Where History and Theology Meet

My full-time job is as a pastor, but I moonlight as a professor of history and pastoral theology. Most of my students do not enjoy history; the same could be said for most of those sitting in the pew weekly. I’ve never understood this. A quote often credited to Maya Angelou states, “You can’t know where you are going until you know where you have been.” It likely predates her, but from an unknown source. Either way, I believe this about life and theology.

Christian tradition and history keep the Church grounded in the truth of the Word of God. Is it possible for a wrong theology to be espoused and repeated in this way? The answer is yes, but when the Church has grappled with a question for over 2,000 years and established a Biblically sound answer, straying from it is dangerous.

The Arian controversy erupted in the 300s AD, leading to the formation of what we now call the Nicene Creed (By the way, this creed is celebrating its 1,700^th anniversary in June). Arianism is still around, most notably in Mormon theology. Essentially, and this is a straightforward explanation, Arius believed that Jesus could not be begotten of the Father and equal to him. Thus, Jesus must be a created being, not eternal. Arius made his conclusions from a position of human logic rather than the teachings of Scripture. John chapter 1 clearly and beautifully explains our doctrine of Christ’s eternality.

Historical theology, as a proper term, keeps us, the followers of Christ, grounded in theology and, yes, traditions of Church doctrine. The Gospel Coalition defines Historical theology as “the discipline of narrating the development of Christian theology.” I would add that this definition also encompasses the practices of our faith, thereby including orthodoxy (doctrine) and orthopraxy (practice).

Let me point out a few examples of where I believe the modern Church is missing it because we have moved from a historical position. I hope to write about each of these in the coming weeks. I will compile these in a list, along with a brief explanation, below. Many of these are what I term “extra Biblical,” meaning they are not outlined in the New Testament as required for our faith. They are not sinful, or necessarily wrong in some contexts, but are also unnecessary.

Celebrating Jewish Festivals as Gentiles – Granted, there is much we can learn about Jesus in all of the feasts. I preached a series on that years ago. I loved it, yet I recognize that Jesus did not sacrifice himself for me to remain under the law (Gal 3). The Jewish feasts should be honored, but requiring them of Christians is wrong and outside of Biblical instruction and historical application.

Pentecostal Expressions—I am a classical Pentecostal in theology and practice. In Western cultures, we live at a time when those churches that entirely reject Pentecostalism are gaining ground, and those who move to the extreme of Pentecostalism are also gaining ground. Those of us who seek to practice Biblical Pentecostal theology and practice are viewed as odd by both sides. I would like to focus on a few specific points here. Flags and shofars in worship are extrabiblical. Flags appear nowhere in Scripture. Shofars are another example of the push toward the law of the Old Testament. Again, nothing is inherently sinful about these practices, but when we examine the historical context of Pentecostal theology, they appear unusual and outside the norm. They are not needed.

Oneness or Jesus Only Theology—Though the doctrine of the Trinity has been attacked throughout Christian History, the Church has never wavered from it. The Apostle’s Creed, the Nicene Creed, and Jesus’ baptism affirm the Trinity. Though I believe those holding this theology are saved, I would argue that they are on a slippery slope. One of the churches in our community that has a lot of buzz is Oneness. They don’t talk about it from the pulpit. As a result, Charismatic/Pentecostals flock to their high-energy services. I scratch my head and wonder how so many can affirm a theology that contradicts biblical evidence and historical doctrine. As a side note, I have not lost many people to this church. I have friends who have left their traditional Pentecostal churches and joined this Oneness church. This gives me grave concern. If you can be so off on a foundational tenet of the Christian faith, what else are you off on?

There is a strong movement toward traditionalism, orthodoxy, and orthopraxy among Pentecostals in their 20s and 30s. Many are leaving the Pentecostal faith and entering the Anglican and Eastern Orthodox Churches. Why? Too many Pentecostals reject the church’s traditions, both in doctrine and practice. I love our Pentecostal faith, but I also love the traditions of the church that have kept us grounded in the Word of God for 2,000 years.

I recognize that some of my readers may reject the idea of Pentecostalism as a tradition within the Church. I have made it a goal to learn about Pentecostal occurrences throughout history. Acts 2 never fully died out. It is easy to find if you search through history. This will be a blog soon. As a teaser, look at the Confession of St. Patrick, the official biography of Charles Finney, and some histories of the Moravians and Quakers. But, as I said, that is for another day and another blog.

Ultimately, we must hold the Word of God above all else, but we cannot overlook the influence of historical theology on our doctrine and practice. The safest way to be true to the foundations of our faith is to follow what has been for 2,000 years.