What Is Theology? by Editor

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Mar 13, 1884

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 10, No. 11.

What Is Theology?

By Editor

WEBSTER enumerates five heads under which he classifies the science of theology, namely: Moral, natural, revealed, scholastic, and speculative. There are, doubtless, even in this age, some good and acceptable works on moral theology, and some works of value on revealed theology. But if we may judge by the popular church teaching we must decide that such works do not exercise any strong or controlling influence over the current theology of the denominations. This seems to be an age of disintegrations. Old landmarks are fast being removed. The popular standard of faith is variable and superficial. Confidence in the Bible is giving way; its plainest facts and precepts are yielded to any tyro who presents a tolerably plausible theory and labels it "science." We have been led to remark—and our opinion is being confirmed by yearly observation—that men often profess to love the Bible when in fact they love only their opinions of the Bible. This is proved to be a truth by their so frequently giving up the Bible rather than to give up their opinions.

When they start out in that direction they have no idea of the terminus of the journey. Nor do they generally appreciate the influences which are moulding them until their faith is undermined. And so liable are they to be mistaken in themselves—so subtle are the deceptions of the enemy—that we have seen them pose as model Bible believers even after they had openly set it aside as of no authority.

Some years since we presented our present faith—the doctrines of the Lord's coming, the Sabbath, etc.—before the members of a certain church in Wisconsin. A prominent member said to his brethren

that they were bound to accept the teaching because it was according to the Bible, and in their covenant they had promised to take "the Bible as their rule of faith and practice." This was denied by another, who said they had covenanted to take only the New Testament. To settle the dispute a meeting was called, and the covenant was produced, and it said "the Bible." Whereupon a motion was made, and passed by a goodly majority, that they strike the Bible out of the covenant; and the New Testament was inserted in its place. That was twenty-six years ago. We do not know how many would like openly to take the same position; but we do believe there are many who, if they acted out their feelings, would vote the Bible out of their churches.

Representative men of nearly all the churches now are putting forth their theories which are undermining the authority of the law of ten commandments; and in furtherance of this object, they are setting aside the entire Old Testament. Recently a church member, in his efforts to evade the position of a Seventh-day Adventist, in answer to the statement that the Bible is the rule of our life, said that the Bible was only of use to us to prove that Christ is come. Now we are to look to him alone.

It is quite true that we are to look to him alone as the author and the way of salvation, whose blood alone can cleanse from sin. But it is equally true that "sin is the transgression of the law," and that we are not permitted to transgress the law under the pretext of causing grace to abound. Rom. 3:20; 6:1-3. The Saviour prayed to the Father, in behalf of his disciples, "Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth." John 17:17. Any theory which sets aside the word of God—and the Old Testament is the word of God, and to it the Saviour referred in his prayer—is subversive of the principles of righteousness; it is opposed to the sanctification of the believer on a true Scriptural basis.

Another instance of giving up the landmarks, and yielding the Scriptures to the life-long opponents of the orthodox faith, is found in the tendency to spiritualize the declarations of the Bible in regard to future rewards. The following paragraph is copied from a Congregationalist paper, being part of a sermon preached by a minister of that church:—

"I hold that the soul is immaterial, and that its happiness and misery are internal to itself, the result of no moral surroundings, but exclusively the result of its own moral condition. The soul is in Heaven when in a state of equilibrium and peace; it is in hell when in a state of unrest, out of harmony with itself and with God."

In our younger days we lived some time in a neighborhood which was almost a stronghold of Universalism; and we attended their preaching, and read extensively their papers and books, and (we say it with regret), we became so deeply interested that we were almost persuaded that they had the truth of the Bible. We speak of this to show that we became well acquainted with the system. And we affirm, without any fear of being contradicted by any one who understands the subject, that the above paragraph, as far as the final condition of the sinner is concerned, is pure and unadorned Universalism. Every soul "in a state of unrest, out of harmony with God," is in hell already! And yet some such souls enjoy that position, and would fain remain in hell; indeed, they cannot be urged to leave it when the door is opened before them. And if hell in the future is no more crossing to their feelings than is hell in the present state, most of them will be willing to risk it, and—not go to hell, as they are there already, but—remain there to all eternity! Only prove to them that this old Universalist theory is truly orthodox, and the preaching of the cross of Christ will be foolishness indeed in their sight.

As to the reward of the righteous, if they are already in Heaven, with cares, and tears, and groans, and tribulations, what assurance have they that these afflictions will not always attach to them in Heaven? Is this the teaching of the Bible? No, no. It is only a perversion of gospel truth, and is part of a spiritualizing system which makes the Bible a mere plaything in the hands of every dreamer. By just such things as these, made popular in large denominations, "the way of truth shall be evil spoken of."

The Bible is a plain book, well suited to the wants and conditions of plain people. It is said in the gospel that, when Christ spoke, "the common people heard him gladly." But if his preaching had resembled that of the spiritualizers, the common people would have gone away uninterested.

We deeply regret that such teaching as that of the paragraph above quoted is becoming popular. Man is a fallen being; the race is inclined to have its own way. However faithfully the Bible is preached, it is difficult to arouse people to a sense of their condition and their danger. But such doctrine as that here noticed is only calculated to lull them to sleep. May the Lord in mercy open the eyes of the blind shepherds, before the day comes spoken of by Jeremiah the prophet: "Howl, ye shepherds, and cry; and wallow yourselves in the ashes, ye principal of the flock; for the days of your slaughter and of your dispersions are accomplished; and ye shall fall like a pleasant vessel." Jer. 25. That day will surely come, and the unfaithful ones, who have misled the people, and virtually taught them that no evil shall befall them for their evil doings, will have their portion with the hypocrites.

We are aware that it may be said, These people are sincere, and you should have charity. But we dare not hold our peace. We believe the Pharisees, in the days of the Saviour, were generally sincere, and that they thought they were the only safe leaders of the people. We do not accept man as our standard. "To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." We pity them, but duty compels us to warn the people of the danger of such teachings.