Theological Discussions...Discussed

Back in my Bible college days about 12-15 years ago, I remember many late nights sipping coffee with a bunch of guys in dorm, as we sat in a lounge debating the merits and shortcomings of a number of theological topics. At the time, I was an eager participant, since I've only been a Christian for about 2-4 years at that point, so any discussion which would either cement or strengthen my faith was welcome. Of course, I have the propensity to be opinionated and I love debating/arguing (I'll let you distinguish), so it was a perfect vehicle for me to learn and engage the mind, at the same time forming friendships and fostering Christian fellowship.

More than a decade later, I still enjoy a good theological debate and have a few friends with whom I can probably spend an entire afternoon outside in lawnchairs, while sipping beers or other beverages of choice, talking about pre or post tribulation, Calvinism or Arminism, whether to dunk or splash or spray (we're talking baptism here, in case you are thinking something else). However, my views on theological discussions and debates have shifted noticeably since those days when I was a relatively new Christian.

I'll come right out and state it succinctly that I think that Billy Graham has it right (I can't comment on his son or his grandson, though they seem to be doing ok in carrying the torch). I have watched Billy Graham on TV many times (and had the opportunity to see him live only once), but if you watch Mr. Graham, you'll notice that he preaches the same gospel day in and day out, nothing added, nothing taken away. You go back to a tape or a reel of film from the 60s, compare it to the 80s and you'll see it's the same message. He is obediently following Jesus' final commission for this followers. And people today are responding in making decisions for Christ. Mr. Graham seldom is seen bogged down discussing sectarian theology or denominational distinctives - I personally think he has it right, and my shift in thinking over the years has been because I believe that Christians everywhere spend too much time debating useless theology (not useless per se, but ultimately useless in the whole scheme of things). Let me quickly explain.

There are things absolutely worth debating. I think that how a Christian views hot-potato social issues like abortion, homosexuality, war and peace, capital punishment, euthanasia, legalizing drugs, feminism, the environment, etc. has a place, particularly in that one's actions generally will be a product of one's worldview. For instance, I would never support (read: financially and otherwise) a political candidate who is a proponent of abortion (this topic will be coming up shortly in my blog here, but for now I'll just state that). I would never support (read: financially or otherwise) a church who has a practising homosexual minister or whose constitution allows openly practising homosexual members. As a result, if someone were to convince me otherwise or wanted my viewpoint, I am not shy (now, some people may think of me as a bit of a prick for being so opinionated and not as "tolerant" and "understanding", but I was not put on this earth to win popularity contests nor please everyone, so if I piss people off or they don't like me, I have learned that it goes with the territory of speaking one's mind openly). How I view things has a direct impact on what I do / not do, so if someone asks for my views on something that matters to them because it may potentially impact their own actions, I certainly take that seriously and will be happy to discuss/debate issues, and do so with respect and compassion to the other person (since they are struggling with coming to grips with issues as well, just like I am).

All that being said, I feel that many theological discussions have no overarching value, as much as I believe that many non-theological discussions have no overarching value (ie. talking about celebrity gossip or what Paris Hilton is up to - who really gives a rat's ass, honestly? If you do, I'd reassess your grasp of reality if I were you - I recently went to a friend's BBQ at their place and the husband was eager to talk about Paris Hilton in jail and he asked me what I thought and I said, although not as tactfully as I should have, "I don't care - let's talk about something else."). On the top of the theological discussions that have no value are discussing things which we clearly do not know and will not know, followed by discussing issues that perpetuate denominationalism. Again, I'll explain.

I have never been entirely comfortable with eschatological theology; that is, theology that deals with the end times. It was great to discuss this as a new Christian with a bunch of guys equally interested with picking each other's brains, but from a pragmatic perspective, how this plays out is out of our control. Same with the elected vs. free will debate. I think it's more important for Christians to preach the gospel to as many people out there as possible, rather than bicker about whether God has already chosen those and set them aside, or people choose Him through their free will. Neither argument can be perfectly supported, even using Scripture, and if you look at Jesus' example, He spends very little time, if any, debating the theological issues of the time. He went out and met with people and ministered to their needs and offered His free gift of salvation (the book of John is filled with Jesus meeting common people - notice how he spent very little, if any, time with the religious leaders at the time - the Pharissees and Saduccees). As His followers, we need to take a look in the mirror and realize that there are many things out of our control and rather than trying to find the answers to how the end times will work out, we should be spending our time reaching others with the gospel in our day to day lives. I think this brings more glory to God since it shows that we are yielding to Him for things that we may not understand and have faith in His ultimate will. It does seem easier and safer to debate these things with Christians, but people are dying everyday without knowing Christ, so which is more important?

My other issue with these either/or debates is that it puts you into one camp or the other. I am not a Calvinist, but I am not an Arminist either. But in the end here, my position is that this is a peripheral point. If you made a decision to accept Jesus Christ as your Saviour by asking Him into your heart, you are saved. Whether it was your free will making the decision, or God's predestined work, I don't know. But what is important is that you made the decision and what is even MORE important than that is that someone told you the good news of the gospel message.

There are other peripheral issues in my mind, such as what happens during communion or, as my good friend Greg would call, the Eucharist. Frankly, I don't particularly concern myself with whether trans-substantiation occurs or con-substatiation or no substantiation or trans-fat substantiation, to use a current food term). Jesus commanded his followers to remember Him through partaking in the bread and the cup. I think everyone (I hope everyone) will agree with me that reverence for what the Lord commanded and respecting the elements (ie. not deliberately throwing it around or chewing like a cow with cud) is appreciated, but whether the elements actually become the body and blood is foreign to me, and it doesn't matter anyway since we are remembering Christ through our actions and in humility, spend time confessing our sins and asking forgiveness while we take communion.

