The word orthodox, from Greek orthos (“right”, “true”, “straight”) + doxa (“opinion” or “belief”, related to dokein, “to think”),¹is generally used to mean the adherence to accepted norms, more specifically to creeds, especially in religion.²

1 – orthodox. Dictionary.com. Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper, Historian. Dictionary Definition (accessed: March 03, 2008). 2 – orthodox. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. Dictionary definition (accessed: March 03, 2008).

From the very beginning of Church History there have been those who would seek to undermine “orthodox” thinking/theology. This note is sounded regularly by the apostle Paul.

It is easily recognizable in 1 Timothy (1:3, 6, 19; 3:7; 4:1; 5:8, 14, 15; 6:3, 10, 20, 21). There is a sense in which “to the victor go the spoils” and those who win the battle define what is orthodox. Fortunately, for us God is the God of His Story and He determines who will win and renders certain the preservation of truth. Thus orthodoxy is capable of an objective existence and not defined by subjective fluctuation.

Paul defines orthodox theology as a theology that celebrates the person and work of Jesus Christ. It is a theology declaring Jesus in His person and work to be enough in this life and in the life to come.

Those who would assault the person and work of Jesus Christ are not orthodox, but heterodox.

Heterodoxy is generally defined as “any opinions or doctrines at variance with an official or orthodox position”. As an adjective, heterodox is commonly used to describe a subject as “characterized by departure from accepted beliefs or standards” (status quo). Under this definition the noun heterodoxy is synonymous with unorthodoxy, while the adjective heterodox is synonymous with dissident. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterodoxy

The word “heterodoxy” comes from the Greek word “heteros”. The word “heteros” speaks of something that is a different kind. It is not comparing apples and oranges. Two different objects but both are fruits. It is comparing rocks to people. Rocks are all together different. The word “heteros” speaks of something that is all together different.

In Chapter two, Paul speaks of those who would distort the person and work of Jesus Christ. As such they seek to delude the listener (2:4), take them into captivity (2:8), pass judgment on them (2:16), and disqualify them of their prize (2:18). By embracing teaching that is false the audience will shift from the hope of the gospel (1:23). Paul unpacks those ideas that are altogether different than the simplicity that is Christ Jesus. Anything adding to or subtracting from Jesus Christ is heterodoxy.

Paul does not end with this warning. He moves from orthodoxy to orthopraxy. “Orthopraxy is a term derived from Greek orthopraxia, meaning ‘correct action/activity,’ or an emphasis on conduct.” Orthodoxy gives birth to orthopraxy. Right belief always leads to right action. The two ideas must always follow this sequence and cannot be separated without the death of either one. Paul lays down what the sufficiency and singularity of Jesus Christ looks like experientially. One must always lead with correct thinking, leading to wise choosing, and culminating with passionate feeling. We must always go from how we think to what we do. Again, neither one can be separated from the other without great harm.

Who Christ is and what He does changes forever those who taste and see that He is good; redemption and adoption perpetually change the soul of the recipient. As we consider the words from Colossae, let us celebrate the truth of Jesus Christ, guard against those who would assault His person and work, and live His life in our daily decisions.

Often, as is true with most of our handling of God’s Word, we read various pieces without seeing how the pieces fit into the bigger picture. This is unfortunate for us and demeaning to the text.

The book of Colossians is comprised of verses. These verses link together to form paragraphs and the paragraphs are part of a singular thought. Paul is not jumping from subject matter to subject matter as if there is no coherent thought and intentional design. Each of the verses and paragraphs form a thread in a beautiful tapestry. Each is a different color used by God to paint a breathtaking portrait of His Son. He is the promised seed within the Story. To understand the parts, you must understand the whole. It is the parts that make up the whole and it is the whole that brings continuity to the individual parts.

We will do an injustice to the revelation of God if we fail to see each part in light of the whole. The task is not difficult, but we have, in our time and culture, become intellectually lazy. The difficulty lies in our own inability to focus for extended periods on a singular thought. Perhaps if we identify what is Paul’s primary point, we will be able to see how the parts fit into the whole.

Paul’s primary thought is, “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27). Each of the following 12 articles and study questions are built around the paragraph. An attempt has been made to “connect the dots” within the book itself. The book is presented as a whole.

Since most letters within the New Testament are occasioned by questions or problems it is only proper to ask what question is being asked of Paul or what problem is being presented to Paul. Consider the weight of what Paul says concerning the Lord Jesus Christ.

“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities–all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything” (Col. 1:15-18).

Such a statement forced one commentator to conclude,

It is agreed upon that “Colossians presents the all-supremacy, the all-sufficiency, the uniqueness, and the fullness of the person and work of Jesus Christ as the God-man Savior, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe and the total solution for man’s needs both for time and eternity. It is a cosmic book, presenting the cosmic Christ: the Creator/Sustainer who is also the one and only Redeemer/Reconciler of the universe.” [Emphasis added] http://bible.org/seriespage/background-colossians “Background on Colossians,” J. Hampton Keathley, III

Because we are only able to listen in on half of the conversation we can only surmise the issue revolves around the singular person and work of Jesus Christ. The argument of Paul rests on the sufficiency of Jesus Christ as being provisionally lavish in addressing the needs of His people. What are the specifics? What name are we to assign the heresy? Call it what you may. Legalism, New Age philosophy, secular humanism, or ancient and current cults, regardless what it is named anything detracting from or adding to the person and work of Jesus Christ is under assault by the apostle Paul as he declares Jesus Christ to be enough in this life and in the life to come. Tullian Tchividjian concludes, “Jesus plus nothing equals everything; everything minus Jesus equals nothing.”¹ The threat is real and Paul’s concern for the church is equally genuine. Consider the following admonitions.

• [Let] no one will delude you with persuasive argument (2:4)

• [Let] no one take you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world (2:8)

• [Let] no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day (2:16)

• Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind (2:18).

Paul’s alarm was for the ongoing perseverance of God’s people in the hope of the gospel (1:23). This must be our concern as well. The only defense against this terminal threat is the singular view of Jesus Christ. He can neither be added to nor subtracted from. Adding to Christ is like adding salt to a meal offered by a world renowned chef. It is insulting and denigrating. The addition says, “I do not like what you’ve done; your meal is unsatisfactory to my taste buds.” And this is simply unacceptable in our relationship with God.

Thus our presuppositions are as follows and simple.

• First, Jesus Christ is the second member of the God-head and He is as the incarnate, resurrected, and redeeming Savior who is the apex and pinnacle of God’s Story.

• Second, anything that would take from or add to who He is in His person and work is a direct assault against the Story of God.

• Third, in the church/city of Colossi there is instruction that seeks to add to and/or subtract from the person and work of Jesus Christ, thus showing Him to be inadequate as incarnate and redeemer.

• Fourth, Paul’s direct assault against this error is to magnify the person and work of Jesus Christ and to show the practical/pragmatic consequences of our union with Him.

From this four-fold foundation all the following articles will be built. As with any study, there are imperfections because of my own inability. I have, however, been enriched by my personal journey in and through the book itself. It has, by design, led me to Him. I trust you will “find, celebrate, and declare that He is enough, in this life and in the life to come.”

