A Case for Formal Theological Training

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
My life has been profoundly shaped by formal theological training. I don't say this to brag, honestly. I just want to explain my situation and reasons for writing this. I have had the privilege to learn for months and years from some of the most godly and biblically knowledgeable people I have ever met. As a result, I have a greater love for God and His Word than I ever could have imagined. However, I frequently hear people deriding formal theological training. It is often portrayed as carnal, full of man-made doctrines, arrogant, useless, the problem of the modern church and even demonic. Most of the time, such people have never stepped foot on a seminary campus. Yet, I wanted to take a moment to engage in a discussion on the issue and answer some frequent charges cited against formal biblical training:

1) "Seminaries merely force people into their own theological molds."

This is simply not true. Of course various theological institutions are going to have distinctions that make them different in various areas of doctrine. Anyone who has spent any amount of time seriously studying the Bible is going to have particular convictions. This is to be expected. However, these institutions do not force their perspectives on others. I have been in numerous classes where I was in a very different place theologically than my professor or the institution. It is not uncommon for half the class (especially in graduate work) or more to be from different denominational backgrounds than the school they are attending. Seminaries are actually very welcoming to people of different backgrounds because it not only stretches the entire class, but it increases the student population of the school. While professors may make their position on a debatable issue known, every professor I have studied under is very gracious and often will even defend other positions (especially when know-it-all students want to make fun of a different view).

2) The disciples were "unschooled, ordinary men."

True. No one is saying a seminary degree is mandatory for being a good or mature Christian. However, let us not forget that the disciples followed Jesus for three years and watched him day and night. Yes, if I had the opportunity to spend three years hanging out with Jesus then I would say I had been rigorously educated. However, it is wrong to say that Jesus took them right out of the boat and made them leaders of His church overnight. He trained them personally and empowered them by his Spirit. They were schooled under Jesus. They were not ignorant.

3) I listen to the Spirit, not the doctrines of men.

Last I checked, the Holy Spirit works through people. He gave some to be evangelists, teachers, preachers, and so forth. This means that the Holy Spirit uses teachers to "teach." It is unbiblical to suggest that because I have a Bible and the Holy Spirit that I don't want or need any other voices in my life. In fact, this kind of attitude is arrogance. This is similar to what brought Paul's rebuke to Corinth. Can the eye say to the hand, "I don't need you?" Yet, this is exactly what we are saying when we claim that our voice is the only voice that matters.

4) Seminary professors are nothing more than modern day Pharisees

It grieves me when I hear people, over and over again, throw mud at the leaders of such institutions. First, most who do so have never actually met a seminary professor. Second, they like to quote verses of Jesus rebuking the Pharisees and say, it applies to them. Usually the connection is that both the Pharisees and the seminary professors were dedicated to studying the Scriptures. There is one problem with this. Jesus' primary frustrations with the Pharisees was that they looked down on the sinful and they rejected him! Seminary professors do neither. So when someone quotes, "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have life..." with regards to a formal seminary education, they have no idea what they are talking about. Jesus was not rebuking the Pharisees because they liked to study God's Word. Rather, he was rebuking them because their study did not bring them to faith in Jesus! If seminary professors rejected Jesus, then maybe you could quote that verse...but that is not the case. Jesus never attacked anyone for loving God's Word too much or spending too much time reading or memorizing it. He went after people to arrogantly looked down on others and exalted themselves. Think about that before you start deriding people who love Jesus and commit themselves to study his Word.

I could go on an on, but the discussion to follow can take it from here. My gut feeling is that most people like to attack seminaries because they feel insecure about their own beliefs, or are envious of a leadership position in a church but are unwilling to commit themselves in a way that would open those doors. In any event, seminaries are more than mere institutions, they are people. People who, for the most part, love Jesus with all their heart and have determined to put everything else in their life on hold so they can know His Word and learn from other believers.

Times yours.
 

Arnie Manitoba

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2011
2,650
137
63
72
Manitoba Canada
Wormwood .... very good post and I hope everybody reads it

Salvation does not require us to be scholars or theologians

But if a person decides to preach or teach or push a certain belief we should make sure we know what we are talking about

I have benefited from learning systematic theology .... which really means learning how to read and study the bible properly .... and it is not complicated ... nor does it require high intelligence.

