WHAT IS THEOLOGY? PART SIX

WHAT IT IS, AND ITS PRACTICAL GOALS

You need to refer to the first five mini-lectures to this question of:

What is Theology? Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5

As I have endeavored to submit before you read or listen to this sixth one. It is again every now and then as we continue to handle this question to remind ourselves on the definitions so far we have established. Theology is a science that attempts to appreciate the revelation of God that he (God), channeled through categorically two modes of revelation.

The first is General Revelation (God as he has revealed himself through the created materialistic world in all its nature and fortification), and the Second is Special Revelation (God as he has revealed himself through Human History, Scripture as the written word, and through Jesus Christ as the Incarnate word).

So as I have illustrated in the first lectures, theology is a discipline about God and supernatural things but not worldly things. Theology’s primary audience is God, then the church (universal community of believers), and finally whoever prefers to know about these divine matters. We have also said that theology is a church discipline and not a secular or street profession that does not necessitate a spiritual conviction as the point of spark that ignited one’s mental faculties to study a discipline.

Having said all that then, it is needful that we also quote from Erickson J. Millard, one of my professors who I assume is a Systematician (though am personally not one), and see how he defines the term theology. In his huge volume of Christian Theology, Erickson puts it this way:

“Theology in a Christian context is a discipline of study that seeks to understand the God revealed in the Bible and to provide a Christian understanding of reality. It seeks to understand God’s creation, particular human beings and their condition, and God’s redemptive work in relation to humankind. Biblical, Historical and Philosophical theology provide insights and understandings that help lead toward a coherent whole. Theology has practical value in providing guidance for the Christian life and ministry.”

Two things that I appreciate from this definition that might not have been stressed in our deliberation so far are: Theology attempts to redefine reality, and secondly, theology is practical value in providing guidance for Christian life and ministry.

These two attributes might not be understood but am going to demonstrate how important they are if we are to understand theology and actually do it well. Allow to conclusively say that all philosophy fails or thrives depending on how it defines what reality is from all the concrete ideals that are so established and practical enough to disguise as realities.

For you to understand what am saying let me put it in the plainest language that I can manage. It is a contradiction for a theologian to be an Atheist. If there is a theologian who does not believe in God or at least in the existence of God historically, then he or she missed the reality of his education all through his academic life. This is not exclusive to theology as a profession alone but even all other studies, are wayward if at any one moment they exclude God as the point of reference for their discoveries and dilemma.

God, therefore, is the absolute reality and either the causative force or the realm in which all things exist and operate. For that matter, the opening statement of the Bible says: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. (Genesis 1:1 RSV).

In the depth of philosophy, we know that ‘Realty’ is not the product but the producer. Fundamentally then we can deduce from this that; it is only God who is the reality and the rest, that is, the universe (heavens and earth together with their content) are nothing but creatures. The first verse of the Bible does not discuss the origins of the God who created the world and neither does it even invoke a debate on whether he is the creator or not. The first verse assumes and establishes God as the reality from which everything has a beginning.

The other fundamental idea expressed in this verse is that the verse does not explain where the God we anthropologically assume to be an inhabitant of heaven was when he created the heavens and earth. Where was he? We cannot expect this God to be like man in whose civilization has invented the concept of housing where he gathers bricks and wood to construct a roof over himself. While man builds a house to be contained in it, God created the heavens and earth to be contained in him. “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built! (1Kings 8:27 RSV).

In the study of the Prolegomena (Study of first things – God’s nature inclusive), there is what we call a Theologoumenon. According to the Encyclopedia of Theology.

“A Theologoumenon is a preposition expressing a theological statement which cannot be directly regarded as official teaching of the church, as dogma binding in faith, but which is the outcome and expression of an endeavor to understand the faith by establishing connections between binding doctrines of faith and by confronting dogmatic with the whole of secular experience and all a man or an age knows”.

The Theologoumenon of God in what is revealed or concealed (to some) in Genesis 1:1, therefore, is that God is both: Transcendent and Immanent.