¹ Tullian Tchividjian, “Jesus + Nothing = Everything (Part 1),” January 10, 2010, http://www.crpc.org/sermons–media/sermon/jesus—nothing—everything–part-1-

(John 15:11)

The stability of the Christian life is built on the bedrock of God’s Word.  We believe what He has said is true and will most certainly happen.  Yet the certainty of His Word is built on the supremacy of His rule.  His Word will happen because His will cannot be thwarted (Daniel 4:35).

Our ultimate joy rests in knowing God will never let His Word fail.  The hope we have is not tentative or speculative as if to say there is the slightest chance that it will not happen.  Our hope is a confident anticipation and our joy is real and firm despite our circumstances and surroundings.

Listen carefully to the following three verses (John 15:11; 6:24; 17:13).

John 15:11 “These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full.

John 16:24 “Until now you have asked for nothing in My name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be made full.

John 17:13 “But now I come to You; and these things I speak in the world so that they may have My joy made full in themselves.

The joy Jesus gives is personal and intimate.  A joy that is full.  It fills the container to overflow.  It is a stabilizing joy.  It is the kind of joy that brings victory in the midst of defeat.  It empowers the fallen, lightens the downtrodden, and invigorates the exhausted.  This is biblical, Christ-exalting joy.  It is the joy that finds its fuel from the Word of God.

Our joy is built on the bedrock of His Word.  Isaiah 55:11 gives us this promise.

10 “For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, And do not return there without watering the earth And making it bear and sprout, And furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater;

11 So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

Isaiah 46:9-11 echoes this same truth.

9 Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me,

10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, ‘My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure’;

11 Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man of My purpose from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it.

Our joy rests in knowing His Word is certain.  Yet His Word is certain because His rule is absolute (Psalm 115:3 “But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.” [see also Psalm 135:6]).  If God cannot determine, with certainty, the outcome of what He has said to be true, then we have no right to rest confidently in His Word.  If God says something is going to happen, then a “million” actions will precede the outcome to insure the declared results.  No event happens in isolation to its surroundings.  The unfolding of life does not happen in historical vacuums.  In the end the reign of God must be absolute or there can be no certainty in the outworking of life.  If life does not find it footing in the supremacy of His rule, history, the present and the unknown future becomes the smudged imprint and discombobulated outworking of a belligerent creature.

It is because God controls the means and the end that His Word is certain and thus we have a peace and joy that truly passes human understanding (Phil. 4:7).

Today, as you joy in all that He is for you and you are in Him realize that such contentment is possible only because God has made a promise to you that He will fulfill.  As long as He reigns, His Word is certain.  May such truth cause you to see that He is enough in this life and in the life that is to come.

I. Justification is looked upon as a provision of grace and thus a gift (Romans 3:24; 5:16,17; Titus 3:5-7) and is appropriated by means of faith and stands in direct contrast of being attained by works (Acts 13:38, 39; Romans 3:21, 22, 26, 28, 30; 4:2-6, 9, 11, 13; 9:30-33; 10:1-13; Gal. 2:16, 17, 21; 3:6, 8, 11, 21-26; Titus 3:5).

Because this is true, you and I have nothing to boast in or of. The Scriptural evidence is so overwhelming that it is impossible to get around it. If it could have been attained by works, then it would not have been by faith. In the Heidelberg Disputation of 1518 Martin Luther made the following comments. Theology of the Cross – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology_of_the_Cross
• He is not righteous who does much, but he who, without work, believes much in Christ.
• The law says “Do this”, and it is never done. Grace says, “believe in this” and everything is already done.

II. Justification is based on the sinless life and sacrificial death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 1:17; 3:25; 5:18, 19) and thus justifying faith finds its object in the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 3:22; 4:22-24).

We must never forget that although the gift of justification is of no cost to us the securing of it for us came through His sinless life and sacrificial death (Romans 5:9).

There are several statements about faith. First, faith never operates in a vacuum. Second, faith must always have an object. Finally, the object of faith must be valid. Jesus is the only legitimate object for a faith that can justify.

III. Justification makes me what Christ is, and He, what I am (1 Cor. 1:29-31; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 4:17).

In a positional sense I am what Christ is. The practical outworking of this is the putting on of the new and the putting off of the old by the renewing of one’s mind (Ephesians 4:22-24). In so doing our Lord will be seen in our earthen vessels. It is, in this sense, that we are righteous. In truth it is His righteousness being seen in and through us. This is what Ephesians 5:9 and Philippians 1:11 are referring to. Our righteousness is actually the  outworking of His righteousness in us. It is as I become aware of what He is that I am desirous of putting on those qualities that will reveal Christ to others through me (1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 2:22; 3:16).

IV. Justification results in having peace with God, access to God, boldness before God (Romans 5:1, 2, 5, 9; 8:30, 33, 34), and frees me from sin and the wrath of God against it (Romans 5:9; 6:7 [“freed” = “justified”]).

My justification results in me having peace with God. I am no longer in a state of fear. I no longer tremble at my inability to measure up to God’s unattainable standard. I have an advocate who pleads my case (1 John 2:1, 2). My advocate asks the question, “Who shall lay anything to the charge of my elect whom I have declared righteous? Who is there among you that can condemn those whom I have freed?” The answer? NO ONE! I am free! Gloriously free! Jesus paid it all and now all to HIM I owe!

We have lived so long in bondage that we have to learn how to live as free men. We sin so naturally that we must learn how to live in righteousness just as we have lived in sin.

V. Justification results in a surrendered life to God (Romans 6:13-19; James 2:14-26; 1 Peter
2:24, 25; 1 John 2:28, 29)

Justification by faith will always bring forth the fruit of righteousness. It is not the works of the Law that justify, but a justifying faith that produces adherence to the Law. Notice how Romans 6:21, 22 and 7:4 read.
• Romans 6:21 Therefore what benefit were you then deriving from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the outcome of those things is death. 22 But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life.
• Romans 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

Only the justified can “keep” Law. It is the enabling power of God quickening me that equips me to fulfill His demands upon me (Romans 8:10). It is only as we understand the nature of God’s grace that we can live righteously (Titus 2:11-15).

Over two months passed when on August 5th the San Jose mine collapse near Copiapo, Chile, when 33 miners were trapped almost ½ a mile below ground. On October 13th, the first of the 33 miners was successfully lifted to the surface in a specially-designed rescue capsule. Friends and relatives, many of whom had camped nearby for months, slowly let their cautious optimism become joy as they were reunited with their loved ones. All of the 33 men made it safely to the surface. Friend, there was no other way except through the channel provided. Those within the room could only be saved by help outside themselves.

One individual wrote, “Watching each of those men “return from the dead” to hold their loved ones again … seeing the genuine care and concern and determination shown by their rescuers was a life changing experience for me. I hate to think how many lives have been considered ‘expendable’ in the past.”

There is only one way to be right with God and it is through Jesus Christ. Unless and until you come to Him and through Him to the Father you will forever be trapped in an inescapable hell.

