Theology Matters

by Joe Thorn on December 5, 2005

I love theology and believe it is essential for every Christian to intentionally become the best theologian possible. Theology is the active pursuit of the knowledge of God. It is not meant to be academic. Theology is an exercise of the mind, the heart and will. Fundamentally, theology is a conversation. I know, that word lost its buzz-worthiness a year ago, but make no mistake; that is what the word “theology” means; words about God. It can be thought of as written words – meant to be read, understood and responded to – or spoken words. Either way it amounts to dialogue about the divine.

While “theology” is not a biblical word, it is the stuff of the Bible. Moses did it, Joseph did it, David did it, the prophets and Apostles did it, and of course Jesus did it. These men spoke about God and invited others to talk with them about him. Their conversation, teaching, and preaching was designed to lead, encourage, and call others to respond to One of and for whom they spoke. The words they spoke of God, his word and works, the human condition, the history of redemption, etc. were always built upon the revelation of God (via Scripture or “mighty acts”). I want to be clear on this point: in our case, our doctrine can only be derived from Scripture.

Having said that, let’s keep in mind that throughout the history of the church this “conversation” has looked different depending on the age and place. In other words, theology is formed through our interaction with church, culture, truth and error. So one man needed to write about practicing the presence of God, another was compelled to write 95 propositions and nail them to the public bulletin board, and another took his theology to the countryside fields where masses gathered to hear about a “new birth.” Why did these men emphasize these truths? Not simply because they are right, but because each unique context required God’s people to apply the Gospel in specific ways. Theology always has something to say to the culture. It is always relevant.

Theology is not good just because it is right. Listen, good theology is not simply the recitation of archaic doctrinal formulations – as valuable as that is. Theology is not good just because it is right. It must be spoken in response to a church and culture that needs Christ. It should be the attempt to show the connection of God and his salvation to men and women here in real time. I find it ironic that many theologianettes who seem to love Luther, Calvin and Spurgeon neglect to follow the example of these men. Their theology emerged from their relationship with the world. Often times our theology is little more than the scripted dialogue of history.

I find myself frustrated with people coming from two different directions. On the one hand there are those (the majority in our Convention) who have dismissed theology as an irrelevant, divisive – if sometimes necessary – engagement. On the other hand are those who treat theology like the XBOX 360. It’s really a lot of fun, and you can do it with others who are into the same games, you spend a lot of time in the virtual world with it, but ultimately it has little connection to real life. It’s a passionate hobby. If you don’t know what XBOX is, or don’t have one, then perhaps you can better grasp the point I am attempting to make.

Theology matters. it matters because God is worth talking about and making known. It matters because without it we are left to make it up as we go along, or simply take the word of another. Consider this the first in a number of posts on the topic of theology. I have more to write, and want to write positively/constructively emphasizing the value of historic theology (From Brother Lawrence, to Bunyan to Berkhof) while calling us to do what those men did so long before us; speak of eternal truths to church and culture for the glory of God and the good of men.

But first I have to finish that series on the seven deadly sins.

  • http://fufiwords.blogspot.com/ marc

    Excellent Joe.

    Theologia Incarnata (phony latin)

  • http://www.stevekmccoy.com/ Steve McCoy

    This should spark some great conversation Joe. Bring it, yo.

  • http://jmoorhead.blogspot.com Jonathan Moorhead

    Love the Xbox 360 analogy – so true.

  • http://www.jasonsampler.blogspot.com Jason Sampler

    Interesting. I look forward to reading more, especially your takes on historical (or, to use your word, historic) theology.

  • SLF

    wow, this is interesting and very timely for me. I appreciate your clarity. Thanks!

    (I am SLF– still a little paranoid about my identity being out there in cyberspace. If that is a problem, I will reconsider!)

  • http://www.doneydepot.blogspot.com Marcguyver

    Well, like the others, I’ll be looking forward to what I’m sure will turn out to be worthwhile discussion.

  • http://www.pigeonriverchurch.org Toby

    Okay, my post has nothing to do with your post, Joe, but with your new church site…I like what you’ve done, or Advance has done, whatever.

    Do you mind sharing what package you got, etc? You can e- it to me if you don’t want to share it here.