The transcendence of God and the Immanence of God are not doctrines and neither are they opinions (as in the loose form of the term opinion might be understood), but rather a knowledge of who God is, which is formed by experience. For one to say that God is transcendent they intend to say that: He is above, beyond, and outside, all that He has made.

No one in his rightful mind would argue that the above Theologoumenon is baseless or just an opinion like any other opinion about anything. For to do that, then, it would entail to say that even the following scriptures born out of the person experiences of the individuals who penned them down are mere Jewish opinions and propaganda: Isaiah 55:8-9; Romans 11:33-36; Exodus 33:20; Jeremiah 23:23-24; 2Chronicles 2:6; Isaiah 40:12-28; Hebrews 1:3.

If anyone believed so, then we would remain with no credible source. However, all truths (read opinions) and experiences should be judged by or on the ultimate reality who is God. While it is true that God is transcendent of everything, God is not a solitary, or a remote principle, and so high above us that we have no way of knowing him. He is also a God who is “near us,” who makes himself known to us and who loves us. That is what is called “immanent.”

By this Theology teaches a reality about God that he is: He is inside all that He has made as well as outside. He is the Sustainer and Preserver as well as the Creator. He is the source of all power and all beauty. Nothing could continue to exist for a moment if He were not continually keeping it in being. We can therefore inductively conclude that God’s Transcendence and his Immanence form a reasonable antinomy. While God is beyond everything in heaven, on Earth and Beneath Earth, he is involved in the affairs of the universe in various modes he chooses and the ultimate one of all being the theology of the incarnation. These are the issues that the study of theology deals with.

What we have just dealt with above is what is known as ‘Theology Proper’ (studying God himself). Every sound theology must qualify itself based on the subject matter, for any theology that gets its God wrong, is idol worship and empty philosophy. That is why the Old Testament presents a mono, absolute and immutable God known as Yahweh to be outstanding in the league of all other gods. “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD; (Deuteronomy 6:4 RSV) I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. “You shall have no other gods before me. (Exodus 20:2-3 RSV) Jesus answered, “The first is, `Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; ( Mark 12:29 RSV).

This is an indisputable Motif of the Old Testament on which all the Testament’s theology bases. It is this, absolute Mono God who was incarnated or became flesh and was known by the names Jesus the Christ. After his bodily ascension, he was the very God that manifested in the form of the Holy Spirit. This is why the Old Testament introduces its content with the words: “In the beginning, God Created the Heavens and Earth”. And verse two continues to say: The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. To understand what theology is and how to live a theologically coherent and corresponding life, we need to understand the subject matter of theology who is GOD.

Finally, allow me as I conclude to discuss the Objectives of Theology and by this, I assume a facilitation of our understanding of what theology is. Since theology is primarily a study on the nature of God (Theology Proper), then the secondary need for the study of Theology is the study of our relation to him. This means that Theology is, essentially and intensely concerned with God being the reason for our existence and us living for him. Good theology will lead to proper living. Because of this; Theology has three objectives and these are Orthology, Orthopraxis and Orthopathos. Let me give quick meaning of these terms that represent the three objectives of Theology.

Orthology means:  Right or straight thinking. Theology is an area of expertise where anthropology, Sociology, psychology, philosophy, linguistics, and many other fields of learning come together. The intent of Orthology is to reach right, true and realistic conclusions. Under this objective, theology capitalizes on rational abilities. Personally, I have been attacked by charlatans who are opposed to intellectual apologetics of spiritual matters. These are people who argue that you do not need to reason in spiritual matters.

This is I find blasphemous to a God who created us as intelligent beings and I also find this contradictory to the teaching of scripture (Proverbs 3:13; 14:15; Isaiah 1:18; Hebrews 11:1; John 20:29; 2Corinthians 4:18; 10:5; Hebrews 5:12-14; Acts 17:11; 18:4; Titus 1:9; James 1:5; 1Peter 3:15; etc.) This is important to begin with because what we understand to be true will either confirm or challenge our behavior and emotions.

