We (my fellow-preachers and I) are not theologians— and no apology is due for that. We are not “professional” men; and although I have long urged those who would preach to train themselves in every facet of their chosen work, many are doing an admirable job without benefit of special training in historic theology. But their lack of familiarity with classic “schools” of thought, and their lack of a “historic sense” of theology leads some to accept the theories of commentaries and contemporary “religious” writers without realizing that they are nibbling at the bait of a weathered theological trap. In earlier days the ever-present battle with denominationalists, with formal and not-so-formal debates, served to keep preachers informed in the basic tenets of various faiths, and in answering their arguments we developed a “theology” of scriptural answers, even though they were not so “methodically formulated.” Perhaps some were “reaction” answers, but the earlier contenders for the faith saw the trap and had sense enough to react. Today many are “wide open” for an invasion of neo-Calvinism —and some not so “neo” —because they do not know the background or the consequences of the arguments they are making. This is especially true in studies on “Grace” and “Holy Spirit.”

A favorite sermon topic of years past was, “Is the Gospel God Gave Suited to the Man God Made?” Answering “Yes,” the preacher discussed the nature of man: a free-agent, capable of understanding God’s word, of coming to God, and held individually accountable for his response to the Lord’s invitation. He knew, and pointedly explained that this was in contrast to the popular theology which taught that genuine free-agency on the part of man was contrary to the “sovereignty of God,” and that Adam’s sin was inherited by all men, so that man was incapable of understanding God’s word and coming to a saving faith, except as God’s Spirit acted directly upon selected individuals, removed their depravity, and brought them to a salvation they could not then lose. (Oh yes, it took more than fifteen minutes to preach this.) Is all this “irrelevant” today? The words have changed somewhat, and there are few formal discussions on these topics, but the basic errors are deeply ingrained in modern theology, experiential religion, direct indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and some of the new (among “us”) concepts of “grace.” So, don’t be surprised if we publish some studies in moss-covered theology, with application for today. [Previous Article] [Next Article]

	Created on 25-Nov-00	Page last updated