I find it eliminates a lot of confusion ..... there will still be some differing points of view and disagreements on some doctrines ... but at least we understand both sides clearly .... which is better than just saying ... "I am right and everybody else is wrong"
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Arnie Manitoba said:
Wormwood .... very good post and I hope everybody reads it

Salvation does not require us to be scholars or theologians

But if a person decides to preach or teach or push a certain belief we should make sure we know what we are talking about

I have benefited from learning systematic theology .... which really means learning how to read and study the bible properly .... and it is not complicated ... nor does it require high intelligence.

I find it eliminates a lot of confusion ..... there will still be some differing points of view and disagreements on some doctrines ... but at least we understand both sides clearly .... which is better than just saying ... "I am right and everybody else is wrong"
Thanks Arnie. I appreciate your reflection. I also enjoy systematic theology. You should read, "The Faith Once For All" by Jack Cottrell. It is a strong systematic theological presentation that I find very persuasive.
 

Dodo_David

Melmacian in human guise
Jul 13, 2013
1,048
63
0
Wormwood, thank you for your defense of formal training.

Whereas the Bible doesn't tell us what level of training one should have before becoming a pastor or elder, the Bible doesn't speak against having formal training.
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Very true. Some denominations do not require any formal training to be a preacher. Yet, I've found such training is always beneficial if a person is able to dedicate the time.
 

Arnie Manitoba

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2011
2,650
137
63
72
Manitoba Canada
Back around 1988 our small church had a midweek bible study that was one of the most beneficial teachings we had ever done.

It was a workbook designed by a theologian for "everyday Christians"

It was utterly simple , anyone could do it , even folks with minimum education

It would take a few verses from the bible and then we had to do the workbook portion which asked to describe the context ... who it was written for ... does it apply today .... was it history .... is it future .... etc etc.

It made a person stop and think .... and that was the whole purpose ... and it eliminated a lot of misunderstandings when applying scripture.

Then there was a portion that focused on "hinge points" .... words such as ..... "therefore" .... or .... "until" ..... bible words we normally roll right over as we read .....

I should dig up the old workbooks and reproduce them here .... never before have I seen so much excitement at a bible study ... and at the end most of us had learned to use the same approach as the theologians.

It produced a new harmony in our group ..... instead of 30 people debating "their beliefs" ... it transformed us into 30 people trying to think like scholars .... quite amazing and productive.
 

Prentis

New Member
May 25, 2011
2,047
92
0
31
Montreal, Qc
I could beat around the bush, but I know that at least a good part of this has come from what I have said.

If you take what I have said to be a condemnation and judgment on individuals, and to be angry and opposed in a personal way to them, either I did not communicate well, was misunderstood, or both. My contention is not with the individuals in this system, but with the system itself. I could go on, but to keep it simple and short, I see a powerless Christianity here in the west. Yes, we do great things in our own strength, but not much more than loving and motivated Hindus might. But we are not for the greater part walking in heavenly power and endowment, and we are not for the most part dying daily as we are called to that we might be conformed to him. Others say it better:

If I see aright, the cross of popular evangelicalism is not the cross of the New Testament. It is, rather, a new bright ornament upon the bosom of a self-assured and carnal Christianity. The old cross slew men, the new cross entertains them. The old cross condemned; the new cross amuses. The old cross destroyed confidence in the flesh; the new cross encourages it. (A.W. Tozer)

I'm not here in this thread to start another endless argument, I'm just telling you what I see... I think that is clearly our point of disagreement. Where I see us coming short of the calling and not doing what we should, you see us doing fine. I guess it comes down to both of us having a radically different definition of what the new life in Christ Jesus is, and looks like.
 

Angelina

Prayer Warrior
Staff member
Admin
Feb 4, 2011
37,034
14,947
113
New Zealand
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
This is an interesting statement Arnie

I have benefited from learning systematic theology .... which really means learning how to read and study the bible properly .... and it is not complicated ... nor does it require high intelligence.
My understanding of theology differs from your definition. I understand theology to be concepts taken from scripture that are enlightened via deeper study forming a conclusion about meaning and possibly intent of the said scripture. Would you consider learning how to read and study the bible theology? or is it a means to an end? :huh:

Shalom!
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Prentis,

This forum is not directed specifically at you. I have heard all kinds of opposition to formal theological training over the years. Your voice is just one among many. I gotta run. I will write more later!
 