This brings me to another objective of theology which is: Orthopraxis. Orthopraxis is the straight or right way of behaving and acting. It is Right behavior or practice. What we know and believe (Orthology) to be true, either confirms or challenges our praxis or actions.

Orthopraxis faces two challenges and problems in our postmodern world. The first is a philosophical problem where atheists and secular philosophers contend that there are no moral absolutes, therefore whatever we do can be justified by the context (Sociology and Anthropology), and Geography. Therefore, every act and behavioral practice is relatively wrong or right.

However, this is a dangerous and harmful deception to theology in a sense that it challenges the core foundation of Theology which is the Sovereignty, Immanence and Transcendence of God, which constitute him as the solo absolute and therefore the reference of our orthopraxis. This ideology of relativism dismisses what I call a ‘causative Reality’ (God) from which all that we appreciate as reality stems from.

Christian Theology ought to emphasize an orthopraxy whose reference is God himself and this orthopraxy is nothing but LOVE (1corinthians 13; Galatians 5:16-25). The second is an evangelical enemy that teaches that our orthopraxy has a part to play and contribute to man’s salvation pre and post salvific event. It is from this that Protestantism evolved and since then it has suffered the question of the role of behavior in our salvation. This has materialized into two extremes known as Nomianism (Law as part of how we are saved from eternal death and for eternal destinies) and Antinomianism (Law as not part of how we are saved from death and for eternal destinies).

When we talk of Christian living in theology, religious beliefs are quick to attribute lifestyle to God and eternal destinies which is not the case of Orthopraxis. Since theology is a study of God and relationships, then that means that our behavior matters primarily to us, and secondary to God. Behavior is about effective active relationships, and behavior also ensures survival and progress. People behave, first to keep things running and secondly to keep things safe. So good theology must produce good behavior and enable efficiency.

Orthology minus Orthopraxis is vain empiricism, rationalism, and intellectualism. For that matter, I personally do recognize any one a theologian if their theology is not evangelical Theology (solution oriented). Whoever studies theology and understands it very well, must behave. Behavior (Orthopraxis) must not be looked upon as a means to an end (behaving to be saved from man’s ultimate problem which is Death and the sinful world), but rather as an end in itself. We behave in order to keep our chaotic sinful and fallen world operating. Orthopraxis is a theological device that attempts to put things in order. Orthopraxis is a psychology of social-order.

True theology does not teach that when you behave you will not die, but rather it says that when you obey you will not contribute to or be the cause of your death. And the Biblical teaching of true orthopraxis is not what we do externally (Isaiah 29:13; 2Samuel 14:1-3; Genesis 42:7; 2Kings 18:18; Luke 6:46; 1Corinthians 5:8-13; Titus 1:7; Genesis 34:13-15; etc) but what comes as a fruit from inside of us (Mark 7; Mathew 15; John 15:1-7; Galatians 5:22-25). Anything done not from the most honest inner-persons of our-being, is dry pharisaic religion and not theology.

Doing things you do not believe in but just for the sake of your community and benefit, is politics and not faith. The Orthopraxis of theology calls practices that are truly representative of who really are rather than stage-managed acts towards a specific end. It is when what we do, comes from within, that our practice has the ability to impact and influence our emotions.

And this brings me to the third and final objective of theology. The Orthopathos. The word Orthopathos is a combination of two Greek words: Ortho= Straight, Right or Correct. And Pathos= Feelings, or Emotions. Orthopathos is getting our feelings or emotions about God straight or right. Just like Theology intends to commune with the conscience of man through its Orthology objective, and helps inform the actions of man as an active man, so does Theology also consider the feelings of man.

Human beings are warm-blooded animals and they are emotional. True theology should not be restricted to our HEADS (Orthology) and HANDS (Orthopraxis), but it must also influence our HEART (Orthopathos) as the center of our emotions and feelings. This is why I argued in my first lectures that, theology is a church business whose main goal is WORSHIP to its subject matter who is God our creator and redeemer.