According to Luther, the theologian of the cross preaches what seems foolish to the world (1 Cor. 1:18). In particular, the theologian of the cross preaches that (1) humans can in no way earn righteousness, (2) humans cannot add to or increase the righteousness of the cross, and (3) any righteousness given to humanity comes from outside of us (extra nos).
Theology of the Cross – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology_of_the_Cross

In Romans 3 the word “justified” is used several times (Rom. 3:4, 10, 20, 24, 26, 28, 30 [see also “righteous” Rom. 3:5, 21, 22, 25, 26). Only God can declare a man righteous and yet men continually seek ways to make themselves righteous.

“THERE ARE fundamentally only two doctrines of salvation: that salvation is from God, and that salvation is from ourselves. The former is the doctrine of common Christianity; the latter is the doctrine of universal heathenism. “The principle of heathenism is, negatively, the denial of the true God, and of the gift of his grace; and, positively, the notion that salvation can be secured by man’s own power and wisdom. Whether the works through which heathenism seeks the way of salvation bear a more ritual or a more ethical characteristic, whether they are of a more positive or of a more negative nature, in any case man remains his own Savior; all religions except the Christian are autosoteric . . . And philosophy has made no advance upon this.”

Being justified is an act of God (Ro 8:33) Who takes the initiative (cp Eph. 1:4, 1Pet. 1:2, 2 Thess. 2:13) and provides the means through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. The sinner who believes in Christ receives God’s gift of righteousness (Rom. 1:17, Rom. 5:17), which then enables God to  pronounce him righteous (both Just & Justifier – Rom. 3:26).

Being justified is once and for all time and as such defines the believers permanent state. Just as you may not be tried for the same crime again after being acquitted, God’s justification means you will never be tried or condemned by Him again for your sins–past, present, or future. This is good news indeed.

To reiterate, justification is not an act of God that makes us righteous but is an act of God that declares us righteous based on what Christ accomplished on Calvary.

Wayne Grudem writes, “A right understanding of justification is absolutely crucial to the whole Christian faith. Even today, a true view of justification is the dividing line between the biblical gospel of salvation by faith alone and all false gospels of salvation based on good works.

It is this truth of our just standing before the Father in the Son that we wish to note and celebrate in this study. In the next post we will look at five elements about justification within the Scripture that one must come to grips with if they will stand before God right and live free.

Romans 3:19-31
How can I be right with God? What does it mean to be right with God? How would you like to never have to worry about God being mad, angry, or upset with you? How would you like to find rest in the midst of life’s struggles? How would you like to finally measure up to God’s righteous expectations for you? Apart from sounding incredible, it also sounds impossible. But you and I can be right before God.

The book of Romans has already created a dilemma within man by revealing his position of complete spiritual bankruptcy before God (Romans 1:18-3:20). Chapter three verse ten is emphatic, “there is none righteous no not one.” In light of his condition man is barred from God’s presence, guilty of sin and a recipient of God’s full and undiluted wrath. In our next post we will consider the doctrine of justification by faith.

The “therefore” forces us back into our previous thought: Therefore remember . . . . It is a call not to forget from where you came (2:1-3) and what God has now done (2:5, 6). The entire work of God is to restore the fellowship and harmony and peace that once existed but was broken by humanity’s rebellion against Him. It is only as we declare our autonomy and make the story about us that the breach is formed and conflict exists. Oh how painfully sad whenever there is conflict and strife within the body of Christ. All of the division that exists by geography, economics, gender, race, allegiance, intellect, ability, sense or the lack thereof is corrected at the cross in the person of Christ. His work makes it possible for the curse to be reversed. It does not matter how it is expressed; in God all things are (ultimately) reconciled. As far fetched as the idea appears to be, the intent of God is to reconcile all things created (not just human relationships). The cross is God’s pronouncement as it relates to this conflict.

The entire thought of Ephesians 2:11-22 calls us to peace. The peace His people enjoy with Him and within His body was the result of God as Trinity engaging the fullness of His resources in canceling our sin debt and adopting us as sons and daughters. Thus peace is to exist where there was once separation and alienation. What was once assessed as two are now to be seen as one. God has built a good work; this work is His body, the Church. The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone. As will be seen further on in Ephesians, there is only one church.

There is no oneness apart from Him and there is no division within Him. Any time there is strife it is because we make the story about our needs, our feelings, and our wants and not about Him and what He is doing in us and through us to those around us.

It would matter little if we were far off or near. Either way, in the absence of Him we are excluded from hope and are without God in the world. The only means through which peace can be restored is in Christ. There is no peace without Him. He becomes the peace, and in His absence peace is unattainable. In Christ all barriers are broken down. He absorbs the conflict and resolves the confusion. This does not negate the hierarchy, but it does remove the conflict by lifting the curse. Its dominion over us is broken, and our citizenship within the kingdom of darkness has been transferred into the kingdom of His dear Son.

Often when we speak of local churches, we become very particular as to who is or is not acceptable. Often those we deem acceptable are those who best conform to our personal preferences and ideals. This is unfortunate and tragic. What God calls clean we have no right to call unclean. I find it tragic when some are so quick to identify those with whom they disagree as false teachers or “wolves.” False teachers and wolves are unbelievers. It is possible for a believer to believe in error or for a teacher to teach error, but this does not qualify him or her as a false teacher. And although I might not align myself ecclesiastically with all Christian churches, let us not presuppose that there is anything wrong with them or with us.

All those who profess Christ are within His one body. They have access in one Spirit to the Father. Since this is true, we need to be careful lest we judge them harshly. We should not speak ill of our brothers and sisters in Christ.

What can we do? Read the passage in front of you. Note how Christ is our peace. He is what we all have in common. Do not allow yourself to speak ill of other people or the churches they attend. If you find yourself disagreeing with the position others hold to, learn to disagree agreeably. Do not complain. Grumbling is so unbecoming of Christ and His Church. Learn to celebrate the enormous diversity that exists inside the one body of Christ. It is small of you when you cannot enjoy the vast variety that does exist in the larger body of Christ.

I believe all of us are on a journey of discovery. We must always learn to think bigger than we are and larger than our own presuppositions and comfort zones. It is only as we embrace the one body of Christ and Christ as her head that we can be at peace within the larger community of faith.

Learn to live at peace with yourself and then with others. It is only when you live at peace that you will be able to speak peace. Oh may God enlarge our hearts so that we can embrace the diversity and celebrate the enormous richness within our immediate fellowship and then that of the larger body of Christ even when it would appear significantly different than who we are in our pursuit of God.

May we continue to be a place where peace is preached and the walls of separation once for all removed by the person and work of God are never rebuilt.

By Pastor Patrick J. Griffiths. For more information see the Waukesha Bible Church series on Ephesians.

Whatever Paul brings to the table in 4:1 and following is a consequence of his previous thought. Paul begins in verse 4:1 by imploring his audience “to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which they have been called.” Somehow we have twisted the thought of walking worthy to mean something that is meritorious and thus resulting in our acceptance before the Father. Yet everything up to this point clearly points out how our acceptance before and access to the Father is firmly rooted in and flowing from our in Christ status (1:5; 2:18; 3:12).

“He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will” (Eph. 1:5).

“For through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father” (Eph. 2:18).

“In whom we have boldness and confident access through faith in Him” (Eph. 3:12).