Rocky Wiley

Active Member
Aug 28, 2012
929
156
43
83
Southeast USA
Arnie Manitoba said:
Back around 1988 our small church had a midweek bible study that was one of the most beneficial teachings we had ever done.

It was a workbook designed by a theologian for "everyday Christians"

It was utterly simple , anyone could do it , even folks with minimum education

It would take a few verses from the bible and then we had to do the workbook portion which asked to describe the context ... who it was written for ... does it apply today .... was it history .... is it future .... etc etc.

It made a person stop and think .... and that was the whole purpose ... and it eliminated a lot of misunderstandings when applying scripture.

Then there was a portion that focused on "hinge points" .... words such as ..... "therefore" .... or .... "until" ..... bible words we normally roll right over as we read .....

I should dig up the old workbooks and reproduce them here .... never before have I seen so much excitement at a bible study ... and at the end most of us had learned to use the same approach as the theologians.

It produced a new harmony in our group ..... instead of 30 people debating "their beliefs" ... it transformed us into 30 people trying to think like scholars .... quite amazing and productive.
Hay Arnie,

This sounds very much like hermenuitics, which explains much of what you said. If you could produce your workbook into pdf file, I would be very interested in having it.

Be blessed.
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Arnie Manitoba said:
Back around 1988 our small church had a midweek bible study that was one of the most beneficial teachings we had ever done.

It was a workbook designed by a theologian for "everyday Christians"

It was utterly simple , anyone could do it , even folks with minimum education

It would take a few verses from the bible and then we had to do the workbook portion which asked to describe the context ... who it was written for ... does it apply today .... was it history .... is it future .... etc etc.

It made a person stop and think .... and that was the whole purpose ... and it eliminated a lot of misunderstandings when applying scripture.

Then there was a portion that focused on "hinge points" .... words such as ..... "therefore" .... or .... "until" ..... bible words we normally roll right over as we read .....

I should dig up the old workbooks and reproduce them here .... never before have I seen so much excitement at a bible study ... and at the end most of us had learned to use the same approach as the theologians.

It produced a new harmony in our group ..... instead of 30 people debating "their beliefs" ... it transformed us into 30 people trying to think like scholars .... quite amazing and productive.
I agree Arnie. My conviction is that the intent of the Spirit is the intent of the Scripture writer. The more people strive to understand that intent, the more people will be brought together around the Word rather than divided by pet doctrines.
Prentis said:
I could beat around the bush, but I know that at least a good part of this has come from what I have said.

If you take what I have said to be a condemnation and judgment on individuals, and to be angry and opposed in a personal way to them, either I did not communicate well, was misunderstood, or both. My contention is not with the individuals in this system, but with the system itself. I could go on, but to keep it simple and short, I see a powerless Christianity here in the west. Yes, we do great things in our own strength, but not much more than loving and motivated Hindus might. But we are not for the greater part walking in heavenly power and endowment, and we are not for the most part dying daily as we are called to that we might be conformed to him. Others say it better:

If I see aright, the cross of popular evangelicalism is not the cross of the New Testament. It is, rather, a new bright ornament upon the bosom of a self-assured and carnal Christianity. The old cross slew men, the new cross entertains them. The old cross condemned; the new cross amuses. The old cross destroyed confidence in the flesh; the new cross encourages it. (A.W. Tozer)

