I feel that as of late I have been blogging off of my 'soap box.' However, I must continue. I have many more stones to throw from atop my perch. Today's topic is balance. I must say the idea isn't all mine as far as originality of topic.
A professor of mine said, and I quote, "Truth can often be found in the middle of two extremes." Quotes like that make my ears perk up as I fasten my ever-critical (denotatively) 'thinking cap.' So I thought, "Is there 'truth' in that statement. Is 'truth' found in the middle?"
This statement immediately caused me to remember a conversation I had with a certain person. We were discussing some controversial phrases in a song about God's choosing and knowing (relationship, not mental knowledge) us as His elect before the world was framed. The comment was made: "Yeh, we changed a few words to make the text more balanced, even though the words [we changed] were straight from Bible text." Immediately, I made a mental note to come back to this the next time I was alone and would have time to think about it in light of Scripture.
Because of our post-modern society (I realize we may be beginning a new era), we must firmly establish and unflaggingly affirm what the source of 'truth' is. Without question, we acknowledge mentally that God's Word is the exclusive source of truth. With this being said, what then is balance within a doctrinal view? Now, I must say that I realize where Scripture is not crystal clear we must not be exactly dogmatic. However, if being balanced is taking two extreme views, finding their mean and declaring that as 'truth,' I must waive a red flag for caution's sake. In history, you do not find reformers who bisected the circle of a doctrinal controversy, carefully avoiding both extremes, and calling that 'truth.' We cannot be afraid that someone within a movement will 'separate' from us if we hold a certain Biblical view.
The issue of the process of salvation quickly comes to mind. Two 'fightin'-fundies' would not dare mention that they might be somewhat 'calvinistic' because that's not who they are. I concede that choosing the ultimate extreme may not be the answer. But we cannot just avoid a 'position' because of the ramifications of being labeled a "_____." Be biblical, not balanced. Where Scripture is clear (i know that is a hard one!) be dogmatic. But if Scripture SEEMS to go both ways some times, do not fall into the "balanced" trap. An infinite God has 'secrets' beyond our understanding.
After much rambling, search the Scriptures! Do not hold a view because you are a _____. Do not 'believe' something because someone else does. It behooves us to have our theology firmly established in Scripture, and not simply believing what another in the past believed. God's Word is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. What God wants us to know is found therein. Do not create a hodgepodge of doctrine by choosing the 'middle.'
A professor of mine said, and I quote, "Truth can often be found in the middle of two extremes." Quotes like that make my ears perk up as I fasten my ever-critical (denotatively) 'thinking cap.' So I thought, "Is there 'truth' in that statement. Is 'truth' found in the middle?"
This statement immediately caused me to remember a conversation I had with a certain person. We were discussing some controversial phrases in a song about God's choosing and knowing (relationship, not mental knowledge) us as His elect before the world was framed. The comment was made: "Yeh, we changed a few words to make the text more balanced, even though the words [we changed] were straight from Bible text." Immediately, I made a mental note to come back to this the next time I was alone and would have time to think about it in light of Scripture.
Because of our post-modern society (I realize we may be beginning a new era), we must firmly establish and unflaggingly affirm what the source of 'truth' is. Without question, we acknowledge mentally that God's Word is the exclusive source of truth. With this being said, what then is balance within a doctrinal view? Now, I must say that I realize where Scripture is not crystal clear we must not be exactly dogmatic. However, if being balanced is taking two extreme views, finding their mean and declaring that as 'truth,' I must waive a red flag for caution's sake. In history, you do not find reformers who bisected the circle of a doctrinal controversy, carefully avoiding both extremes, and calling that 'truth.' We cannot be afraid that someone within a movement will 'separate' from us if we hold a certain Biblical view.
The issue of the process of salvation quickly comes to mind. Two 'fightin'-fundies' would not dare mention that they might be somewhat 'calvinistic' because that's not who they are. I concede that choosing the ultimate extreme may not be the answer. But we cannot just avoid a 'position' because of the ramifications of being labeled a "_____." Be biblical, not balanced. Where Scripture is clear (i know that is a hard one!) be dogmatic. But if Scripture SEEMS to go both ways some times, do not fall into the "balanced" trap. An infinite God has 'secrets' beyond our understanding.
After much rambling, search the Scriptures! Do not hold a view because you are a _____. Do not 'believe' something because someone else does. It behooves us to have our theology firmly established in Scripture, and not simply believing what another in the past believed. God's Word is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. What God wants us to know is found therein. Do not create a hodgepodge of doctrine by choosing the 'middle.'