The thought of worthy is something that is compatible with or suitable to. Paul’s simple thought is that our lives should mimic our spiritual union with Christ. Whatever we are in Christ we should be while in the world. It is His life flowing into us and thus flowing out of us. Although it might be anti-climatic, let us not forget that the “us” of Ephesians is the “we” of the church and not the “us” of isolated independent individualism.

Paul’s primary point in the first six verses is for His church to look unified because it is unified (vv. 1-6) and the only way this unity can become tangible is through the design depicted in verses 7-16. His language is intense, “Being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” New Testament commentator Markus Barth seeks to capture the intensity of speech used by the apostle.

“It is hardly possible to render exactly the urgency contained in the underlying Greek verb. Not only haste and passion, but a full effort of the whole man is meant, involving his will, sentiment, reason, physical strength, and total attitude. The imperative mood of the participle found in the Greek text excludes passivity, quietism, a wait-and-see attitude, or a diligence tempered by all deliberate speed. Yours is the initiative! Do it now! Mean it! You are to do it! I mean it! – such are the overtones in verse 3.” (Markus Barth, The Anchor Bible, Ephesians 4-6, 428).

The worthy walk does not attain unity or create something that previously did not exist. A walk marked by unity is equal with and suitable to the unity we already have in Christ. The worthy walk is a consequence, not a causation of. But why is the church one? Let us answer this from the response given by Paul in verses 4-6.

4 “There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:4-6).

In verses 4 through 6 we have a confession or creed of the early church. The intent is to show the God-ward makeup of the New Testament Church. There is a singularity and solidarity to the body of Christ that transcends every ethnic, geographic, cultural, gender, or financial identifiers. In fact, the only thing that identifies the body of Christ is: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father.

It is interesting to see how the New Testament takes away everything our present age deems necessary and essential. The church of Christ is not marked by its cosmetic covering, but by its essential energy.

Like Joseph’s coat of many colors, the one body of Christ is made up of unlimited colors and threads, but the coat itself is still singular. There is only one Holy Spirit. There is only one destiny to which all of His people long for and hope in. There is only one King to whom His church bows. There is only one object believed in that makes faith salvific. There is only one baptism that places the believing into the body and thus comprising the one body. There is only one God and Father of all who is ruling all and controlling all. Regardless as to what flag each of the individual parts flies under and stands by it bears the standard of the King of kings and Lord of lords.

In the early centuries of the Christian church they were without a finalized New Testament canon. There were copies of Paul’s letters in circulation and the truths of Jesus Christ were communicated orally, but there was still a dynamic and fluid existence that is somewhat incapable of being experienced by the Western 21st century church. In the midst of this dynamic the church penned creeds and confessions so that what was known was clearly defined and those who would gather in the name of Jesus would rally around a common thought. The Apostles Creed was one such rallying cry. Read carefully the words penned below and seek to understand them in the context of the early 1st century church. May His people continue to rally around the great truths of the Christian faith.

THE APOSTLES’ CREED
I believe in God the Father Almighty; Maker of heaven and earth.
And in Jesus Christ His only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; the third day He rose from the dead; He ascended into heaven; and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit; the holy catholic Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.

I am confident that all who read this can identify with Paul’s dilemma as lamented in Romans 7:19. Those who do not identify fall into one of two categories: those who are spiritually dead as an unbeliever, and those who are spiritually deceived as a believer.

Honesty and transparency are difficult, for they leave us vulnerable. The alternative, however, is mask wearing, and I have always found mask wearing to be uncomfortable as well as stifling and “plastic.”

So, let us be honest – both you and I struggle. While we do not struggle with the truth claims of faith, we do struggle with our progression forward. We want to see Him and have Him use us in an unprecedented way. We want to see Him with the eye of faith. We want to believe that which awaits us can swallow up the trials of this temporal world. We want to believe that somehow in the midst of all this “craziness” God is in control. And yet . . . we struggle. We struggle at work; we struggle with our kids; we struggle with our spouse; and we struggle financially, emotionally, physically, and, at times, spiritually. We just flat out struggle. Life is hard; nothing appears to be easy. We want the supernatural and miraculous. We want God to snap His fingers and fix all of our problems. Yet despite all of these desires, it is still incredibly difficult to do right when wrong is so easy.

Such candid speech can leave us breathless. What if people knew what you were really like? Does that scare you? Friend, God knows, and if we would be honest with each other we would find that our
experiences are common to all of our brothers and sisters in Christ. If I am not mistaken, this is one of the points in First Corinthians 10:13.

No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.

So, in a sense we just “aired our dirty laundry.” Every one now knows what a loser you and I really are – so what! I believe Paul did the same in Romans 7: he admitted the struggle between what he knew as true (i.e., his theology) and what he faced in every day life (i.e., his experience/obedience).

Admitting the struggle is not failure. Transparent honesty is far better than tragic hypocrisy. Failure is never fatal. The point of the struggle can be seen in Romans 7:24 and 25:

Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

We have to see ourselves as wretched before we will fully lean on Jesus Christ. The experiences of our lives show us that we cannot, but Jesus can. Our experience is a daily cry for help. The best activity we can engage in is one that allows us to see who we are in light of who He is.

I want an easy life. Moreover, if the truth be told, I want a perfect life. Fortunately, all I want and need I already have. As far as the sense experience is concerned, that too will come . . . in due time. Some day I will shed this “jar of clay” and will see Him face to face. In that day, I will be like Him for I will see Him (1 John 3:1-3).

So, be encouraged! Your daily “failure” is bringing you to the end of yourself and closer to Him. Always remember, “God is faithful, who will with the temptation provide . . . .”

By Pastor Patrick J. Griffiths. For more information see the Waukesha Bible Church series on Galatians.

OCTOBER 31, 1517

Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the
following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the
presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of
Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place.
Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and
debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite,
willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e.,
confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward
repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the
flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self
continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until
our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties
other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by
that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has
been remitted by God and by assenting to God’s remission; though, to be
sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his
right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would
remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time,
humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the
priest. 8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and,
according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his
decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of
necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the
case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory
is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops
slept.

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but
before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already
dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love,
of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller
the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing
of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is
very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair,
almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow
less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are
outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them,
are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite
certain of it.

20. Therefore by “full remission of all penalties” the pope means not
actually “of all,” but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that
by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according
to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life. 23. If it is
at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties
whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to
the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people
are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release
from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is
just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way,
within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in
purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess),
but by way of intercession.

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the
money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain
and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the
Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out
of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that
he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man
who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who
believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of
pardon.

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope’s
pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to
Him;

34. For these “graces of pardon” concern only the penalties of
sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not
necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy
confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of
penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the
blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God,
even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of
the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised,
for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one
and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and
[the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only
relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an
occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people
may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the
buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends
to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by
pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and
passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the
indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they
need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own
families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter
of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons,
needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the
money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful, if
they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through
them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of
the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter’s church should
go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and
bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope’s wish, as it
is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom
certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St.
Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even
though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake
his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God
be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be
preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal
or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a
very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions
and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing,
should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a
hundred ceremonies.

