond this life and shelters us from the fires of hell. He promises to be with us, to never leave us nor forsake us. “So we may boldly say: ‘The LORD is my helper; I will not fear. What can man do to me?’” (He. 13:6)
No matter how careful I may be or how badly I may wish it were otherwise, I cannot guarantee that my children will grow up healthy, that evil will never touch them, that I will be there to watch them graduate, marry, and have children of their own. But for all the things that I cannot give them, there is one precious commodity that I can. I can give my children the knowledge of Jesus Christ. I can teach them how to know the Lord so that they do not have to fear the dangers in this world. And I can offer myself as a role model of faith, by loving and serving the Lord with all that is in me. Bad things happen, and innocent people, even young people, lose their lives in tragic ways. I may not be able to keep that from happening to myself or my children, but I can keep the members of my family from losing what is more precious: their souls. -The Editors
What Did “They” Think Would Happen?
Although the massacre at Virginia Tech came unexpectedly, it was entirely predictable, as well as the aftermath of shock and finger-pointing that has followed. All reasonable people are horrified by the carnage, and are beginning to ask “why”? I have not seen nor heard nearly all that has been put “out there”, but in what I have seen, I have observed an interesting omission. Nobody seems to be asking the right question: What kind of society or social environment do we have that produces such a horror? The “shooter” did not live in a vacuum! All of us, in addition to our own innate qualities and attributes, are the product of the totality of our “nurture”. What leads a person to such an act of human destruction and final suicide?
There is no question, according to his own statements, that Cho was afflicted with a distorted picture of himself and the outside world: ego, self-esteem, sinful pride, bitterness and hate, envy–these were all issues involved in his fateful decision. Too, it is also evident that he was mentally unstable. But is that ALL that contributed? Just days later, we learn of the suicide of a much more rational person in Houston, Texas, who killed a fellow-worker who had angered him before he killed himself. Almost daily we hear of similar events or near events. Did the society and culture in which these lived have NOTHING to do with these outbursts?
What about the widely-held view that these (and those they assaulted) are nothing more than animals, accidents of nature (evolution)? What about the humanist teaching (also widely-held) that God has nothing to do with out lives, and that we answer to no being other than ourselves? What about the progressive attacks on the value of a human life (abortion, euthanasia, our human “throwaway” society?) What about the “victim” mindset, the doctrinal diminishing of personal responsibility and accountability that is so pervasive? What about the permissive attitude of our society, defining almost all “bad” conduct as a sickness, diminishing punishment for wrongdoing, and endless delays associated almost all efforts toward justice.
The very ones responsible for such erroneous beliefs are leading the “blame game”, and hand-wringing which always follows such things. WHAT DID THEY THINK WOULD HAPPEN? In a world where God is ignored, or rejected, and so there is no fear of retribution or eternal damnation, where human life is valued no higher than that of a rat or a dog, where each person is encouraged to see himself as the center of his universe, where all are encouraged to blame others or their past for their misbehavior, and where most criminal acts go largely unpunished – the world these social engineers has foisted on the world–WHAT DO YOU EXPECT?
I have a question: Given all the above elements of the “faith” of humanists, infidels, and hedonists, would the world be any worse WITH God? --AcBelue