Friday, September 18, 2009

Unsettling Theology

The idea first came in to my mind to write a blog series called, "Why I Am.." when I saw a similar list of "Why I Am's..." on the cover of a popular author's book. This approach to blogging has proved to be unfruitful and unproductive. While labels are unavoidable and not always a bad thing, to write a series like this suggests that a) I am settled in my theology, b) that I am dogmatic in my positions, and it immediately sets up barriers between myself and others who - quite naturally - have differing views. None of this was my intention and in hindsight I would have never begun this series. I am not dogmatic toward "labels" or "traditions" as some, and so I abandon this series on "Why I Am..." with a few prepositions of "I believe" with the hopes of undoing some of what has resulted from that series.

I believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and have allowed that fact to change me; if that makes me a "Christian" then so be it. I shy not away from that label.

I believe that our ultimate authority on all matters pertaining to the faith is God and that he has revealed Himself and his will in and through Jesus Christ and through the writings of his Apostles and Prophets by the Holy Spirit; if that makes me "Protestant Reformed Evangelical" then so be it.

I believe that my commitment to God's authority exercised through the scriptures to be over and above all traditions necessitates - in my opinion - remaining in an attitude of "Reformed and Always Reforming"; if this places me under the label of "Post-Conservative", then so be it.

I believe in the biblical doctrines of Election, Predestination and Foreordination to be understood in the Hebrew context of Covenant and Incorporation and - as it is revealed in the New Testament - to be Christocentric; I believe Romans 9-11 is to be understood properly only with the context of Romans 1-8 in which the Righteousness of God - his faithfulness to his covenant with Israel - is on trial, and that predestination in that context is in keeping with the Hebrew idea of Covenantal Election; if that makes me "Arminian", then so be it.

I believe that the Hebrew idea of "Time" is linear and unending, that the idea of "timelessness" is a neo-Platonic pollution into historic Christianity and that "eternity" should be understood and defined as, "time-unending" not "timelessness"; furthermore I believe that God is passionate, near, able to be influenced by his children to either be moved to action or else to stay his wrathful hand as the scriptures attest; that the ideas of God being an "Unmoved Mover", Impassionate, Distant and Immutable are all neo-Platonic ideas that have polluted classical Christian theology and are inimical to the testimony of scripture; if all of this presents me with "Open Theistic" tendencies, then so be it.

I believe that Christ will return to judge the living and the dead, that in this return both righeous and wicked will experience a resurrection and that afterwards God will destroy (but not destroy) the earth and re-create it amalgamating Heaven and Earth where the righteous will reign with him forever in time unending eternity; if this makes me "Amillennial", then so be it.

I believe that in the fall three evils were created; 1) the devil is now the ruler of the air during this present evil age and his Kingdom is dominant in this world presently; 2) mankind have been separated from God by sin and an exilic curse and 3) as a result of this the world is prone to destruction and death is the result of all things cursed! Yet I believe that God set into motion a plan to defeat all three (not just sin) of these enemies. In the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ we have the defeat of the Devil, Sin and Death; this is the biblical doctrine of Christus Victor! That Christ did not just die to "cover our sins", rather he also defeated the powers and effects of Sin and those elements that keep us separated from God. It isn't just "you are forgiven" (Penal Substitution), it is also, "now go and sin no more"; if this places my over-arching view of the Atonement under the umbrella of "Christus Victor", then so be it.

And finally, I believe that "a mere ad hoc reading of the scripture - searching Scripture with a particular issue in mind while failing to grasp the overarching themes and ideas - obscures the essential message of the Bible" and results in a misunderstanding of those particular issues. It is with this "overarching theme" in mind that the above beliefs have been formed, and it is because of this overarching theme that I have rejected the dichotomies of those beliefs. This overarching theme is called "Creation and Covenant"; and if this makes me a "Covenantal Theologian" today then so be it.

Everything that I have just covered presents in a nutshell where I presently am in my theological pilgrimage with or without labels; labels do not define me they only serve to help in giving definations and "shorthand" to my ever fluid and unsettled and ever grow understanding of God and his Word. May I - and may you - forever grow and remain unsettled in our theology as we follow the lead of an Unsettling God. And with that, let me make a suggestion by way of a book I recently read. If what follows sounds detached from what I have written so far or somewhat redundant it is because I originally planned on presenting it as an introduction to a post on Open Theism; I have mildly edited it. I should note that the blog on Open Theism was one of the few blogs I was actually looking forward to writing; alas it will have to wait for some future unknown date ;-)

The next post is called, "Time to Unlearn A Few Things"

Derek

3 comments:

  1. Hope you post this on FB as well! It will be "liked" by your's truly. I think it's one of your best one's to date.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi there. I want to tell you that I think you're first section on why you are an Arminian is pretty harsh. I am a calvanist and I don't feel my pastor, and many of the pastors you mentioned, such as Piper, deserve the brush you have painted them with. We love Jesus, we don't believe less than Arminians, we extol your minitries. My pastor happens to be in great dialoge and relationship with a local Pentecostal pastor. I don't know man, just kinda harsh. I'm not here to comment on your theological convictions -- if you lean to arminianism, awesome -- but don't slam the body. What you view as mean, you are not looking at full context of sermons or letters. Ultimately its about the glory of God being first, which what you profess, we just take a different road, which is just as steeped in biblical scripture conviction. Be blessed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Beth,

    I appreciate your heart and am wholly grateful that you affirm the ministry of Arminians; I am glad that you do not consider my views as "heretical", that you do not consider me a "Pelagius" that you do not think of me as being "unchristian" or even "anti-Christian". It seems that you consider me an equal in the faith and not just as “barely" saved! Sister you bless my heart and I am sorry if I offended you.

    You and your pastor sound incredible and I'm sure we would get along, I have many friends - good and long term friends - who are Calvinist'. I really should have qualified my statement and restricted it to popular Calvinist writings and not to the body as a whole. Of course that was the context of the paragraph, but I could have been clearer.

    All of those quotes above, "heretics", "Semi-Pelagius", "unchristian", "antichristian" and "barely" saved are direct quotes or concepts from J.I. Packer, R.C. Sproul, and Johnston and I have books by Piper and others who says similar things (though they are tucked away in storage somewhere).

    I understand where you are coming from but when you say "we" I think you mean you and all the Calvinist' you know. I was talking to a Pastor just yesterday morning who leans heavily toward Calvinism (a friend), he was telling me how much he likes Sproul; I happened to have his Sproul's book, "Willing to Believe" on hand and I quoted to my Pastor friend out of the book, "People often ask me if I believe Arminians are Christians? I usually answer 'Yes, barely'." [p.25].

    My friend was shocked, and I suspect - given your beautiful and sincere heart - that you too would be shocked; We Calvinists "extol your ministries"! - Praise God and thank you. It is indeed about the glory of God, but how can God be glorified when leaders of a particular system speak of other parts of Christ' body as being "anti-Christians" and "barely" saved because our views - equally biblically based - are different? Isn't this "kinda harsh" and slamin "the body". What if I had said in my blog, Calvinist are "barely" saved or what if I called the lot of them "anti-Christians". This - my sister - is harsh. If you felt my post was harsh you should be indignant at these revered writers!

    I want to read Calvinist' material so that I may give Calvinism a fair hearing and maybe be convinced; but every time I do I come across similar bigotry as quoted above. It is as Peterson (a Calvinist) wrote; "We Calvinist' are particularly guilty of the 'if it quacks like a duck' smear'".

    Thank you again (infinitely) for your kind words!

    ReplyDelete

Followers