What shapes your theology the most?

Well, I’ll take the bait first.

What shapes my theology? That is an excellent question that I have really come to grips with lately, after hearing a message on Andrew Fuller (he’s the particular Baptist pastor in England who sent William Carey to India and thus began the modern missionary movement).

First, I must say that it is Puritanism, namely that of Jonathan Edwards and John Owen. Many of my breakthroughs in Scriptural insight have come from these men, either directly or indirectly. As a result of this, Calvinism has a high influence on me. It shapes my view of people both within the church and outside of the church. It dominates much of my world view. Also, God’s sovereignty and glory is very much important to me. So is pure, holy living even though I never can live up to it.

Another influence on my theology are my college professors. My adviser at SBU was such a gracious person. When I had my car wreck while going to preach for the school, he visited me in the hospital. When my friend’s grandpa was about to die, Dr. Fuhrman let him return to New Mexico to see his grandpa before he died and let the kid take his final when he returned back the next semester. That is the kind of person I aspire to be as a Christian. Also, what I learn from them in class has shaped how I exegete the Bible, how I look at Jesus’ words and life.

These are the two things that come to mind when I ponder this question. I hope that I have answered the question in the way you were asking.

I have almost commented three times but stopped because I felt that it was not complete (and I changed locations). I would say that the first thing on my mind is a desire to see the totality of the world as it really is, through a lens stripped of presuppositions. However, that lens is clouded by such topics. I want the Bible to make sense and mesh with how the world appears to be. I want to situate the Bible in it’s historical context and start my viewpoint there.

I want to see the fullness of God’s personality. I feel like the formulations that I have encountered either stress the justice/sovereignty of God over the Love/Mercy of God or vice versa. It is difficult to hold those attributes in perfect harmony.

There are also my religious wants that I have to suppress, such as my want for universal salvation, for no person to be sent to Hell; or the actualized equality of women both in worth and in deed. There are a lots of things like this. I try to guard against this. Overall, I try to remain open and not tied to a historical formulation of doctrine. Not that I want to be ignorant of them, but to see the strengths and weakness of them with the goal of a better doctrine.

Finally, I want to recognize the apparent contradictions between the world as it appears and the world as it is described (seemingly) in the Bible and find a way to reconcile them.

I want to say that this is a great question (and I hope all answer it here) for it forces one to look at the additions one places on the Bible.

Well, as a Christian I must say that it is the Bible understood through the aid of God’s Spirit. But I think you are getting at more of how I understand the Bible considering that there are so many different views within Christianity on doctrinal issues. To that I would hold to that which is rational (non-contradictory). I would also echo what HT said above, I lean heavily on men who have gone before me particularly of the Reformation based thinking. I primarily see the truths of Scripture to apply to the whole of man’s life, it answers all the honest questions we may have.

So I see the Bible not as an exhaustive textbook about God, man, and nature. So a perfect systematic theology will never exist this side of eternity (perhaps never period because God is infinite). So it is our task to strive to understand what God has given us, as best we can. We will get it wrong, all of us when we stand before God will be corrected in some areas, however we must strive to have a clear understanding in our theology through study of the Bible itself, and looking to the men who have gone before us. That is my approach to doing theology.

I believe HT and HM have both brought good points to this thought. We all have people who have shaped us (for better or worse). From college professors who we admired (or hated) to the sunday school teacher we had when we were six, these teachers have had some impression on us.

Another thought that HM brought up is how we see the world in relation to the bible. I believe HM’s thoughts on God are deeply true, he hold certain views based on our understanding of his justice/love relationship.

There are probably many more examples and personal stories that we all could share but this is my point: One of our duties as Christian “theologians” is to recognize when and where our “presuppositions” and “beliefs that come from outside the bible” shade us from the true truth. Sometimes our passions of certain believes or doctrines might be more founded on a passion/belief of a loyal college professor, or preacher, or our undestanding of the world. When we recognize that we are holding not to scripture but to a fragment we need to try to let it go and come to scripture once again.