  • http://www.byfarthersteps.com Tim

    Awesome! Theology’s proper end (telos is doxology. You are right it is necessary, not disposable and certainly not a toy. It also must have feet. Theology must do something. Tis true, tis true.

    One little nit to pick: “They words they spoke of God,” Oops. That is one of my most common typos.

  • http://www.byfarthersteps.com Tim

    Oh yea, any idea when the Pub will be meeting in Jan yet? The term begins on the 11th so I’m rooting for something before that.

  • http://sbcoutpost.blogspot.com Marty Duren

    My current frustration are those who have missed the God of theology, making a god of their theology.

    It just seems to me that true theology should lead us to the face of God, not to attempts at putting finer dots on the “i’s” and straighter crosses on the “t’s”.

  • Vicki

    Off topic

    WHERE are the pictures that you were talking about?

    /off topic.

  • http://spencerhaygood.blogspot.com Spencer Haygood

    Thanks for the post, Joe! If it’s okay, I’d like to jump in here with a reflection.

    I’m still pondering the “Fundamentally, theology is a conversation” claim, but I have to say I was struck immediately with the piercing point that “[t]heology is not good just because it is right.” Wow! There are lots of venues in which I wish this statement could be shouted!

    It reminds me of the case made by Richard Lints. He argues that a “theological framework” built on “redemptive-historical lines” helps situate us in redemptive history so that we can “remain prophetic within our unique cultural setting.” The “framework” is to be distinguished from the “vision” (and it’s this sort of methodological distinction that many of us evangelicals don’t seem to think about very well). His conclusion, then, is relevant to some of the rest of your post. He writes: “A theological framework remains constant over time, while a theological vision properly changes as culture changes. The challenge for the contemporary evangelical community is not simply to repeat the theological vision of our forebears [which you have deliciously called “the scripted dialogue of history”] but to appropriate their theological framework by means of a new theological vision that is equal to the daunting tasks facing us today in our own culture.”

    That’s how we contextualize without compromise. The “framework” stays the same. But the “vision” changes with the culture, and then speaks the words from and about God out of the word of God with true prophetic relevance to the moment! I’m still trying to work this out in a pastoral setting, but I do think it’s a distinction that points the way forward.

    (Oh, Lints’s book is “The Fabric of Theology: A Prolegomenon to Evangelical Theology”).

  • http://www.joethorn.net Joe Thorn

    Thanks Spencer, that’s helpful and I am adding that book to my list tonight.

  • http://timsweatman.blogspot.com Tim Sweatman

    Joe,

    Glad to see you back up and running.

    Very profound stuff. I think you are so right about the role our context plays (or that it should play) in our theological discussions. I believe this is one of the potential weaknesses of systematic theology—we can get so caught up in defending our system or trying to get others to buy into it that we don’t shape our discussions to fit the context of our church/culture. So we end up saying a lot of stuff that, even though it may be true, doesn’t really communicate anything meaningful. We also often end up doing what Marty says by making our theology an end unto itself.

  • Mike Shuman

    Joe, I know nobody has posted on this message for a while but I just thought this was a good place to post a thought. Perhaps our befuddledness with systematic theology and our tendency to somehow divorce it from our relationship with God has to do with our lack of a biblical rooting in much of our theology. Currently I’m reading Wayne Grudem and I love how rooted in the word of God it is. Not that it is totally objective and biblical but I appreciate this about it. Also perhaps if we lose a God-centered (i.e. relationship with God-centered) approach to theological study and a gospel-centered approach we can be thrown off. I find this tendency in my own life and I try to combat it with a word-centered, relationship with Christ-centered, cross-centered approach to doing theology. p.s. I love your postings on evangelism. Many of the comments have really stuck with me as of late.

  • http://www.joethorn.net Joe Thorn

    Thanks Mike. I agree with your comments. I really enjoy systematic theology, and believe it has a place at the table in Christian study and living. From my perspective a few of our shortcomings with sys theo have been:

    1. Not building it on the discipline of “biblical theology.” In my estimation, Berkhof does well, Hodge… not so much.

    2. Treating it as purely academic, versus scholarly and devotional.

    3. Seeing the end as being right instead of worshipping God (big problem among many in my Reformed circles).

  • Pingback: About Theology »

Previous post:

Next post: