Saturday, July 30, 2005
Theology As Sin
Not quite two weeks ago, the Upward Call, asked a great question and I attempted to answer it. Yesterday, courtesy of Rebecca, I learned that she is at it again.
I do not; however, think that such a pat answer really addresses the issues Kim is raising. Basically, I think there are two issues raised by the situation and quotation Kim describes. The first issue is what to do in church when there is bad, or maybe just disagreeable, theology. The second issue concerns the interrelationship of love and sins.
The first issue is a situation with which I have a great deal of experience. In the first place, I have never found a church where I agree with every theological stance it takes. Secondly I have seen churches with pretty poor theology bear good fruit, and churches with excellent theology produce nothing but ugliness. To me the answer is simple -- if you have problems with the theology taught in your church -- argue. Teach a Sunday School class and present your view -- write letters and columns for the church newsletter -- blog. When the person that fills your pulpit is teaching classes, attend, and badger him/her during Q&A sessions. Do your homework, be prepared. Write courteous, thoughtful, probing letters. Engage in the conversation. Beyond that there is not much to do.
Problems arise only if the church attempts to squelch such discussion and alternate viewpoints. I have been in churches like that, but not for long. Such behavior is one of my personal trigger points for suspicion of the cultic, they are generally not great places to be. Theology is an academic exercise, which demands openness and debate. When it ceases to be academic and becomes dogmatic, the church is looking for robots, not members.
The interrelationship between love and covering sins is the far more important and much deeper question. Does love, in fact, cover sins? Only in the sense that love sacrifices for the sake of the sinful. The question here is really the essence of the penal substitution debate that Adrian Warnock has been following so closely and on which Pyromaniac has been commenting for the last several weeks. I will not recreate that long and deep discussion, the reader is urged in the strongest terms to follow the links and read for themselves.
I will say this, as I read scripture, only one thing "covers" sin -- blood. The blood of the goat on the Day of Atonement, and in the present age -- the blood of Christ. Truly, Christ's sacrifice on the cross was an act of love, but it was not Christ's love that remitted sin, it was His blood, shed on our behalf. This is more than a semantic distinction -- when we say, "love covers a multitude of sins," we overlook sin, we do not overcome it. We neglect the huge price actually paid to genuinely cover sin.
In fact, my friend has gone so far as to make this comment, about which I'd like someone to share his or her opinion. My friend's comment is: "Love covers a multitude of sins, including bad theology."At first glance, it is easy to simply dismiss this question -- "sin" is either a description of "apartness from God" or it is an action -- theology does not fall into either of those categories. Theology can be either right or wrong, but I am not sure it can ever rise to the level of sinful. Theology can have sinful consequences, but the theology itself just does not qualify for the adjective.
So, tell me, does love cover a multitude of bad theology? I see red flags with this. Am I nuts or what?
I do not; however, think that such a pat answer really addresses the issues Kim is raising. Basically, I think there are two issues raised by the situation and quotation Kim describes. The first issue is what to do in church when there is bad, or maybe just disagreeable, theology. The second issue concerns the interrelationship of love and sins.
The first issue is a situation with which I have a great deal of experience. In the first place, I have never found a church where I agree with every theological stance it takes. Secondly I have seen churches with pretty poor theology bear good fruit, and churches with excellent theology produce nothing but ugliness. To me the answer is simple -- if you have problems with the theology taught in your church -- argue. Teach a Sunday School class and present your view -- write letters and columns for the church newsletter -- blog. When the person that fills your pulpit is teaching classes, attend, and badger him/her during Q&A sessions. Do your homework, be prepared. Write courteous, thoughtful, probing letters. Engage in the conversation. Beyond that there is not much to do.
Problems arise only if the church attempts to squelch such discussion and alternate viewpoints. I have been in churches like that, but not for long. Such behavior is one of my personal trigger points for suspicion of the cultic, they are generally not great places to be. Theology is an academic exercise, which demands openness and debate. When it ceases to be academic and becomes dogmatic, the church is looking for robots, not members.
The interrelationship between love and covering sins is the far more important and much deeper question. Does love, in fact, cover sins? Only in the sense that love sacrifices for the sake of the sinful. The question here is really the essence of the penal substitution debate that Adrian Warnock has been following so closely and on which Pyromaniac has been commenting for the last several weeks. I will not recreate that long and deep discussion, the reader is urged in the strongest terms to follow the links and read for themselves.
I will say this, as I read scripture, only one thing "covers" sin -- blood. The blood of the goat on the Day of Atonement, and in the present age -- the blood of Christ. Truly, Christ's sacrifice on the cross was an act of love, but it was not Christ's love that remitted sin, it was His blood, shed on our behalf. This is more than a semantic distinction -- when we say, "love covers a multitude of sins," we overlook sin, we do not overcome it. We neglect the huge price actually paid to genuinely cover sin.
