The Distractions and Worship of Theology

So a innocent remark or two from me about the contoversy in some quarters that surrounds penal substitution becomes a broadside against theology or a supposed worship of it. The worship of theology or the word was absolutely light years away from my thinking as I made a few brief remarks that I thought might be interesting and generate a few remarks. It's amazing how folks can take simple things and run with them. My my!

Brother Blaine,

I agree with you that because men love their own opinions more than the teaching of the Holy Spirit illuminating the scriptures that these endless discussions on theology have drawn many away from the pure devotion to Jesus Christ to the eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

He is the Word. "In the beginning was the Word", and the meaning of that designation is just this, that God has made Himself intelligible to us in a Person, not in a book. God has not first of all written a book, although we have the Bible. God has written a Person. In one of his little booklets, Dr. A. B. Simpson has this illustration, or illustrates this thing in this way. He says that on one occasion he saw the Constitution of the United States written, and it was written on a parchment. He was near to it, and could read all the details of the Constitution of the United States. But as he stood back from that parchment, some yards off, all he could see was the head of George Washington there on the parchment. Then he drew near again and saw the Constitution was so written in light and shadow as to take the shape of the head of George Washington. That is it. God has written the revelation of Himself, but it is in the Person of His Son, the Headship of the Lord Jesus, and you cannot have the constitution of heaven, except in the Person, and the constitution of heaven is the Person in the shape of God's Son.

This is only an affirmation of things. I do trust you will take hold of the fact stated and go to the Lord with this. Do not ask for light as some thing; ask for a fuller knowledge of the Lord Jesus. That is the way, for that is the only living way to know Him: and remember God always keeps the knowledge of Himself in Christ bound up with practical situations. That cuts both ways. We have to be in the situation. The Holy Spirit will bring us, if we are in His hand, into the situation which will make necessary a new knowledge of the Lord. That is one side. The other side is that, if we are in a situation which is a very hard and a very difficult one, we are in the very position to ask for a revelation of the Lord.

T. Austin Sparks

Men who didn't...

1) forget that Jesus had called them into a relationship with Him.
2) get led away from the simplicity and purity of a devotional relationship to the Lord Jesus Christ.
3) Let theology destroy their first love for Him.
4) Let theology become a head trip.
5) Let their heart grow cold devoid of a love for Jesus.

Arthur W. Pink: 1886-1952
Augustus Toplady: 1740-1778 (author of "Rock Of Ages” and other hymns)
Benjamin Keach: 1640-1704
B.H. Carroll: 1843-1914
Charles Spurgeon: 1834-1892
Francis Schaeffer: 1912-1984
George Mueller: 1805-1898
George Whitefield:1714-1770
J.C. Ryle: 1816-1900
J.P. Boyce: 1827-1888
John Bunyan: 1628-1688 (author of Pilgrim’s Progress)
John L. Dagg: 1794-1884
John Foxe: 1516-1587 (author of Foxe’s Book Of Martyrs)
John Gill: 1697-1771
John Knox: 1513-1572
John Newton: 1725-1807 (wrote the hymn "Amazing Grace”)
John Owen: 1616-1683
Jonathan Edwards: 1703-1758
Martyn Lloyd-Jones: 1834-1892
Martin Luther
Matthew Henry: 1662-1712
Roger Williams: 1603-1683
William Carey: 1761-1834 (missionary)
William Wilberforce: 1759-1833 (slavery abolitionist)
Paul Washer
David Platt
D.A. Carson
D. James Kennedy
James Montgomery Boice
John Piper
Albert Mohler
Voddie Bachham
Wayne Grudem

As one man said, "I became a theologian that I might be a better pastor."

The above men mentioned above are only a few of many. And they're not named to become objects of worship.

But we are to give honor(not worship)to whom honor is due. We are to recognize the gifts God has given each, and give thanks to God.

And as for the many other questions in your post, they deserve answers as well. Answers that only each individual can give after examining themselves, and God illuminating them lest they deceive their own selves.

Our experience is, SIMPLY, our experience. It is NOT the rule!

So many people, so many experiences! An experience, whether yours or mine, is not an argument. It IS SIMPLY an experience.

Some experiences are good and right, some are not.

"The foundation of God stands firm, He knows them that are His"

Men who didn't search the bible for systematic thoughts and doctrines but instead walked in life in the truth of Christ and by His guiding in their day to day life and in His wisdom not limited by the bible but confirmed by it:

Peter
John
Andrew
Bartholomew
Philip
James (lesser)
James (greater)
Thaddeus
Matthew
Thomas
Judas (not iscariot)
Paul
Stephen
Silas
Bananas
Apollos

Etc.

