The concept of "theology" is not used univocally but equivocally. The word has a different sense in historical-critical theology than it has among evangelicals. We are accustomed to speaking of Bultmann's theology, or Barth's, or Moltmann's, or Jungel's. But which of us would speak in the same sense of Spenser's theology, or Wesley's, or Moody's, or Spurgeon's? Did the latter group somehow fail to make a theological contribution? Of course not. But they did not develop their own theology. That is, they did not construct a theology that could be named after them, containing specific, subjective divergences from the word of God.
It is only at the cost of a considerable independent divergence from God's word that a theologian's achievement wins renown in the current setting. The person who takes every thought captive to the obedience of Christ (2 Cor 10:5) and loyally subordinates his thinking to God's revelation constructs no such theology. That person also no longer faces pressure to make a name for himself. For him it is enough if the Lord says to him, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant."
Eta Linnemann, Biblical Criticism on Trial (Grand Rapids: Kregel; 2001) , 117. The bold font is part of the original.
5 comments:
hmm...but I would speak of Wesley's theology and Spurgeon's etc... and Piper's, for example...
But would you see Spurgeon as a *great* theologian?
At Moore College it drove me bananas when I chose an elective about 20th Century Theologians. Guess who we looked at? Bultmann, Barth, Moltmann etc (the usual suspects).
People who seem to stay faithful to the word of God, rather than moving away from it, do not seem to be regarded as the great theologians. Where was Packer and Stott?
Well, you'll be pleased to know that the revamped course, which I am co-teaching and hand a big hand in redesigning, has Warfield in it, and Packer, Horton, Vanhoozer, Knox and Robinson - as well as Schleiermacher, Newman, Barth, Williams and others. We will be able to see how reformed and evangelical theologians have responded to the challenges put to them by others.
Trouble is, you see, I would regard Calvin and Edwards and Warfield and Bavinck as great theologians... they had something fresh and original to say but did it in the parameters of serving the word of God, and as its faithful interpreters.
I'm glad you've changed that course. Well done.
Sounds good Michael! I might have to consider it when I get to 4th year :-)
I saw you at college the other day, but didn't introduce myself. I'm sure I'll get a chance to sooner or later.
Post a Comment