I'm not here in this thread to start another endless argument, I'm just telling you what I see... I think that is clearly our point of disagreement. Where I see us coming short of the calling and not doing what we should, you see us doing fine. I guess it comes down to both of us having a radically different definition of what the new life in Christ Jesus is, and looks like.
I did not say the church was "doing fine." Rather, I specifically said in another place in our conversation that the church was not "fine." My issue is suggesting that academic institutions that focus on the Scriptures are the culprit for this "self assured and carnal Christianity." If nothing else, my academic pursuits have helped me to grapple with why contemporary Christianity is so consumer and entertainment driven rather than just pointing fingers or washing my hands of the mess. Seminaries strive to address the issues of our culture, not perpetuate them. I would contend that the only thing that is keeping American Christianity from falling off the cliff theologically is the work of these institutions that so many deride. People are so swept away by popular culture and current trends that it takes study, research and historical insight to understand what exactly is taking place and how it can be addressed. Unfortunately, I find that the problem is that we live in a culture were people have been indoctrinated with the idea that they live "secular" lives in which religion is an optional portion. They segment their faith and are engrained with the idea that their individualized expression, experience and satisfaction is both the true meaning of life and ultimate desire of God (Generally it is the uneducated preacher who pushes such nonsense...I wont name names). I think chucking the blame at seminaries is the easy way out and is both unfair and inaccurate. Maybe I will start another thread on the issues of contemporary culture and how they effect the church...but time does not permit at this moment.
 

Dodo_David

Melmacian in human guise
Jul 13, 2013
1,048
63
0
Folks, there is a difference between saying, "Formal seminar training is beneficial," and saying, "Formal seminary training is flawless."
Wormwood has said the former, not the latter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: This Vale Of Tears

Prentis

New Member
May 25, 2011
2,047
92
0
31
Montreal, Qc
Wormwood said:
I agree Arnie. My conviction is that the intent of the Spirit is the intent of the Scripture writer. The more people strive to understand that intent, the more people will be brought together around the Word rather than divided by pet doctrines.


I did not say the church was "doing fine." Rather, I specifically said in another place in our conversation that the church was not "fine." My issue is suggesting that academic institutions that focus on the Scriptures are the culprit for this "self assured and carnal Christianity." If nothing else, my academic pursuits have helped me to grapple with why contemporary Christianity is so consumer and entertainment driven rather than just pointing fingers or washing my hands of the mess. Seminaries strive to address the issues of our culture, not perpetuate them. I would contend that the only thing that is keeping American Christianity from falling off the cliff theologically is the work of these institutions that so many deride. People are so swept away by popular culture and current trends that it takes study, research and historical insight to understand what exactly is taking place and how it can be addressed. Unfortunately, I find that the problem is that we live in a culture were people have been indoctrinated with the idea that they live "secular" lives in which religion is an optional portion. They segment their faith and are engrained with the idea that their individualized expression, experience and satisfaction is both the true meaning of life and ultimate desire of God (Generally it is the uneducated preacher who pushes such nonsense...I wont name names). I think chucking the blame at seminaries is the easy way out and is both unfair and inaccurate. Maybe I will start another thread on the issues of contemporary culture and how they effect the church...but time does not permit at this moment.
I agree with some of the things you say as being the issues of our modern church. Only I do not see studying as a solution. Yes, we must study the Word if we are called of him, that is beneficial. But it is only in repentance and in a work of the Spirit that people are turned back from their idolatry.

In the time of Elijah, when practically all Israel had turned to idolatry, it took a showdown with the idols of the people where fire came and burnt a soaked sacrifice, and the priests of Balaam were shown powerless and slaughtered before the eyes of the people.

Studying is only of any avail if we walk in the power the New Testament testifies to. I fear we see so little of it our faith at wide in a life so endowed from on high and in such oneness with God is gone.

We can be nice people, studying wonderful things, speaking of good things, that is all fine and dandy. But we are called to a far higher walk than that. When we call the study of the church and what it is being the church, we forget that the church is a powerful instrument of change, a channel of the Spirit in this world bringing repentance to many and persecution from most.

I understand you are agreeing that the church is not what it should be. American Christianity has already fallen off the cliff theologically, and if these seminaries were it's saving grace, then their work would be to bring it back to the power and life that is in Christ spoken of in the New Testament. Instead, the church keeps steadily on it's current course, still empty of life.

It is not study we need. We have enough study to fill library upon library, enough commentary to bring to boredom the most zealous of Christians. What we lack is the life of the Spirit.