A little leaven leavens the whole lump. Let's look back to the rock from which we were hewn, which is Christ and, as the scriptures attest, the apostles he set forth to teach whose writings we have. It seems risky to cite anyone but those whom Christ and the apostles attested to. Who says spurgeon walked in the fullness of Christ? For me I don't know but I can see a stark difference between his teachings and those of Paul's. Surgeon (just picking on him because hes very well known) spent a great deal of time trying to decipher Paul's writings rather than walking as Paul walked. Not that he's a false teacher or bad but why quote and cite men such as him and not rather listen to what Christ and those who were taught by him instead of men who, however well meaning, may have unintentionally been deceived by the 1900 years that have had a chance to distort christianity. Unless you believe it's been continued and preserved regardless of man's faults in which case I would recommend joining the Catholic church who do have a distinct and true lineage hearkning back to the church of the apostles. The way is narrow and few there be that find it.

A.W. Tozer hits at what is at the root of the problem of men that worship the dead letter of the law without the Holy Spirit. They idolize their own human reasoning without being led by the only guide (Holy Spirit) that can give us illumination and understanding of the scriptures.

Spirit-Taught
"A man can receive nothing." That is the burden of the Bible. Whatever men may think of human reason God takes a low view of it. "Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" Man's reason is a fine instrument and useful within its field. It is a gift of God and God does not hesitate to appeal to it, as when He cries to Israel, "Come now, and let us reason together." The inability of human reason as an organ of divine knowledge arises not from its own weakness but from its unfittedness for the task by its own nature. It was not given as an organ by which to know God.

The doctrine of the inability of the human mind and the need for divine illumination is so fully developed in the New Testament that it is nothing short of astonishing that we should have gone so far astray about the whole thing. Fundamentalism has stood aloof from the liberal in self-conscious superiority and has on its own part fallen into error, the error of textualism, which is simply orthodoxy without the Holy Spirit. Everywhere among conservatives we find persons who are Bible-taught but not Spirit-taught. They conceive truth to be something that they can grasp with the mind. If a man hold to the fundamentals of the Christian faith, he is thought to possess divine truth. But it does not follow. There is no truth apart from the Spirit. The most brilliant intellect may be imbecilic when confronted with the mysteries of God. For a man to understand revealed truth requires an act of God equal to the original act that inspired the text.

"It seems risky to cite anyone but those whom Christ and the apostles attested to."

Why bother reading anything anyone posts on this forum. Why am I bothering reading anything you've just written. You then go on to say this regarding Spurgeon,

"I can see a stark difference between his teachings and those of Paul's."

Apparently, what you see Paul teaching, differs from what Spurgeon saw Paul teaching. So you do adhere to a teaching. Unless all you do is quote Scripture, and make no comment or explanation at all.

You then say,

"Surgeon spent a great deal of time trying to decipher Paul's writings rather than walking as Paul walked."

How do you know this! Were you there?

Do you read no book but the Bible? Do you not listen to anyone preach or teach from the Word of God?

If you do, you're not living according your own words in this post.

/I believe our dear brother in Christ has best summarized what I am so pitifully trying to convey in this thread./

Besides using the penal substituion thread to insert your own obvious disdain for theology which had nothing to do with the original OP in that thread you have thrown a kind of one size fits all accusatory blanket over any and all theologians. You falsely assume that all theologians have succumbed to reliance on their own minds etc and have jettisoned any reliance on the Holy Spirit and worship theology. It's an urban myth in the church. What a disservice to repeat it.

A former Pharisee can be unwittingly prideful that he's not caught in the pride of the Pharisees anymore.

Paul walked and moved in the Spirit of freedom and life. He was not bound by exegetical bible studies. If you read Paul's letters it is not an exegetical statement, he described and taught spiritual realities, not doctrines. Most of what Paul said in his letters are not quotes from the bible (the old testament) because that was not the binding law on his heart not was it even his guide. He moved and walked in the spirit of freedom, the fullness of the what the old testament was moving towards.

In regards to spurgeon I know he spent most of his time deciphering the bible because all of his sermons (I have many collections) are exegetical sermons based around a certain biblical text. We do not see Paul doing that all that much (although he did cite it when appropriate.) Isn't that peculiar? Almost as if he received extra biblical revelation which was not extra biblical but was a reality and living word that could not come from study alone but from moving and walking in truth.

The teaching I adhere to is the truth of Christ. Christ is truth and only in and through him can any scripture be seen in the truth. Of course now we come to "Well you say this is truth but I say this is truth," this is inevitable. But the way is narrow and few there be that find it.