56. The “treasures of the Church,” out of which the pope grants
indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of
Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many
of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only
gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without
the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross,
death, and hell for the outward man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the
Church’s poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his
own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by
Christ’s merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved
cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the
glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first
to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most
acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they
formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish
for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the “greatest graces”
are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the
grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of
apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend
with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of
the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be
anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the
pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive
the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the
pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man
even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of
God–this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to
remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not
bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against
the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope
at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers,
gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set
up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross
of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be
spread among the people, will have an account to render. 81. This
unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for
learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or
even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit:–”Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of
holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he
redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money
with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just;
the latter is most trivial.”

83. Again:–”Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead
continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the
endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the
redeemed?”

84. Again:–”What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money
they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory
the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that
pious and beloved soul’s own need, free it for pure love’s sake?”

85. Again:–”Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact
and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of
indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?”

86. Again:–”Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than
the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with
his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?”

87. Again:–”What is it that the pope remits, and what participation
does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full
remission and participation?”

88. Again:–”What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the
pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow
on every believer these remissions and participations?”

89. “Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls
rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons
granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?”

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force
alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the
Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make
Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and
mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they
would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of
Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ,
“Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following
Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many
tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.

The Architecture of Theology

Theology is a vast and rigorous discipline. The historicity and complexity of Christian theology as a discipline is captured by J. I. Packer’s succinct statement:

For eighteen centuries Christian thinkers have pursued a discipline – variously called first principles (so Origen), wisdom (so Augustine), theology (so Thomas Aquinas), Christian philosophy and doctrine (so Calvin), dogmatics (so Reformational and Catholic teachers since the seventeenth century), and systematic theology (so American protestant teachers since the nineteenth century) – that seeks a full and integrated account of all Christian truth. Books developing this discipline have borne a variety of titles – enchiridion (handbook), ekdosis (exposition), sententiae (opinions), summa (full statements), commentarius (survey), loci communes (topics of shared concerns), institutio (basic instruction), medulla (marrow, as in bones), syntagma (arrangement), and synopsis (overview), among others – and have been put together in many different ways.1

To simplify such complexity, Alister McGrath pictures an “architecture of theology”, a basic taxonomy that gives a theological synopsis and structure to this demanding discipline. It encompasses a number of related fields, notably that of biblical theology, systematic theology, historical theology, pastoral theology and philosophical theology.2

Defining the Theological Task

The chief task of theology, Millard J. Erickson contends, is the exercise which “strives to give a coherent statement based on the doctrines of the Christian faith…based primarily upon the Scriptures, on the culture and rooted in the issues of life.”3 Important as this task is, we must bear in mind that it is not a restricted one. Everyone has a theology, whether they know it or not, and whether they can articulate it or not. We all have a particular view of God. In this broad sense, everyone is a theologian with a privileged responsibility of thinking deliberately about God.

Theology belongs to the people. It is therefore not to be confined to the distinguished halls of intellectual institutions, sprouting long incomprehensible theological jargons from dusty large books with incredibly small print. There is obviously a significant place for theological institutions in the life of the church but a wider engagement of theological reflection, outside the hallowed halls of academia, must be encouraged to take place.

At the heart of true theology is the essential and intimate knowledge of the Almighty God. “Theology” therefore is the devout contemplation of God, by the people of God, resulting in a growing understanding of God’s essential nature and will, through the revealed Word; so that lives are transformed through the practice and teaching of that which is learnt. Such theology, with a high view of God that is informed by the Scriptures, is not dry but dynamic!

In the light of this grand theological task for the people of God, I want to briefly examine how theology should be done. There are at least six fundamental necessities for doing theology well. This paper briefly examines these six basic building-blocks; namely, (1) the necessity of theological vision, (2) the necessity of theological foundation, (3) the necessity of theological contemplation, (4) the necessity of theological pedagogy, (5) the necessity of theological holism and (6) the necessity of theological humility.

The Necessity of Theological Vision

The church faces a serious theological crisis. The ideological virus of postmodern humanism has been so entrenched in our ‘Christian’ mindsets that our ability to think deeply about the things of God has been entirely compromised, often without our realizing it. Herein lays the severity of the problem. We are unaware of the compromised extent to which our thinking has been shaped by a secular mindset. We accept as a norm the profound lack of willingness, or ability, to think deeply and consistently about truth. We are lulled into a passive mode of thinking which militates against vital theological reflection. Instead of countering the fallacy of secular philosophy with rich biblical and theological truths, and a deep life congruent with those truths, we live in a generation where a sound theological foundation is ignored; or worse, even snubbed upon.

Unexamined assumptions thus shape the intellectual contours of a lazy generation, tainting the moral and spiritual landscape of the soul. As such, one of the distinct weaknesses of the modern church is that of having zeal without knowledge. We end up with a superficial faith without a deep theological foundation. Indeed, as it has been popularly said, thinking without roots will result in flower but no fruit. In the contemporary revolution of ideas, what engages the Christian mind is no longer “what’s true” but rather “what works”. Truth has often been sacrificed upon the altar of pragmatism. Of course, pragmatism has its value. But when “what works” supersedes “what’s true”, we engage life with a severe short-sightedness that will sabotage both a deep soul and a lasting spiritual legacy. For at the root of this critical problem is the  emergent crisis of theological rootlessness in both our way of thinking and our basic orientation to life.

What the church needs today is theological vision. We must once again return to the cultivation of a right and high view of God. It is the ability to intelligently and meaningfully examine the condition of life and its presuppositions of thought in the light of who God is as revealed in the Scriptures. In Lints’ definition,

To frame a theological vision is simply to attempt to capture in a careful and deliberate manner this ‘way of thinking’ about God, the world, and ourselves. A theological vision seeks to capture the entire counsel of God as revealed in the Scriptures and to communicate it in a conceptuality that is native to the theologian’s own age.4

The church needs to think aright about God. This necessity is a critical one. A. W. Tozer, on reflecting on the attributes of God, most rightly concluded:

What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us . . . The history of mankind will probably show that no people has ever risen above its religion, and man’s spiritual history will positively demonstrate that no religion has ever been greater than its idea of God.5

Life without God is surely a contradiction of terms. Indeed, we need to think aright about God. As the book of Ecclesiastes reminds us, life without God is spiritually barren, philosophically sterile, existentially meaningless and thus ultimately futile. Right theology is certainly positive and life-giving. It affirms humanity’s destiny, addressing at its most fundamental level the theological agenda of who we are, and how we ought to live, in the light of who God is. The church needs such a theocentricity that is largely missing in our contemporary culture.

The Necessity of Theological Foundation

The very idea of the thinkability of God is both a grand and profound one. How can one possibly conceive God? How can that which is finitely finite understand the One who is infinitely infinite? The divine God is totally and eternally beyond human comprehension. To comprehend God would be exceedingly more confounding than for a toddler to understand a post-graduate philosophical discussion of Nietzsche’s impact upon the critical theories of deconstructionism and post-structuralism. It is like trying to describe three-dimensional realities to someone else if both were to have lived all their lives in a two-dimensional world.

Divine revelation is therefore the key to theology. It is centered upon the very idea of the self-disclosure of God. Thus, neither reason nor tradition nor experience is an adequate foundation for thinking aright about God; for unless God reveals himself, our human faculties fail us most miserably. The canonical Scriptures, the agent of divine revelation, are the true and God-appointed foundation for faith and theological reflection. Indeed, the most important world we live in is the unseen world, and the most precious commodity in the unseen world is truth; and this truth is founded upon the Word of God.

