POOR THEOLOGIANS IN THE BIBLE

I almost titled this post “Poor Theology in the Bible,” but that would have been quite misleading. The fact is that the Bible does happen to contain the record of those who had very misguided and mistaken concepts of God and His will, not just those in pagan nations but also among some of His staunchest followers. Below is just a brief sampling of examples that come to mind.

Joshua (Joshua 5:13-14) – Right before the Battle of Jericho, Joshua looks up and sees a man with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua asks him, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” The answer from the man, who turns out to be the commander of the LORD's army, is a strange one; he says, “Neither.” In other words, Joshua is so off-base theologically that he hasn't even been able to frame his question in categories that make sense of God's truth. The real question to ask would have been, “Are we on your side?”

I think of the memorable line in the movie Chariots of Fire in which a member of the English Olympic Committee is outraged that Eric Liddell will not run on the Sabbath. He says, “In my day it was king first and God after.” I am afraid that is the attitude of many “Christian Nationalists” who seem to condone any sort of non-Christian actions and attitudes as long as it will further their personal view of the nation's future.

David – The strangest dichotomy in Scripture is probably the figure of King David. While he is on the run from Saul, his major concern besides preserving his life was to keep from harming Saul at the same time. Twice David has Saul's life in his hands but refuses to act since Saul was God's chosen man. However, David has no compunction in breaking most of the second tablet of commandments in order to have Bathsheba and cover up his sin afterward.

Only after Nathan confronts him does David admit that his sin has been against God Himself. Up to that time, David had apparently been able to conveniently compartmentalize his obedience to God from his disobedience of the commands to love your fellow man as well.

Pharisees and Corban (Mark 7:11) – In the New Testament we run into devout men of God who are even more able to keep these two tablets of commandments separate in their mind when they invoke the principle of Corban. They feel they can get high praise from the people and go above and beyond in carrying out their devotion to God by donating a certain amount of money to the temple. But that very money had been earmarked for support of their aging parents. Again, like David they feel they can chose which commands to obey and which ones to ignore.

Achan (Joshua 7:1) – Following this battle, Achan took some valuable objects from the town rather than obey God's command to burn everything to the ground. He may have been a loyal enough Israelite to join in the battle, but it appears that he thought he could not only outsmart those around him but keep his sin from God also. He suffers the consequences for his poor theology.

Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5) – Achan has his counterpart in the NT in this couple who were apparently dedicated enough to the cause of Christ to join the fledgling group of believers and even donate some money to the cause. But they lied in proclaiming that they had given all the proceeds of a land sale rather than just part of it. Again, they obviously had a very limited view of God's ability to know the truth concerning their lives.

Demand for a King – Despite God demonstrating over and over again to the people of Israel that He was more than capable of taking care of them in spite of their inconsistent attitude toward Him, their cry is for a king to lead them instead. They seem enamored by the might of the nations around them and decide to follow their role model instead of God's. (I Samuel 8:6)

This attitude is not that far off from their demand in the wilderness for a god such as the pagan nations had in plenty, one which they could actually see and touch rather than an invisible God. And Aaron is glad to give in to their desire with the golden calf. (Exodus 32)

Unfortunately, we as Christians do exactly the same thing when we reject God's way of doing things and decide that a political model will be more effective. Thus, we turn God's people on earth into yet another lobbying group.

Foreign Alliances – I and II Kings are full of stories in which the rulers of Judah and Israel feel that God is not a powerful enough ally to stave off the enemies of the nation. So instead they make treaties with pagan nations they admire for their strength, only to be let down or even betrayed by them. You would think that Christians today would have learned this lesson from the past by now, but we continue to make common cause with politicians who are ready to betray us at the drop of a hat.

Jeremiah's Enemies (Jeremiah 18:18) – While plotting to kill Jeremiah, they justify themselves with the strange theological argument that “instruction shall not perish from the priest, nor counsel from the wise, or the word from the prophet.” In other words, “Ultimately, his death will not cut us off from all the guidance God has given us.” So they are willing to disobey one of the prime directives God has given them already, “Do not kill,” since it will not be affected adversely by the prophet's death.

Caiphas (John 11:49) – The New Testament counterpart of Jeremiah's enemies are the devout Pharisees and Sanhedrin leadership who deep-down admit that Jesus is an innocent party but want to condemn him to death anyway. They reason, as voiced by the high priest Caiphas, “It is better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed.” On the surface, it appears that he was only looking out for the welfare of the people of God as a whole. However, as most commentators will note, the real reason for the animosity the religious leaders of the day toward Jesus was the fact that it threatened the personal position and prestige each one of them held in the minds of the people.

Jesus and the Rich Man (Mark 10:17-27) – In this story, Jesus is approached by a very devout Jewish man who has obviously been quite diligent concerning the strict keeping of all God's commandments. But when he is told by Jesus that he needs to sell everything and give it to the poor, he goes away sorrowful. We could say that he was an example of someone who feels it is alright to obey the letter of the law without showing any real love for his fellow man and hording his blessings for himself. And even more telling is the response of the disciples when Jesus tells them how hard it is for rich men to enter the kingdom of heaven. They say, “Then who can be saved?”

That question may not make much sense to us, but we need to remember that the theology of the time was that (1) only the rich had enough leisure time to fully devote to keeping all the minutia of the Law needed to remain in God's favor and (2) they were only rich in the first place because God had considered them worthy enough to be blessed.

The latter theology is alive and well today among the many spokesmen for a health and wealth message in megachurches throughout the United States.

The Man Born Blind (John 9) – The flip side of the above belief was the idea that those visited by God with disease, ill health, or birth defects had those conditions as a consequence of sin. Therefore, the disciples want to know who sinned in this man's case, he or his parents. Of course, the poster children for this sort of misguided “Prosperity Gospel” were Job's friends who in the end were told by God Himself that they had misspoke concerning Him.

Messianic Expectations

Perhaps the most widespread and misguided theological expectations in first-century Judah involved the exact nature of the coming of the Messiah. A strictly literal interpretation of the many OT prophecies involving this event led most people to view it as a glorious political overthrow of pagan oppressors and full restoration of the Davidic kingdom. Even Jesus' twelve apostles appear to have had this identical expectation and were horrified when He told them that His kingdom was not of this earth and that His fate was to suffer and die under humiliating circumstances.

This was certainly one of the central factors in Jesus' rejection by the populace during his arrest and trial. Another factor was that the religious leaders had already worked out in some detail the scenario that would be followed when the Messiah arrived. For one thing, he was to be born in Bethlehem, and since they assumed that Nazareth was Jesus' birthplace, they could safely eliminate Him as a candidate (John 7:42).

Such messianic expectations are also around today involving the exact method and timing of Christ's Second Coming. I am reminded of a cartoon years ago in Christianity Today magazine picturing a scowling man with a prophecy chart in his hand complaining to a host of angels coming down from heaven and blowing trumpets. He complains to them, “You're early!” We often elevate our own understanding of God's ways above His ways.