Our goal, be it extremely difficult, to recognize when these issues actually do play a part of our developing doctrinal truths. Let us try to base our “truth” on the one thing that is true…scripture.

Disagree or agree????

I agree.

I would also like to know how you, Casey, would answer this question.

I get direct revelation from God. Seriously, I will address the topic in the future. My weekends are usually busy. casey

I think that there are a lot of good thoughts above.

Casey, is scripture the only source of Truth? The only source of Revelation? Can one not learn truth from nature, philosophy, logic, experience, or listening to the Holy Spirit?

What about seeing the Bible as a filter. Filter what you think is the Holy Spirit speaking to you (in whatever form) thru the Bible as a lens.

I think that the issues that have already been brought up are true with me, as well. I have had certain individuals (dead and alive) who have shpaed my thinking. I probably won’t make a huge list here, unless someone wants to know. I think that the issues of the world and God that HM brought up were excellent. We, meaning myself too, are shaped by our surroundings (positively or negatively).

Actually both the issues that HT and HM brought up were things that I was not thinking about. When I asked the question I was actually refering strictly to doctrinal issues. For example, I believe in DOCTIRNE 1 (it might be right or wrong). In studying Doc 2 I accept it because it validates Doc 1. The reason why I accept it is not because scripture claims it to be true but that if I hold to DOC 1 then I must hold to DOC 2. The only way to perserve DOC 1 is to hold to DOC 2. After many of these steps I belief in DOC 9, 10, and 11 too based soley on DOC 1.

When I asked the original question, I was trying to examine a little more closely what Doctrines shape our thinking the most. I do not what the bible answer, obviously everyone will say that Jesus on the cross and deity are foundational truths, which is true. But when it comes to my (yours) actual belief development, which doctrines do you allow to shape other doctrines? Thinking out loud (even so I am typing this), I would think the end of times, issue of free will, and our understanding of equality are some Doctrines that might be more foundational to an individual than they realize. I was just wondering if we could find these issues so we can be aware of the dangers and blindly following a particular doctrine (not that any of those issues mentioned above are wrong).

Henry, I will try to give quick answers to your questions. Feel free to ask more questions if you have them.
Is scripture the only source of Truth? absolutely not. We can still know God/his truths without scripture. Romans 1. But all of scripture is true truth. So it makes sense to study and look at what we do know as truth that God has given.

The only source of revelation? Can one not learn truth from nature, philosophy, logic, experience, or listening to the HS?
In part, my answer above has already answered some of this question. When people study “truths (like philosophy, science, logic)” outside the bible they get scared because usually the two do not mesh well with on another. But I think that is because people use “faulty” or “Bad” logic, philosophy, science to begin with. In fact I can find people who do the same thing with the bible (we can have faulty or bad students of the word too). When it comes to philosophy, logic, science I think the qualities that we can see in God should be in these “truths” as well. Let me explain. God has qualities of Consistency, and Coherrent (probably mispelled). So “right” or “true” philosophy should be consistent throughout its teaching. An example of one that might not be consistent might be relativism. At someone point on that process of studying the essence of relativism, I think that there are issues that come up that prove to me that relativism is not consistent nor coherrent with it’s teaching.

I think CS Lewis tells the story of an encounter with a college student who believed in relativism. Lewis got some boiling hot water and held it over the students head and asked why he should not dump it on the boy. The boy had to admit that there are some “laws” or “absolutes.”

I really do not know exactly what you mean by “bible as a filter” and “filter the HS speaking to you” stuff. I believe since scritpure is true, we can use it as a platform to study other things. So if that is what you mean by filter, then ok.

casey

On the road to Emmaus, Jesus encountered to two disciples and said, “Don’t you know that all the Scriptures speak of me?” (paraphrase - I don’t have my Bible with me) Paul speaks of receiving the revelation of Christ and in Ephesians 3:4 he says that he desires us to “know” his “intelligence” in the mystery of Christ. That is what drives my “theology.”

Peter,

what do you mean exactly by those things?