Yet, although sola scriptura was one of the great resounding battle-cries of the Reformation, some theologians today have misguidedly questioned the high place assigned to revelation.6 It is thus fundamental to affirm that revelation is “the primary source of theology, and is also a basic category in theological thinking.”7 The importance of biblical authority lies in the evangelical premise that “the doctrine of the Bible controls all other doctrines of the Christian faith.”8 It is most important that we get our theology right and that our theology be informed by the Scriptures, the Word of God.

Submission to the Scriptures is foundational to doing theology well. In reflecting on the epistemological issues which underlie biblical hermeneutics, Pratt reviews both subjectivism, expressed in much liberation and feminist hermeneutics (“bringing the text to our level”), and objectivism, expressed in much of most evangelical hermeneutics (“raising our understanding to the level of the Scriptures itself”); and calls for an authority-dialogue model which “keeps the Bible supreme and the reader a servant of the text.”9 Because theology is essentially centered upon God’s self-disclosure, it is obvious that the basis for doing theology should be the Scriptures.

Even so, important as the Scriptures are to doing theology well, it is not given by God to be an end in itself but for the basic purpose of revealing Jesus Christ (John 5:39; cf. Psa 40:7). One of the most remarkable tenets of Christianity is the fact that we can meaningfully think about God, not just because he has revealed his truth to us, but because he has revealed Himself to us in Christ. As far as God is concerned, ultimate truth is not merely Proposition-bound but Person-bound. Christ is the absolute anchor to doing theology well.

Hence, a strong theological foundation, both in the written Word (the Bible) and the living Word (Jesus Christ, the logos of God in John’s Prologue) must fundamentally inform and inspire our theologizing.

The Necessity of Theological Contemplation

Our generation of Christians however is largely tutored in theological content, if they are tutored at all, rather than in the art of theological contemplation. The aim of theological contemplation is not merely to help us think more deeply about God, or to think more intelligently about God, or to think more clearly about God. Rather, the aim of theological contemplation is to help us think more godly about God. That which informs the mind must also inspire the heart.

We can neither overlook nor dismiss the fact that in our milieu the theological pedagogy continues in much the same old fashion. We are still tutored by the lectio, the quaestio, and the disputatio in dogmatic theology. The doctrine of the historic Christian faith is first set forth, then defended on the basis of Scripture and the tradition of Christian thought, and then we move into theological speculations and inquiries.10

Theological content aims at imparting information about God, telling us what we should believe about him. Important as theological information might be, it is grossly inadequate to establish a vital spirituality. For at the heart of theology is thinking godly about God. To many, God is regarded as irrelevant except for emergencies only. People approach God as a “quick fix” to their problems. Many in the church have drifted from sound theological moorings, searching frantically for a quick fix to their problems. The contemporary malaise of irreverence towards God stems from the worldview that God is irrelevant to practical living. Theology thus becomes the Cinderella of the church, unwooed and unsought. At the heart of such shallowness in theological thinking is the fallacy of the truncated Gospel and the domestication of God in postmodern culture. We must return to strong theological roots for practical Christian discipleship. We have a God who is immensely relevant to every facet of life. Let us engage life theologically.

There are at least three fundamental questions to guide us in such contemplation: (1) what is the essential nature of God and his kingdom? (2) what is the fundamental purpose of God in the light of his essential nature? And (3) what are the unchanging principles by which God deals with humankind, in view of his essential Being and his essential purpose? Such theological contemplation probes the emerging realities of life in view of the sovereignty of God, which must be once again declared over human affairs and destinies.

The Necessity of Theological Pedagogy

Theology must be pedagogical. There is a vital element of teaching the truth, not just of acquiring it. To do so, we must rise above theological ambiguities. Granted that every discipline has its distinctively technical terms, there are ways of communicating the same ideas that would either unfold its meaning or confound it. I have read theological writings that are lucid and compelling (even though technical theological jargon is employed). However, I have also read some that are utterly confounding, not because the ideas are difficult to understand but precisely because the pedagogy of theology is ignored; and the author is in fact a rather poor communicator, untutored in pedagogical principles, who has confused the incoherent profusion of words for the intellectual profundity of ideas. In the twenty-first century, even homiletics has progressed to help preachers move from archaic expressions of words to connect with the contemporary audience. Why would not more theologians pay attention to the application and communication of truth rather than merely the acquisition of it (cf. Ezra 7:10)?

A worthy consideration in contemporary theological pedagogy is the narrative as a fresh conduit of truth. The story, along with the principles gleaned from the plot, becomes the central motif for theological reflection. In discussing narrative as a forum and motif of doing theology, Lints reminds us that the Bible is not “given at one time, nor in the form of a theological dictionary. . .It is a book full of dramatic interest and comes complete with major and minor plots.” (1993:274). Indeed, the Scriptures weave a narrative of God’s unfailing faithfulness and tutor our faith in him.

Consider the narrative as an essential part of theological pedagogy. The way the Jewish culture teaches about God, as opposed to the Western propositional approach, is instructive. Within the conservative Jewish culture, at least two things deserve our immediate attention. First, God was not just taught in theological schools but more significantly, in the homes. Fathers are to be the theological educators in the family! When Christian fathers abdicate this God-given responsibility, we find a generation that is biblically illiterate and theologically impoverished. The church (and theological institutions) ought to complement the home (and equip the fathers!) but the foundation of theological education rests in the home (Deut 4:9-10; cf. 32:7).

The second thing that calls for immediate attention is that within the home, theology was not taught in the Jewish family by way of propositional truth. The father did not say, “Son, let me tell you, God is good. And son, remember, God is great…” No, he tells a story! The father would narrate the accounts of Noah and the ark, Abraham and his exploits of faith, Moses and the mighty deliverance from Egypt etc. Through these great biblical narratives, their concept of God is shaped. And the wise, godly father would speak with such holy awe that it wasn’t merely the narrative plot that gripped the imagination of the child, it was the sense of the father’s reverence for God that is communicated to his children as a profound theological legacy.

Such “narrative” theology must nonetheless be applied to life and not remain merely a good story irrelevant to life. Goldberg highlights that there are three critical issues that any narrative theology must face: (1) the question of Truth – the relationship between story and experience; (2) the question of Meaning – the hermeneutic involved for understanding stories aright; and (3) the question of Rationality – the charge of moral relativism.11 Might I add a fourth: the question of Application; for it is in the application of the narrative that the greatest hermeneutical challenge lies. It is in the application that the elements of truth, meaning and rationality are caused to bear upon the circumstance or condition of life.

The Necessity of Theological Holism

Theological holism is integrating truth with life. Adapting the thought from Cole’s article on holistic spirituality in the Reformed Theological Review,12 it may be proposed that there are four basic building blocks to holistic theological integration: (1) Orthodoxy. There is a need for right doctrines of truth; (2) Orthopraxy. There is a need for right practice as a responsibility towards truth; (3) Orthokardia There is a need for right response of the heart in truth; and (4) Orthokoinonia There is a need for the right community for truth.

