THEOLOGY IN CRISES, BY BONIFRESH MUHOLLO.The bible is not a google software, whereby you just click a search button and get all the answers you need. If it were so, there would be no need for bible teachers, scribes and preachers.The holy spirit does not interpret the scriptures for you, He inspires you to interpret them. If it were not so, there would be no need for bible instructors. I will not rest until i demythologize the art of inspiration, for centuries, from primitivity to enlightened 21st century, the naive view that one needs no theological training to interpret the bible has dominated the minds of the ignorant as well as the intelligent. God is not opposed to reason, because He is the one responsible for it. Karl Barth, the 20th century theology Einstein said that Faith(inspiration) is the illumination of REASON. I agree with this view, look at every funny theology out there, and tell me whether it is founded on sober reason. Comrade theologian Churchill Ogallo(Bugema University, Not in A.B.T) is not indefensible when he contends that inspiration needs reason more than the latter needs the former. St. Augustine maintains that sound interpretation of the holy writ depends on an existential knowledge of oneself. If there was no use of reason in hermaneutics, God should not have bothered that His message be written down. Many despise higher learning on spiritual matters and by so doing, give the Devil an easy task of deception. Am not saying that one must have atleast a bathelors in theology to know the will of God, if i were to say so, i woud not account for the millions of illitrates that am sure will be in heaven. Am talking in the context of 21st century whereby the church is in dire need of sober apologetics and updating of fundamental church doctrines. Not everybody is to know greek and hebrew, but the minister of the gospel cannot neglect such and other relevant studies.A pastor should be a theologian, to protect the saints from deceptions. There should be a clear line between the office of a pastor/theologian/clergy and that one of Lay. The former is like Paul, to judge between heresies and truth, whereas the latter should be more or less like Peter, for practical administration of the church. In the hierachy of epistemology, i contaend that theories occupy the top most position, followed by pragmatism. It follows then, that laymen should consult theologians just as practicals depend on theories.This drives theology to her rightful position, of the boss of the church. However, the church has never allowed theologians to do their jobs well. There has always been a needless overlapping of duties between the two. Theologians are responsible for making church doctrines, whereas the administration should be concerned with implementing them-on the supervision of the former. But theologians are aware of the fact that knowledge is dynamic in human contexts and so they often come back to edit the doctrines time to time, only to find the administration having built a babylon wall around the doctrines and posters saying dont dare touch our doctrines. The administration often forgets that doctrines/dogmas/theology is/are not static. In the first case, these doctines were made by the same theologians who now wants some improvements on the same. A church without theologians is like a class without a teacher. A church without administration is like a class without a student prefect.
Posted on: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:47:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015