I think sometimes it’s easy to cross the line from wanting to know God better to Theology-ology. I think CS Lewis captures this in The Great Divorce saying, “Every poet and musician and artist, but for Grace, is drawn away from love of the thing he tells, to love of the telling till, down in Deep Hell, they cannot be interested in God at all but only in what they say about Him.”

When I first became a Christian I was consumed with a desire to know something, anything, about God. I read and studied and prayed with an unquenchable thirst. But over time I let that feeling become more about the study and less about God. That’s a very dangerous path to walk down!

“However, if someone studies God only to acquire knowledge about him without applying any of that knowledge to his life, he is not so much studying God as he is studying the study of God”

A trap that many Christians find themselves in. I would wager that many new Christians without root will jump into the bible eager to learn more about God, and then come across difficult passages and won’t know what to do with them. They may want only to hear the loving passages, or the ones that command some drastic change in their lives.

i would say that Theology-ology-phobia stems from the desire to know and love and be loved by God, unless it requires earth shattering life changes (which often means the major surgery of some sin in our lives).

As long as i’m reading some touchy feely happy passages that make me experience being loved, then i’m good, i know the “love of God”. But when it comes to actually reading the word of God, and applying what it says to our lives, people hesitate.

Amen to your post!

Oh how we fall off both sides of this proverbial horse. One person who finds that reading and studying does not come natural to him and therefore does seek to be a good theologian holds up the idea from Scripture that “knowledge puffs up” and says to himself and others that he avoids “too much” theology because it only makes one prideful. Others, like myself, enjoy reading, learning, discussing ideas and finds it natural to read as much as possible about theological matters and wants others to share in similar pursuits. This type of individual may claim that one cannot love God without really knowing who He is and that to love a God whom we think inaccurate thoughts about is equivocal to idolatry ( which it is). But then too often (I’m speaking from experience here) this individual who satures himself with knowledge finds a large chasm between His head and his heart, his knowing and his loving.

It seems to me the missing link that is common between these two types of individuals is the awareness of our absolute dependence on God. In other words, we need humility. I need humility. I love Spurgeon’s definition of humility. It is “the proper estimate of oneself.” We we estimate ourselves properly and find ourselves lacking, then we are drawn to the everlasting fountain of life-giving waters, namely, our Lord Jesus Christ. We want to know Him and the more we know Him the more we love Him. God grant us the grace of humility.

Good post Tim, thank you for this, however I think it goes deeper than what you describe. Unfortunately, sad to say, the reason so many people shun theology isbecause they are not be saved themselves, and thus have no real desire for God as described in the bible and love more the god they’ve created in their own minds. They flock to books such as the Shack because it describes a false god that they are confortable with, and not the holy God of scripture. I say this again, and truely believe it, that church buildings are one of the great mission fields of our day, and Sunday morning is one of the greatest days of idolatry in Norh America. I also think the reason so many of these performers(pastors) have accumulated to themselves such large followings is because they have never heard the preaching from the word of God, they don’t know what it is. John MacArthur pointedly said, that not long do the false converts sit in the pew at his church, and understandably not. But oh how they love the Warrens and Olsteens and Jakes.

Before anyone disagrees with what I’ve said, this is what Jesus said the church would be like, being filled with the true and the false. Listen to this message and think about sharing the true gospel, and never weaken its power by appealing to the emotions and “feeling” of the unsaved. The gospel IS and offence to the unregenerate, all you are commanded to do is share it in love.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzQ1Dj6xsuI

The adversary has many ways of ensnaring Christians, depending on their particular weaknesses. For some of us, theology-ology can be such a snare, for all the reasons other commentors here have already given. Running away from theology altogether is no solution, either, since the enemy revels in our ignorance.

I think one way theology-ology manifests itself is when we fall in love with a particular theological system, and then elevate that system to the point where it is of higher authority for us than its source, the inspired Word of God. It is, however, critical to have an understanding of God and His activity—as it has been revealed to us in Scripture, and insofar as we fallen, finite creatures can do so—and this the role theology is to play. We just must always be prepared to revisit and revise our theology when a careful re-reading of Scripture demands it, and never bend Scripture to fit our theological preconceptions.