If you want to search the scriptures to find the things that belong to Christ go ahead, they are certainly an invaluable aid but I submit once more that the totality of Christ and His finished work are found within and without the pages of the bible. And how could it be otherwise? Did the one who created all things mask himself from being found in those things limiting himself to 66 books (73 books??)

I have read many many books and have come to the conclusion of the author of ecclestiatics that there is much weariness in it. So yes I read only the bible. Is that bad? I have the words of Christ and those who knew him. And even those do not bind me nor do I scour them to try to tie them together. Who would do such a thing? We have four varied gospels and misicellanious letters. There are differences and this is okay because the truth from them is in Christ and they point to them. Does the bible bear testimony of itself or does it bear testimony of He who is in our hearts and indeed in all of creation? Through him all things were made and in him all things hold together.

Please pardon any typos, I'm typing on my phone

Just wondering out loud...

What are you guys trying to communicate to Docs?

He simply wanted to discuss the meaning of the atonement. How are you helping him towards that goal?

What are you trying to achieve here with your writings?

The meaning of the atonement is found in Christ, not through analysis of the scriptures.

Martyr,

It is Christ who illuminates Scripture. The Word of God often chooses to work through His Word.

Also - every person I've met who loved the Lord Jesus loved His Word.

Anyway, what are you trying to achieve through your replies to Docs?

What you communiucated was a prideful one size fits all disdain for theologians and theology.

/The meaning of the atonement is found in Christ, not through analysis of the scriptures./

Can Christ speak to you through His written word? If Christ Himself spoke to you about the meaning of His atonement coulkd you then go to Scripture and find the same words and meaning?

My disdain is for the act of elevating the scriptures to the level of Lord and seeking in them eternal life. It is subtle. Jesus upbraided the Pharisees for it. My disdain is for those who turn the bible into doctrines and precepts and live by those rather than living by the Spirit if Truth.

The Word points to Him whom I love and that is why it is invaluable and precious to me. It is profitable for correction, reproof, rebuke and as a guide when taken in subjection with the Spirit of God, so yes yuehan we are in agreement on that. But it is not "How God speaks" as if He only had one means. The God who made the mouth is not void of one Himself.

The law was imperfect. The New Testament expresses it. Yet don't you consider it to be the word of God? Did God speak or create imperfection? The sacrificial system was imperfect, did God ordain something imperfect? If you take the every word is 100% true then you do not judge the bible with righteous judgement. Those who search it to form a complete doctrine miss that to which it points.

My point with that is this, the scriptures need to be taken and viewed in the revelation of Christ. Going back to the atonement you are not going to find it spelled out for you in the bible. The bible wasn't meant for that. Paul didn't hand out his letters and say "Here study these and find out about Christ." No he would go into a city with the power of God and in His wisdom speak words not of doctrines or explanations but of the sword of Truth which pierces the hearts of those who hear.

"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God". It is not the bible that causes a person to hear. It is the Spirit of God, the word of God which is Christ. As it says, let him who has ears to hear listen

I would also like to point out how often in Paul's letters he urges us to read our bibles. I guarantee you in any one sermon in this website you will hear that exhortation more than in the entire new testament. The word was simply not the apostles focus, the Word was.

Does the scripture prohibit religion? Do we really have to hate theology?

"Simplicity and purity of our devotional relationship to Christ" _ This is a beautiful statement but what really is
the biblical teaching and implementation of our devotion and relationship to Christ?

I guess we should be careful of too much analogy of our relationship to God with human affairs. Romanticization of which is sacred will not bring us closer to God, but may bury us in humanist agenda and anarchistic mess.

I find this interesting:
"In the chapel at Reformed Seminary there is this 9 foot tall pulpit. It must be mounted from either side by a steep flight of stairs. The brother, who was given me a tour of the seminary, said that the pulpit symbolized the exalted Word of God. And those who sat in the chapel were to give attention to the person who broke open the word of God. This is the best pictorial representation I can see of the worship of theology. Of the worship of those theologians who stand as mediator between God and man. We accuse the Catholics of having the priest stand between them and God. Yet we have our own traditions in our own Protestant background. We exalt the Calvinistic or evangelical pastor who is trained in scripture exposition as one who must break open the word of God. The evangelical pastor stands as mediator between God and man."

I have been told this is one issue the early Anabaptist taught against: the elevation of the pastor above the people. Since they believed in the priesthood of the Believer they believed the pastor should not be on an elevated platform as you described.

I agree with your article. It is unnerving to me when I challenge someone on some Biblical issue they will say, "I have to go ask my pastor about it." They never assume the clear reading of the WORD as being authoritative.

Sandra