When as Christians
we attempt to lay out the rules and guidelines that ought to be followed regarding any aspect of our faith and conduct,
we often ascribe to it a theology of such and such. To put this in terms of
‘ought’ immediately places this under the rubric of ethics. If we ought to do
something, it is because God has prescribed it and we ascertain the
prescription of that either by overt biblical statement, or, as the Westminster divines
phrased it, “by good and necessary consequence” (Westminster Confession of
Faith 1, VI) drawn from a biblical study of the matter.
For example, we
have a theology of salvation (soteriology), sin (hamartiology), Christ
(Christology), last things (eschatology), and so on. These doctrines are
fundamentally about faith, or what we ought to believe. Interestingly, there
never has been a solid consensus on the doctrine of last things throughout
church history as evidenced by the three familiar views of the millennium
(amillennialism, postmillennialism, and premillennialism). The oughtness of a
theology of last things breaks down, and we believe that is acceptable because
what we really mean by ‘ought’ when it comes to our faith is that it applies
only to matters that are essential to Christianity. For example, there is no
Christianity if there is no Christ or resurrection. Hence, to have a theology
of salvation without a resurrected Christ is not a matter in which there is
wiggle room. Either you hold to Christ’s resurrection or you are a heretic. Not
so with one’s millennial view because whatever one holds to, he has not strayed
from what is essential to Christianity.
A theology of a
certain practice, that is, a biblical view of how we should behave as
Christians likewise has areas which are quite clear and others which are not so
obvious. I recall in the sixties how Beatlemania introduced the fad of long
hair for men and changed the course of male hairstyle ever since. It was
debated hotly at times as to whether or not it was a sin for a man to have long
hair. Citing such verses as 1 Cor 11:14, Does
not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor
to him?, at first seemed to settle the matter until the question was posed,
how long is long? And whether the length of man’s hair was relative to the male
hairstyles of the culture. Charges of relativism and situational ethics were
made. Similar questions rose over the drinking of alcoholic beverages, smoking,
dancing, going to the movies, and playing cards. In the church at Corinth, it was eating
meat offered to idols (1 Cor 8; 10:25; cf Rom 14:21). How one behaves in such
matters has to do with an opinion that is made in good conscience, and because
they are not essential to Christianity itself (for example, whether one smoked
or not had nothing to do with his authenticity as a Christian), there was room
for difference and toleration.
As Christian
writers, in some fashion or other, we have a theology of Christian writing. Some of us
may have spent considerable time over that, others may have given it little
thought; regardless, if the writer is truly Christian, his Christianity affects
his writing, not only in the content, but also in the practice. The theology of
Christian writing that I hold to is very likely different from yours, and may
very well be at odds with it. I have expressed my views in several posts, and
it has elicited responses both pro and con.
Whatever our theology of Christian writing is, it ought to be biblically based. We should give serious thought to what writing is in general, and what Christian writing is in particular. When we have done that, we can measure our obedience to the one who has called us to be writers. It really is a matter of obedience in the sense that God calls us to devote ourselves seriously to whatever he has called us to do. Part of that devotion is to be sure that we are doing it to the best of our ability, in a manner that reflects the nobility of our work, and as consciously as possible to the glory of God. How we do that goes into our theology, and if we are not faithful to it, we are failing in our calling – we are disobedient servants.
No comments:
Post a Comment