The issue with these institutions is that they stand in peoples understanding as a replacement for the power of the Spirit. We have such great studies, such great theologians: what could we need, and what do we lack? Many modern theologies also are geared to tell people that they are already saved, everything is already ok. We are only lulling people to sleep. People do not perceive that we are a dead body, without life, having been entangled with all the ways of the world. The church of the west is in need of a great awakening that would shake it to it's core, and divide right into two.
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Prentis,

I appreciate your heart and passion for both God and the church. I differ with you in some major ways theologically which is why we are landing in such different places. I understand that you come from a position that sees a more zealous and passionate people as the be-all and end-all of spiritual life and the solution to all that ails the church. While I agree with you in ideals for the most part, the reality is (as I pointed out before) the church has never been, nor will ever be what you are demanding. Yes, there have been and will be times when the fervor of believers is increased and there is a greater love for God and passion to share the Gospel that impacts communities and even large regions. However, even during times of great revival there have been all kinds of theological confusion, manipulation, immaturity and sin. There will always be immature Christians. There will always be faulty and broken people in the church. There will always be ignorance about the Word of God and a culture that pushes people away from Christ (at least until Christ returns). We see it in the NT and in every age from then until now. Moreover, I worry that this kind of focus of yours often leads people toward an experience driven faith that determines its value based on its personal power. The idea is if we do not experience God powerfully, then we must be doing something wrong. If God is not doing what he did through Paul, then we must not be mature enough/passionate enough/prayerful enough, etc. I find in some circles that emphasize this type of teaching that tends to get people focused on the wrong thing and causes them to constantly naval gaze and beat themselves up that they aren't experiencing more of God (based on whatever they are taught that means). I find this leads to a very unbiblical view of God...and pictures him as holding out on his people until they get a little more committed/passionate or whatever. (This picture looks much more like the prophets of Baal in the Elijah scene you referenced than the God of the Bible) Pauls prayer is that Christians would understand what they ALREADY have in Christ...not what they COULD have if they were only a little more _____________ (you fill in the blank). For me, the power of the church is the simplicity and beauty of the Gospel and helping people truly understand and live that. Not achieve some spiritual height where they can experience what they should experience if only they were the church they ought to be.
 

Dodo_David

Melmacian in human guise
Jul 13, 2013
1,048
63
0
Prentis said:
People do not perceive that we are a dead body, without life...
Prentis, it is your opinion that "we are a dead body, without life". I find no merit for such a broad generalization.
 

Asyncritus

New Member
Sep 8, 2013
52
2
0
I am personally very heavily against 'theologians' and 'theological training' in general.

Simple reasons.

1 Jesus and His apostles had no time whatsoever for the theologians of the day. In fact He roundly condemned 'the traditions of the elders - the theologians - for their false doctrines and evil practices.

What makes the modern churches any different?

2 It was the theologians of the day who were baying for His blood, and later, the blood of His disciples. Saul, you may recall, was one of the foremost, 'breathing out threatenings and murder' against his disciples. You can be sure that there were many other 'theologically trained' besides him. He is but the tip of the iceberg.

3 Paul cast aside all his 'theological training' and 'counted it but dung'. Why? Because it was his 'theological training' that caused him to be such a violent persecutor of the church.

What makes you think things are better today?

Look at where the 'theologians' have led the churches today, and be afraid.

The doctrines of the catholic and anglican churches, with so little connection with scripture, have been created by whom? Answer: the theologians.

The random doctrines of the random churches dotted around have been created and led by whom? The 'theologians'.

Are you aware that the 'theologians' of the Graf-Wellhausen schools created that most evil system known so presumptuously as the higher criticism? Which postulated that the prophets couldn't prophesy, that Moses and Abraham couldn't write, and were mere fictions? That the Exodus did not take place, that Sinai was a myth, that Daniel was a fake?

And that those attitudes still permeate the universities and seminaries of today? Do you doubt that? Then let me tell you that the dating of the gospels by these 'theologians' all, practically without exception, say sometime between AD75 -100. And do you know why?

Because they cannot accept that Jesus could have spoken the Olivet prophecy, with its incredibly detailed account of what was going to happen in the Fall of Jerusalem. Therefore the gospels had to be written post-AD70!Such are their doctrines.

The worst part of all this is that in a college, university or seminary, you absorb these things subconsciously, by osmosis as it were. Perhaps no one comes out and says 'inspiration is nonsense'. but it is implied, and the attitudes absorbed, to the unconscious detriment of the scholar.