The next part of this discussion may get me into some hot water, but I'll lay it out nonetheless. I think that the church today is not living up to the model of the original New Testament church in that it is fractured into all these denominations. Someone (a non-Christian) once asked me about this and said that the church can't even agree on things, so how can they purport to evangelize others? You know what - that's a really valid point and one which I think needs to change for the church to be effective. Let's state at the outset, and I hope that we can agree - these denominations are all built upon subtle (and at times not so subtle) differences in the way they view theology. Take that to its origins and you will see that these denominations were created because people took issue with another's views, etc., and purport that these are all substantiated by Scripture. I can't comment on too much of this, since I am not a theologian or a Biblical scholar, but it would seem to me that many of these things are more preference types of theology - for instance, most evangelical churches today will have something in their constitution or statement of faith about God being triune: God, Son, Holy Spirit, and that the Bible is the only divinely inspired Word of God, that faith in Jesus Christ is the only way to be saved, God's gift of salvation is by grace alone (not works), every human being is sinful and in need of redemption, and so forth. However, despite what commonalities these churches have, it is their distinctives in theology which set them apart and which often causes friction and lack of unity. Some of these churches have differences in local church governance structures, the place of women in ministry (which I actually think is a bigger issue than a peripheral one which people would have you believe - I think the Bible is pretty clear in how it views the qualifications of a pastor or elder and yes, I believe they both need to be men and it's not because I'm sexist or misogynist or whatever else label gets applied to people who don't embrace feminism). But ultimately, if I had or were forced to rank what is more important - preaching the gospel or debating women in ministry, I'd work on my gospel presentation. Also, I realize that I don't operate in a vaccuum, so I need to sometimes be active in less-than-ideal conditions and be willing to yield to Christian unity over a denominational disagreement. But because I am not a big fan of denominations anyway, I tend to stay away from the discussions that center on denominational differences. Churches today have much more important things to worry about (such as whether they are doctrinally sound and whether their view of Scripture as the ONLY divinely inspired Word of God is intact - North American churches tend to be shifting more towards a business type of model, to my utter chagrin - I went to a church last year in Edmonton, Alberta - it was a very large, considered "hip" church complete with a bookstore and coffeeshop (it was disconcerting to see commerce done on Sunday IN THE CHURCH) - but you know what? If I were asked for my assessment of that church (and I was - my cousin asked me) - I would say big building, high tech children's drop-off and retrieval program, lots of seating, lots of options of things to do in the church building itself, highly emotionally-based worship singing, lots of use in A/V for presentations and skits and what not, but the sermon/message was not unlike something I would hear in a business meeting. The place was packed and I can see why - why not go to a place where they don't discuss the need for salvation, how we need to seek forgiveness for sins, how Christ's death paid for our sinful break with God? Instead, they have divorce support groups, teen and college support groups, ethnically-centered support groups, etc. Probably a church which held up "The Purpose Driven Life" as canon. Again, they can talk with me about reaching the lost and evangelism numbers and what not, but if their message is so syrupy, I'd say they have more important things to talk about.

Oh...what was I talking about. Oh yeah. There are some very good theological discussions that can be had, and these days, I generally gravitate towards those (or introduce those) whenever possible. I've already discussed that I generally try to refrain from participating in theological discussions that perpetuate denominational distinctives, discussions or over which we, as human beings, have no control. I'd add to that things such as speculative conjecturing, such as "what was that thorn in Paul's flesh and what was the nature of it?" or "what was that, that Jesus wrote on the sand in the account of the adulterous woman being brought out by the religious leaders?" Similarly, there are things (miraculous occurrences) that I cannot explain, but I simply have to accept on faith. As per one of my earlier postings, I believe the central issue for Biblical apologetics is whether the Bible is true or not. I wholeheartedly believe and know that the Bible is God's Word, so I will have to take the parts which I don't quite understand along with the many more parts that I do understand.

I mentioned already some of what I consider are "good discussions" - those which have value in that it can and does prompt us towards action in our lives, in order to be the salt and light of this earth and, whenever possible, advancing the Kingdom. I would probably add to that two other aspects which I find to be of good value in discussing and that is simple Bible study and also Biblical apologetics (or faith defence, as some term). Discussing the Bible is something which has inherit intrinsic value - being better versed with the manual to which believers live their lives is never a bad thing - discussing the Bible in all its facets in order to gain a better understanding of Scripture is a good thing. As a natural extension, in my view, every Christian should have a good, solid understanding of Biblical apologetics, being able to provide an answer when people ask us about our faith. Unfortunately, it's been too often that I hear of Bible-believing Christians not answering their door to Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons. I get encountered by Mormons very often in the intersection where I work and while I have to confess, it's not always the most comfortable to place to be in, I welcome the opportunity to discuss my faith (some times it has gone well, some times it has not, but whatever the case, I tend to read my Bible more that afternoon or that evening as a result, and that's always a good thing). More Christians need to be acquainted with their Bibles for those very reasons - so when someone comes and asks you about something, or challenges you on a topic, that you can at the very least use that as a potential witnessing opportunity. Those, I would suggest, are perhaps the best theological discussions you can have.