Obviously, theology is more than just orthodoxy, it also involves right practice (orthopraxis). In the Scriptures, right practice is both the desired outcome as well as the imperative for right doctrine (e.g. Romans 1-11 doctrine, 12-16 practice; or Ephesians 1-3 doctrine, 4-6 practice). Moreover, the aim of orthopraxis is more than just applying the truth; rather it is applying for a redemptive and transformational purpose. As Lamb puts it, orthopraxis

. . . aims at transforming human history, redeeming it through a knowledge born of subject empowering, life-giving love, which heals the biases needlessly victimizing millions of our brothers and sisters. Vox victimarum vox Dei. The cries of the victims are the voice of God. To the extent that those cries are not heard above the din of our political, cultural, economic, social, and ecclesial celebrations or bickerings, we have already begun a descent into hell. (1982:22f.)

In doing theology, the importance of community must not be overlooked. A right community (orthokoinonia) is needed for a dynamic transformational orthopraxis. For truth, and the application of it, is best done in the context of interpersonal relationships. In any theological discussion of truth, for example, due consideration might be given to earlier reflections, such as the Pennabergian, Barthian and Hegelian worldview pertinent to the rhetoric of truth, and of Niebuhr’s postulation of truth and culture. Nonetheless, I would like to contribute to this discussion a most simple observation: Truth is best communicated in the realm of interpersonal relationships.

It comes as no surprise therefore that “some of the most effective learning in systematic theology courses in colleges and seminaries often occurs outside the classroom in informal conversations among students who are attempting to understand Bible doctrines for themselves.”13 A faith community of collaborative theological learners is formed. In such a community, there is a vital non-formal aspect to theological education. There is thus a need to engage theology not just by way of individual contemplations of truth but more importantly, in a faith community of collaborative theological learning. This is how theology is best done!

The Necessity of Theological Humility

Knowledge puffs up (1 Cor 8:1) but theology that is done well humbles. For at the heart of theological education is not to exchange an empty mind for a full one, but rather to exchange an empty mind for an open yet discerning mind. And a mind that is discerningly open and openly discerning understands and appreciates the richness and depth of theological contemplation, such that it is genuinely humbled by the finiteness of the human mind to grasp and comprehend an infinite God.

The aim of theology, as Wells alluded to, is not to “master” the subject of God by the formulation of theological knowledge but rather to come to both the realization and appreciation of its utter inexhaustibility. For God, unlike the periodical table, cannot be quantified and analyzed.14 Such true and inexhaustible theology humbles us. A discerning perception of theology is the understanding that it is always an unfinished task. As Barr points out, “Cross-cultural theological discussion exposes the limits of every theological view and reminds those engaged in such discussion that theology is never, at least in this life, finished.”15

Another aspect of the humbling is that we need each other. No man is an island in the construction of informed theological thought and convictions. D.A. Carson, commenting on the integratedness of theological paradigms, compared the systematic theologian with a juggler, keeping many intellectual balls up in the air:

Unlike balls whirling through the air by the juggler’s skill, the various ingredients that constitute systematic theology are not independent. Drop a ball and the other balls are unaffected; drop, say historical theology and not only does the entire discipline of systematic theology change its shape, but the other ingredients are adversely affected. Without historical theology for instance, exegesis is likely to degenerate into arcane, atomistic debates far too tightly tethered to the twentieth century.16

As such, there is a place for humility to learn from the past as we theologize in the present for the future. The one who misguidedly spurns a theological tradition, rather than taps from it, misses doing theology well. As Cole puts it, “Theological thinking is also historical thinking. The theologian has behind him or her the great stream of Christian thought. To ignore the past would be an immense folly.”17 This thought is likewise affirmed by Spykman who declared that “tradition is the very lifeblood of theology… No healthy theology ever arises de novo. By honoring sound tradition, theological continuity with the past is assured.”18 The link with our theological roots and the ability to hear one another is a mark of theological humility.

Conclusion

To become a Christian is not to engage in intellectual suicide. On the contrary, it calls for clear thinking that stems from loving God with all that we are, including a love that is sustained and nourished by right thinking. As Wolfhart Pannenberg has aptly commented: “Argumentation and the operation of the Holy Spirit are not in competition with each other. In trusting in the Holy Spirit Paul in no way spared himself thinking or arguing.”19 There is no place for anti-intellectualism in Christianity. The greatest need of this generation is the intentional development of biblically grounded, theologically sound and spiritually vital disciples of Christ.

As such, theological leadership is vital to the health of the contemporary church. We must do what we can to strengthen the cord. Our purpose and priorities must be clear. The pulpits of local churches must make a radical shift from exhortation or worse, mere entertainment, to sound exegesis and biblical exposition. The rise of biblical illiteracy must be addressed. Sound theological thinking must be returned to the people of God. And such theology should be done contritely, conscientiously and corporately. We are grateful that we have the God-given faculty to think about God meaningfully because the Almighty has chosen to reveal himself to us and to call us into a living relationship with him. Thus, we must go beyond a mere attempt to do theology as merely an intellectual exercise; but rather to integrate it into the whole of life and faith.

We increasingly realize our inadequacy in such a profound intellectual, spiritual and communal exercise. Yet the wonderful privilege and the critical responsibility of doing theology today invite us to such a glorious undertaking. For theology done well is both the act and foundation for the true worship of God, who alone is the adored and inexhaustible subject of all our finest but finite attempts at theologizing. And in the final analysis, this is how theology should essentially be done. For the true worship of the Almighty God, who has revealed himself through the Scriptures and in Christ, is the distinguishing mark of doing theology well.

1 Packer, J. I. Is Systematic Theology a Mirage? An Introductory Discussion, p. 17.

2 McGrath, Alister E. Christian Theology: An Introduction, p. 119-123.

3 Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology, 1986, p.21.

4 Lints, Richard. 1993. The Fabric of Theology: A Prolegomenon to Evangelical Theology, p. 8-9.

5 Tozer, A. W. 1965. The Knowledge of the Holy, p. 9.

6 Cf. F. Gerald Downing’s Has Christianity a Revelation?

7 Macquarrie, John. Principles of Christian Theology, p.6

8 Henry, Carl F. H. 1964. Frontiers in Modern Theology, p.138.

9 Pratt, Richard J. He Gave Us Stories, p. 33.

10 Vidales, Raul. Methodical Issues in Liberation Theology, p.35.

11 Goldberg, Michael. 1982. Theology and Narrative. Nashville: Abingdon, p. 192.

12 Cole, Graham A. At the Heart of a Christian Spirituality, p. 49-61.

13 Grudem, Wayne. 1994. Systematic Theology, p. 35.

14 Wells, David. The Theologian’s Craft, p. 171.

15 Barr, William R. Re-forming Theology in the Global Conversation, p.8.

16 Carson, D. A. The Role of Exegesis in Systematic Theology, p. 39.

17 Cole, Graham A. Thinking Theologically, p.52.

18 Spykman, Gordon J., Reformational Theology: Paradigm for Doing Dogmatics, p.5.

19 Pannenberg, Wolfhart. 1971. Basic Questions in Theology, Vol. II, p. 35.

Bibliography

Barr, William R. 1997. “Re-forming Theology in the Global Conversation” In

Constructive Christian Theology in the Worldwide Church. Grand Rapids, MI:

Eerdmans.

Carson, D. A. 1994. “The Role of Exegesis in Systematic Theology” In Doing Theology

in Today’s World, John D. Woodbridge and Thomas Edward McComiskey.

Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Cole, Graham. 1989. “Thinking Theologically.” The Reformed Theological Review. Vol.

48, No. 2

_________ 1993. “At the Heart of a Christian Spirituality.” The Reformed Theological

Review. Vol. 52, No. 2

Erickson, Millard J. 1986. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Goldberg, Michael. 1982. Theology and Narrative. Nashville: Abingdon.

Grudem, Wayne. 1994. Systematic Theology. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.

Henry, Carl F. H. 1964. Frontiers in Modern Theology. Chicago, IL: Moody Press.

Lamb, Matthew L. 1982. Solidarity with Victims: Toward a Theology of Social

Transformation. New York: Crossroad.

Lints, Richard. 1993. The Fabric of Theology: A Prolegomenon to Evangelical Theology.

Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Macquarrie, John. 1966. Principles of Christian Theology. New York: Charles Scribner’s

Sons.

McGrath, Alister E. 1994. Christian Theology: An Introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell

Publishers.

Packer, J. I. 1994. “Is Systematic Theology a Mirage?: An Introductory Discussion.” In

Doing Theology in Today’s World, John D. Woodbridge and Thomas Edward

McComiskey. Grand rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Pannenberg, Wolfhart. 1971. Basic Questions in Theology, Vol. II. London: SCM Press.

Pratt, Richard J. 1990. He Gave Us Stories: The Bible Student’s Guide To Interpreting

Old Testament Narratives. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing.

Spykman, Gordon J., 1992. Reformational Theology: Paradigm for Doing Dogmatics.

Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Tozer, A. W. 1965. The Knowledge of the Holy. London: James Clarke.

Vidales, Raul. 1979. “Methodological Issues in Liberation Theology” In Frontiers of

Theology in Latin America. Rosino Gibellini, ed. Maryknoll: Orbis.

Wells, David. 1991. “The Theologian’s Craft” In Doing Theology in Today’s World, John

D. Woodbridge and Thomas Edward McComiskey. Grand Rapids, MI:

Zondervan.

This article can be found in the Common Ground Journal.

© Copyright 2006. Common Ground Journal. All rights reserved.
ISSN: 1547-9129. www.commongroundjournal.org

Paul continues to show the immeasurable nature of God’s redeeming grace by noting the context in which it took place.  It is as if he provides the reader with a snapshot or summary of the whole story from beginning to end.  It is because we were dead in our trespasses that God would have to forgive us by means of redeeming us from sin’s debt (1:7).  Verses 2 and 3 describe the state of what all once were prior to their adoption as sons and daughters (1:5).

Verses 1 through 3 do not distinguish between male or female, Jew or Gentile, bond or free.  All are in the same dead state brought on by trespass and sin.  Paul highlights the enemies of grace: the world, the devil, and the flesh.  All three work to overthrow and undercut the provision of God for the inability of man.  Verse 4 acts as a sharp contrast to the initial three verses.  It functions as an explosion of hope.  In contrast to all that we are, here stands God who is rich in mercy and great in love.  He does not allow us to continue as we were but sets us on a path of life and light.  Because of who God is in essence, all His actions are inseparably linked to and flowing from this abundant resource.

The text speaks to our past, what we once were (vv. 1-3).  It then addresses the present by noting how we are alive together with Christ and have been raised up with Him and seated with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus (vv. 5, 6).  We often fail to appreciate the already-not yet aspect of faith.  We are already alive, raised, and seated, yet there is more.

Verse 7 paints a picture of the future.  The Church is a trophy of His surpassing grace, a grace marked by richness and kindness.  There is something lavish about what God does for those whom He loves.

Everything the church enjoys is a result of a freely bestowed gift (v. 8-10).  This gift as such was incapable of being earned through works, thus no one can boast.  The Church is the work of His hands and through which He works His good work.  This is the story God wrote beforehand and it is in this story we are to walk.

Throughout this short letter, Paul speaks of God’s superabundant activities flowing from Himself to His people.  Such words as “rich, lavish, surpassing greatness, surpassing riches, unfathomable riches, surpasses knowledge and far more abundantly beyond all that we ask or think” (1:7, 8, 18, 19; 2:4, 7; 3:8, 16, 18, 19, 20) are employed in an attempt to capture the magnitude of God’s person and work to redeem His people from sin’s debt and to adopt them as sons.  All of this was written by Him into His story (1:4, 5, 9, 11, 21; 2:7, 10; 3:11).

Paul’s opening sentence reaches from verse 3 to verse 14.  Here is an avalanche of descriptive words that unveil what God did in the securing of His people for Himself.  Here we read of God as a tri-unity working (energy) to secure for Himself worshipping sons and daughters.  Our passage speaks of God the Father blessing (v. 3), choosing (v. 4) and adopting (vv. 5, 6) trespassers into His family.  We can equally note the activity of the Son to redeem slaves by forgiving debt by means of His own substitutionary and voluntary death (vv. 7, 8).  It is the Son who makes known to us the mystery of their eternal purpose (vv. 9, 10), how from rebellion, division, and damnation He brings peace, harmony, and life.  It is through Him and in Him all things created find the object that silences the rage from within and the loneliness that robs and destroys.  What is the outcome, the inheritance of His activity?  Through Him, the alienated are adopted, the rebel is restored, the indebted are pardoned and the forsaken are chosen.

None of this is left to the recipient.  The work, all of it in every area, is left to the free bestowal and lavish dispensing of His grace.  He seals His people with the Holy Spirit of promise.  This pledge, the seal, determines ownership and guarantees the outcome (vv. 13, 14).

God’s end game is that all things would be “to the praise of His glory” (vv. 6, 12, 14).  A means to that end, at least in Ephesians, is by the redeeming of His people from sin and the adopting of the same as sons and daughters.  These redeemed trespassers constitute His body, the Church.  It is this Church that now becomes the means whereby God is glorified by all things outside of Himself.  God did/does what no one else could do.  He redeemed those who trespassed against Him, and He was fully engaged, in His essence and economy, in and during the entire process.

In this initial assault on our sensibility, there are hints given as to the extremity of His activity.  Words such as bless assumes a state of being cursed; chosen assumes rejection, adoption presupposes abandonment, redemption takes for granted debt,  making known demands previous blindness, inheritance speaks to disenfranchised, sealing and pledge contrasts with uncertainty and ambiguity.

All of the negatives are descriptive of a previously existing condition.  There was nothing the cursed, rejected, abandoned, indebted, blind, disenfranchised and unstable could do to undo their preexisting condition.  It is only as the Trinitarian God freely bestows and lavishly dispenses His resources without condition that the abandoned can become sons through adoption.

Where does this lead us?  This leads us to the foot of His cross and to the glory of His throne.  There is only one response that is appropriate and it is one of humble adoration and praise.  We have no boast but the cross.  He is our life and our living.  What can we do but praise Him.  He is the substance from which life makes sense.  May we the redeemed gladly and openly declare our eternal indebtedness to the One whose essence and economy secures us from sin’s debt and adopts us as sons.