But it is by their fruits that you shall know them. And what bitter fruits they are!

NT Wright wrote that one could not progress (in the anglican church, presumably) unless one held to the enlightenment philosophy. And a cardinal feature of that philosophy is the belief that Jesus did not rise from the dead.

Can you believe that? And these people who 'progress' in the church, stand there every week proclaiming a 'gospel' which is bereft of the resurrection of Christ, and with no awareness of exactly why it is such an important thing. Do you know why it is so important? Did they teach you at university or wherever?

It was the resurrection which powered the teaching of the early church. It was the power of faith in it that made Paul do as he did, and made the apostles willing to die for their beliefs. 'If Christ be not raised', he said. 'your faith is vain, and ye are yet in your sins'. Do you believe that, despite your theologians? And do you know why it is so vital a doctrine?

It is no wonder people leave in droves. They are without hope - destroyed by the 'theologians'. So why hang around?

It is the theologians who have created the monumental edifices we see.

Who created the astonishingly unscriptural doctrines of the catholic and anglican churches? Why, their theologians , of course.

And the random and varied doctrines of the various denominations all over the place. Who created those? Why, their theologians, of course.

Who caused the accumulation of enormous quantities of wealth, in assets, land and bullion by the churches everywhere? Why, their theologians, of course.

The trouble , of course, is that these things snowball. One early mistake, and a titanic result follows. Build one building, then another then another and you end up with cathedrals and the most astonishing and expensive structures imaginable - all in the name of Him who had nowhere to lay His head! Who promoted all this one asks? Why, the theologians, of course.

And they keep writing books in their ivory towers. Why aren't they out there 'preaching the gospel'? Instead of flooding the world with paper? To make money, of course, and reputations!

Those are some of the reasons why I have little use for 'theology' and 'theologians'.

To the Law and to the testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because they have no light in them (Isa.8.20) Looks like he had the same problems in his day.

The scriptures are enough for any one. They speak at every level: to the brilliant and to the infant. No one is excluded.

They are available almost everywhere today, thanks to those wonderful men, many of whom were burnt by the 'theologians' of their day..

Beware of them, I say.
 

Prentis

New Member
May 25, 2011
2,047
92
0
31
Montreal, Qc
Wormwood said:
Prentis,

I appreciate your heart and passion for both God and the church. I differ with you in some major ways theologically which is why we are landing in such different places. I understand that you come from a position that sees a more zealous and passionate people as the be-all and end-all of spiritual life and the solution to all that ails the church. While I agree with you in ideals for the most part, the reality is (as I pointed out before) the church has never been, nor will ever be what you are demanding. Yes, there have been and will be times when the fervor of believers is increased and there is a greater love for God and passion to share the Gospel that impacts communities and even large regions. However, even during times of great revival there have been all kinds of theological confusion, manipulation, immaturity and sin. There will always be immature Christians. There will always be faulty and broken people in the church. There will always be ignorance about the Word of God and a culture that pushes people away from Christ (at least until Christ returns). We see it in the NT and in every age from then until now. Moreover, I worry that this kind of focus of yours often leads people toward an experience driven faith that determines its value based on its personal power. The idea is if we do not experience God powerfully, then we must be doing something wrong. If God is not doing what he did through Paul, then we must not be mature enough/passionate enough/prayerful enough, etc. I find in some circles that emphasize this type of teaching that tends to get people focused on the wrong thing and causes them to constantly naval gaze and beat themselves up that they aren't experiencing more of God (based on whatever they are taught that means). I find this leads to a very unbiblical view of God...and pictures him as holding out on his people until they get a little more committed/passionate or whatever. (This picture looks much more like the prophets of Baal in the Elijah scene you referenced than the God of the Bible) Pauls prayer is that Christians would understand what they ALREADY have in Christ...not what they COULD have if they were only a little more _____________ (you fill in the blank). For me, the power of the church is the simplicity and beauty of the Gospel and helping people truly understand and live that. Not achieve some spiritual height where they can experience what they should experience if only they were the church they ought to be.
I do not see people with great passion as the be all and end all of the church, but rather people with a great oneness with God and fear of him, who serve him in all things, unto death.

