It seems to me that a couple of things are running amok in evangelical theology right now which are pushing theology-in-practice to some unfortunate extremes. Though other things could be thrown in, two issues of principle concern to me are: 1) meticulous determinism and 2) either an over-inflation of human worth or an over-defamation of human nature. Concerning the first, too often the notion comes forth that whatever happens in the world is what God planned and causatively orchestrated (usually specifically "for me"). I have no desire here to impugn the sovereignty of God (it is a notion I affirm), but rather a particular interpretation of what sovereignty means, which is often taken to certain extremes. This runs, in particular, into some serious problems with the "problem of evil," since it requires God to be the initiator of both original evil and the perpetuator of all current evils. I do not wish to tear down straw men of certain theologies here as I know that there are those who hold to forms of determinism or compatibilism who address such an objection [my intent here is not to interact with the philosophical dimension of that problem, though it seems to me, however, that ultimately the objection still stands]. Subsequently, this causes us to misinterpret events which may not be divinely orchestrated as God-ordained. In other words, not everything which God allows to happen is something which God causes to happen. This has all sorts of implications for how we live and approach each day. Yet too often in popular, or perhaps "folk" theology, such a view is perpetuated. I think we need to exercise more discernment than this.
The second equally creates major issues. Somewhere in the mix of this discussion about human worth is the imago dei, or the notion that ALL humans are created, in some sense, in the image of God. On one extreme, overestimating how this is displayed among humanity leads to the conclusion that any and everything which is a part of my person-hood or behavior is divinely approved or created to remain as such. Some necessary correction is required here as this seriously rubs against the grain of Scripture wherein all humans in some capacity disobey God and are in need of transformation. The other extreme of the pendulum asserts that any- and everything which an unregenerate person does is inherently selfish and sinful because of "total depravity." This equally radical form of human anthropology would assert that nothing humans do, apart from God (meaning non-believers), could be God honoring. This seems, too, an over-correction. Such a premise is nowhere explicit in Scripture (when taking genre into consideration at least). Rather, we should be able to recognize that ALL humans, created in God's image, to some extent reflect the divine nature. This does not entail or require that they can somehow "earn" salvation or that they can tighten up their bootstraps and ascend to heaven on their own terms. But it does recognize that ALL humans, regenerate or not, have inherit worth and are made in the image of God. Ultimately that image is tarnished and is restored only in Christ as believers, individually and collectively, "image" Christ, and thereby "image" God. But it remains nonetheless. Why does this matter? This first issue matters because Christians are often too quick to refer to an event as "God's will" in the sense of God-ordained and orchestrated when it very well may not be. And the second matters because these extremes on the pendulum of theological anthropology either lead us to the strange notion that what we are now is what God intended us to be (whereas believers are "becoming" this but are not yet "being" it) or that unbelievers in every sense of the word are depraved. Both extremes lead to poor theology-in-practice and both, at least in my estimation, need adjustment.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
October 2016
Categories
All
|