Theology’s objective through the Orthopathos also suffers two extremes: the first is what I call:

1. Impassive Theology. It is scholarly works that apathetically dissects every spiritual notion without personalizing the content. It is a theology without a human face. This is where many civilized individuals and countries belong. It is due to this, that, God is no longer popular in Europe where Science and Technology are booming, However, in Africa, Asia and the Eastern World it is a different story. This brings me to the second extreme which is

2. Expressive Theology. A Theology that looks at every notion about God materialistically and in the form of ecclesiastical exhibitions.

These ecclesiastical exhibitions can be in forms of: pieces cloths, handkerchiefs, water, dress, Oil, Charismatic physical reactions, speaking in strange tongues, dancing, shaking, falling, rolling on ground, handling snakes and taking poison in the name of faith, etc (Acts 19:12; 1Cortithians 14:2; Psalm 149:3; Mark 6:13; James 2:19; Mathew 17:6; Revelation 1:17; Acts 9:4-8; Mark 16:18). It is a Theology whereby symbols do not lead to the veneration of meaning but where meaning leads to the veneration of symbols.

Expressive Theology is a study of God that understands and appreciates God not depending on what one knows but on how one feels. Through these charismatic gestures and instruments, expressive Theology raises unrealistic optimism that it prefers calling faith. That is how individuals end up doing all sorts of extreme acts like: dry-fasting for forty days like Jesus did, climbing high hills and isolating themselves from other people, dressing in plain apparels, drinking special wines and some taking blood. This is what is happening in the some Pentecostal churches and Catholicism.

These two extremes are the ones that have abused the Orthopathos objective of true Theology. Theology, maintains that believers must get their emotions and feelings right and correct about God. Our emotions and feelings about God must be aligned with the truth about this very God, lest we hurt ourselves in the guise of worshipping God.

Our feelings influence what we believe and do. Our joys, our disappointments, our yearnings, our anger, our exhilaration and a host of other emotions must be brought into conformity with the will of God. Through the objective of Orthopathos, God intends that we individually form a worship that does not hurt us and at the same time which does not abuse or misrepresent this very God we worship.

It is a fact that God designed us as emotional beings, and that is who we are. We are emotional beings. What we cannot claim however is that our emotional make-up and setting is still in the default settings which God created them. There has been the problem of sin. And because of this fall, if our feelings are not right and corrected, we can end up hurting ourselves and embarrassing God. We, therefore, have to balance our feelings with what is right.

Theologians have distinguished these two school of thoughts I have simplified by the words: Objective religion and Subjective religion. Folk-Religion and Christianity gives a brief account of the distinction between objective and subjective religion. Objective religion suffers itself to be arranged in one’s mind, organized into a system, set forth in a book, and expounded to others in a discourse; subjective religion expresses itself only in feelings and actions” (The difference between these two lies in the intellectual nature of objective religion, and the experiential, emotional, and pragmatic nature of subjective religion. Given this distinction, Hegel believes that “Objective religion…is dead. Subjective religion is alive” (Kedourie, Elie. Hegel & Marx. Cambridge: Blackwell, 1995. Print).

Theology is the source of reasonable emotions and feelings. Spirituality is regarded as an indescribable sensuous experience, or merely a tool used to accomplish pragmatic goals.  We live in a world that is dominated by the motivational speakers and optimistic philosophers that are often confused for pastors or theologians. We are lead to believe that subjective religion is living, organic, and active, while objective, intellectual religion is cold, worthless, and dead.

It is the mission of theology, through its objective of Orthopathos, to make sure we balance our feelings and our faith. Christians must never base any of their beliefs upon these emotional experiences. Our common experience has no bearing upon Christian Theology, and Scripture never makes emotion the prerequisite for salvation or for the Christian life. The truth is that we cannot always assign priority or over-emphasize one of the three objectives (Orthology, Orthopraxis, and Orthopathos) of theology at the expense of others.

It is, therefore, important that we develop the wisdom to give priority and emphasis to each single objective of theology that is needed most in any given situation. After all, the deck of life is always shifting; balance can be nothing more than momentary synchronicity.

God bless you…merry Christmas and a happy New Year…from your faithful theologian Isaiah-White.