Where we greatly part ways and where I believe the issue lies is here: "While I agree with you in ideals for the most part, the reality is (as I pointed out before) the church has never been, nor will ever be what you are demanding." It is not that I am demanding, but that it is said he will return for a bride without spot or wrinkle. Who has believed the word of the Lord? Who believes he can do this great work? Very few.

We settle for the seminaries for the institutions, for the ways of men because of unbelief. It is because we do not believe in the transforming power of God to the utmost. We might believe it 10%, 50%, 90%, but we do not believe God will do just what he has said, and prepare a bride without spot and wrinkle who will be perfect.

We settle and we do not see, Israel also settled. They would settle for less then the calling, they would be lukewarm. Didn't God send prophets to awaken Israel? To call her back to what she should be? But the prophets were hated.

God has called us to perfection, to be as he is and walk as he walked. Who believes that He is able to bring this to happen in his people, by his mighty power?

God has not called us to mediocrity. It is true that the people of God have time and time again falling short, but it is wrong to settle for this: God hasn't settled for it. Rather what he has promised will come to pass. As Asyncritus said, it has been through history the theologians of the day that burnt and killed the prophets and men of God.

The theologians of the day settle with the current state, but if we are to bring life to the world, we must come with the truth of the radical and great call of God. It is unbelief that says 'things have always been so, why try to change them?'

But we are to be bearers of what is to this world a foreign but most powerful transforming Spirit which calls us to a life so different and peculiar. If we are not strangers and pilgrims on this earth, we need to examine ourselves, and if we are accepted and loved of the world, we need to ask ourselves serious questions, because they loved the false prophets also.

This post might seem harsh, but I say it in hopes that people would see. We have removed ourselves so far from our calling as a body... May we "repent therefore, and be zealous" (Revelations 3, to the Laodiceans, who believed they needed nothing).
 

Dodo_David

Melmacian in human guise
Jul 13, 2013
1,048
63
0
Asyncritus said:
Paul cast aside all his 'theological training'
No, he didn't. Paul's theological training is used throughout his epistles.

Asyncritus, you are saying that all theologians are wrong, but you give me no reason to believe that you are right.
 

Asyncritus

New Member
Sep 8, 2013
52
2
0
Dodo_David said:
No, he didn't. Paul's theological training is used throughout his epistles.

Asyncritus, you are saying that all theologians are wrong, but you give me no reason to believe that you are right.
His knowledge of the scriptures is what he retained - and made their application to Christ. Even that he learned from Jesus Himself.

I'm not saying that all theologians are wrong - there's got to be some wheat among the chaff - but it's hard to find.

I am basically recommending that a believer stays with his Bible and prayer, and forget about reading theologians' books ABOUT the Bible. The people writing the books can be just as wrong as you in forming their opinions - and you wouldn't know the difference.

So why spend good money buying the books, which so often are only full of fluff and personal opinions? Make your own mistakes, and stand on your own two feet. If you are conscientious but wrong, the Lord won't break your neck for it.

I was at a friend's house - and he'd got all the commentaries on the whole Bible in a series. The one that amazed me the most was one volume on the epistles of John. As you know, there are only a few chapters all told in the 3 epistles - yet the book was about 14 inches high, 8 or 10 wide and about 2 inches thick.

I wondered what they could have found to take up all that space - so I had a look, and just as I thought, it was full of fluff and opinion.

If John himself had seen the book, he would probably have had a fit, I think.

Don't you think it's just a little remarkable that the commentary on a book of the Bible can be up to 20 times as big as the book itself? What on earth is the 'theologian' doing? I'll tell you. He's collecting and collating other people's opinions, and presenting them as useful. So if the first person to produce that opinion was wrong in some important respect, all we can expect to find is a repetition and expansion of the original error.

I wondered what they taught at university in a theology degree course, so I looked up the syllabuses for Cambridge, Exeter and one other British university. As I expected, the course contents were pretty far divorced from studying the scriptures themselves. They spend far more time on other theologians' writings than they ever do on the scriptures themselves. Go have a look on google for yourself and see.

And these are the people who are going to 'lead the flock'!