Opus 2013-3: Links: Response to “Denominations”, part 1 of 2

Recently at Gorges’ Grouse there was a post on Denominations.  It is worth reading if you have not done so yet.  I might nit pick but on the whole he has good points.  My basic thoughts here are taken from a note I wrote myself a couple of years ago.  As I was reviewing old ideas his post got me thinking this would be a good addition to the discussion.

In the study of theology you have different objectives.  One the one hand you have “systematic” theology.  Another emphasis would be “Biblical” theology.  This would seem to be redundant but it is a necessary difference.  There are certain teachings that are a required part of orthodox Christianity that you will not find in the concordance.  One is the teaching of the Trinity.  The world is not in the Bible but you do find both the statement that there is one God along with the divinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  That would be "systematic."

There is also a difference between theology and straight Biblical teaching.  For instance, how do you deal with the teaching about the filling with the Holy Spirit?  In my background, the Church of the Nazarene, we have a doctrine to explain it.  We call it “entire sanctification.”  This is theology saying there is a work of grace by the Holy Spirit subsequent to regeneration by which we are filled with the Spirit and sanctified entirely.  That is a theological statement.  Most denominations would disagree with the way the Nazarenes state it.

How does this work out in teaching the Bible.  The Bible says we are to be sanctified wholly.

(1 Thessalonians 5:23 KJV)  And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

No believer would claim it does not say this.  We simply disagree on what it means.

One is theology, one straight Bible teaching. 

To be continued...

homo unius libri