Good post. I believe your basic premise is correct.

I’ve had a rough day and I’m not trying to be rude so I hope you will indulge me. Perhaps some others can help me clear my mind on a matter.

“Principles” is probably one of my least favorite words. It digs at me. Maybe I’m being too sensitive and not looking at it in the right perspective.

When I hear the word used, as it was here, I think like this…

God says, “Women should cover their heads…”We say, “God doesn’t really mean that, let’s find some principles”

RESULT: Principles are not binding. Principles are more flexible. The principles I arrive at may not be the principles that you arrive at but it doesn’t matter because they’re just principles. We can now bypass God’s clear statement and choose to follow the principles that are less demanding and more to our liking.

Tim, I’m not implying that this is how you see it or that my view is what you’re suggesting. Perhaps I’m being too cynical.

OR

“The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those who do not have it.” George Bernard Shaw

Tim Irvin, I’m sorry you had a bad day but if it makes you feel any better I agree with your logic. It’s legitimate and lucid.

My first encounter with church life was in a church where the head covering was taught as a no-brainer and they took it literally. I don’t particularly care about the issue either way, but whenever I read that chapter from the beginning and how Paul explains the significance of submission and the order thereof, I find it hard to see that as having only a cultural application to the recalcitrant Corinthians and not us today.

In a broader sense though, if I may I’d like to offer a different perspective on the application of biblical principles. Not to refute what you’re saying but to see it from another angle. As you know the Bible is pretty silent on many areas of modern life for obvious reasons as it was written in an age where most of our modern practices did not yet exist. Let’s take the classic question “is it a sin to smoke?” and if so where does the Bible say it’s a sin? No chapter and verse “thou shalt not smoke” but if the Bible calls us God’s sacred temple and the Holy Spirit’s dwelling and by destroying that temple God will destroy us (1 Cor 3:17), we can use this as a “biblical principle” that anything we do that voluntarily destroys and self inflicts damage on our health, is sinful. The next logical question is, “does smoking fit that description?” If the answer is “yes” then this scripture would apply in principle to anything that we practice deliberately that destroys our physical existence.

In the same vein, self-stimulation is not mentioned as a sin the Bible (I’m deliberately avoiding the M word to bypass some internet filters on my end), but lust is a sin. So if one can become self stimulated without lustful thoughts (excluding one’s own spouse of course) then theoretically they can do that without sinning but reality dictates this is nearly impossible to do. So the principle of forbidden lust should extend to all such practices although the Scriptures do not actually name them.

Personally I’m very interested in Scriptures that have a workplace application because I’ve been working the corporate world for 21 years as a Christian. Here’s one example. As a business and premises owner, is there anything in the Bible that would place ethical responsibilities on me to provide occupational health and safety for my staff and customers? Explicitly no, but principally (in my opinion) yes. Deuteronomy 22:8 says, When you build a new house, then you shall put a railing around your [flat] roof, so that no one may fall from there and bring guilt of blood upon your house. (AMP) We don’t need great insight to understand that God placed an ethical obligation on property owners to ensure they provided a safe environment for those who accessed and use their property, and failure to do so made them guilty of negligence. This of course was in the OT law. The question then becomes “would God continue to care about this now?” If the answer is “no” then we have to accept that God couldn’t care less if you left loose wiring on the floor of your workshop, slippery surfaces, salmonella-breeding air conditioning ducts or any other pathogenic environments.

Then the question of what jobs should be unacceptable to Christians? Well other than the obvious ones where you sin overtly or break the law, you would have to apply biblical principles to arrive at an answer since the Bible doesn’t give those details. Should a Christian participate in “whisper marketing” for example? This is the marketing strategy of employing people to engage in real world product endorsements at the moment of purchase. You may be approached by someone in a supermarket who “coincidentally” happened to be standing in front of the same isle as you and they start telling you about how great a particular product on the shelve has been for them. Perfectly legal, but totally dishonest. So what verse would one apply? You’d have to find Scriptures that “bind us” to the principle of honesty etc.

Not sure If I made much sense, but I tried……you posed a great challenge and a legitimate concern. Too late in your neck of the woods but it’s only 4pm over here!

Hi Tim, Thanks for the great reminder :)