theology below the surface
I had a good discussion this morning with a couple of brothers on the place of doctrine in the ministry of the church. In this case we were discussing how the difference between a “lordship” understanding of salvation (is there any other kind?!) and an “easy-believism” understanding might look different in some practical ministry situation, say preaching to inmates in a prison.
One brother made the point that in practice, the way in which we present the gospel could look pretty much the same: Creator God, man’s fall and continuing sinfulness, God’s provision in Christ’s death in our place rescuing us from eternal death in hell, resurrection, and the hope of eternal life, all through faith in Christ. Thus, any discussion regarding the finer nuances about what that salvation should look like, he suggested, is mostly academic, at least until after the person is converted.
I’m not so sure that’s true, because the Bible makes clear that repentance from sin and submission to Christ as Lord is an inseparable part of the gospel call. Jesus said, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15), and those who are convinced of a believe-only call in the gospel will likely leave out mention of repentance.
But my larger point in response, was that theology is never just academic; that the definitions which make up the truths that we declare mean everything. For example, resting beneath the simple statement, “God sent Jesus to die for sinners” is an ocean of theological meaning, meaning that is usually assumed by those who declare such things, but meaning that is nonetheless vast and crucially important. The statement practically begs for definition and clarification:
- Who is God?
- Who is Jesus?
- Who is a sinner?
- What would happen to sinners if Jesus didn’t die for them?
- How can his death make any difference at all, much less for sinners?
- How do sinners receive the benefits of Jesus’ death?
And on and on the list could go. Just because Christians usually assume the content beneath our statements, doesn’t mean that others will. If they are lost, they likely will not. And they’ll likely have many of those questions, even if they don’t ask them. But when they do, the answers we give will mean everything. And that’s why theology, even when it reaches to inexhaustible depths beneath the surface of our propositions, is practical in its essence–the stuff of life. It’s never just academic.

The words have to matter. The concepts do mean something specific.
What I have been wrestling with in my witnessing opportunities is how to share my faith in light of my belief that God is totally sovereign and has chosen those whom He will save. I know we are called to be witnesses, (no question there) and it is not our job to try to distinguish between those God has chosen and those He has not. So how do we, or are we obligated to share the concept of God’s election…or how should it manifest itself? How should that belief come out in our witness?
In light of this belief, it doesn’t seem right to say to someone, “Jesus died on the cross for you,” since I can’t really know this to be true. God knows, but I do not. I do know, “Jesus died on the cross to pay the penalty for sin”, which seems more truthful from my perspective to say to someone.
I realize this subject is much bigger than the original discussion (God’s choosing and election) but it certainly supports the idea that the theology matters.