Russell A. Cardwell Online

Found another cool theological quiz. I scored a tie between Anselm and Charles Finney. As with the previous quiz, I have some reservations about the results. I agree with both these Finney and Anselm in some important ways, but I also disagree with both in other important ways. As for charges of Pelagianism against Finney; these are purely unfounded—hyper-Calvinist mud-slinging. The same charges could be leveled for the same reasons against any of Finney’s evangelical antecedents, including Billy Graham and all the branches of the theological tree related to evangelical and Arminian theology, including Wesleyans and Charismatics. His legacy embraces the gamut of contemporary Evangelical Christianity, from the Right, such as Falwell, to the Left, such as Wallis. As a former president of Wheaton College said (referring to Finney’s heirs, such as the Vineyard movement, the Promise Keepers movement, televangelism, revivalism, and the Church Growth Movement), “Finney lives on!”

Nevertheless, I think Finney overreacted to the hyper-Calvinism of his day. His critics charge that he erred by deemphasizing the importance of Christ’s atonement on the cross, and the doctrine of justification by faith alone (sola fide). In his Systematic Theology he said that he fully embraced the Calvinist tenet of “Preservation of the Saints” (eternal security), but stated that he had more difficulty formulating his views on it than on any other point in theology. The accusations of Pelagianism are belied by Finney’s strong affirmation of the belief in justification through grace by faith alone, not by works or obedience. He believed that good works were the evidence of faith, and that continued sin was evidence that the person had never had saving faith to begin with. Thus his strong emphasis on continued personal holiness, a position he supported by 1 Corinthians 5.

As for Anselm, I was strongly influenced in my early 20’s by his ontological argument for the existence of God. Anselm’s reasonable approach to theology is very appealing (especially to a rationalist like me), but ultimately falls short. I was also during that time, strongly influenced by William James, who insisted that all beliefs must be tested and weighed for practical value; those that have no practical value should be discarded. While many Christians may object to such pragmatism, you would never have gotten me through the door of faith without tangible evidence of its positive results. I submit that everyone who chooses salvation does so initially for practical reasons, if only for the assurance of their eternal reward. I continue to be very pragmatic about my theology.

Those who denigrate reason, saying we are to have blind faith instead, are more than simply champions of ignorance. The word, logos, translated in our Bibles as word, means reason. John 1:1-3 says:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Jesus, he says, is the incarnation of reason (logos), and through him, the incarnation of reason everything in the universe was made. Reason is also identified with God here. John does not say that God has reason, or that God does reason, but that God is reason. Fundamentalism, and other radical fideist theologies, in their denial of reason, are denying God, Jesus, and the Bible. Daniel Kolak, in In Search of God, argues that faith that does not stem from a rational choice is not genuine faith. People who simply hold a set of beliefs taught or imposed by others, without the freedom to question and investigate them, is holding beliefs that are not truly their own. They have been psychologically conditioned to accept a view, rather than choosing it themselves. Thus faith without reason is not genuine faith. and if salvation is through faith, then such people are not genuinely saved after all, despite the vehemence with which they may defend their views.

Reason alone falls short, however, and Anselm himself pointed this out, writing that “unless I first believe, I shall not understand.” Faith comes first. It is a deliberate act. You cannot arrive at it through reason. Mark Twain paraphrased Hebrews 11:1 as “Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.” Salvation is not by reason, but by faith. Once we have been saved, and received the Holy Spirit, the spirit bears witness within us. I agree with Augustine, Anselm and Thomas Aquinas (The A-Team?) that reason itself begins with faith. Aquinas said that “faith presupposes natural knowledge, just as grace does nature and all perfections that which they perfect.” Although there are many things we can know about God through natural means, because of our limitations, there are many other things we cannot know except through faith.

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.—1 Corinthians 13:12

And how can I resist quoting another great philosopher of our time:

“I refuse to prove that I exist,” says God.

—Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

I’m surprised I scored so high John Calvin, with whom I strongly disagree. And that I scored so low on Paul Tillich and Jonathan Edwards, whom I admire greatly.

Anyway. A rather long introduction to this post of test results. It didn’t start out that way, but I got carried away. While I don’t fully endorse the results I got, the test is rather fun, and certainly will get you thinking about some details of theology you may not often think about. I certainly don’t think about this stuff very much: I’m way too busy living it.

Which theologian are you?created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Charles FinneyYou’re passionate about God and love to preach the Gospel. Your theology borders on pelagianism and it is said that if God were taken out of your theology, it would look exactly the same. Charles Finney 87% Anselm 87% John Calvin 67% Augustine 60% Friedrich Schleiermacher 53% Martin Luther 53% Karl Barth 47% Paul Tillich 40% Jürgen Moltmann 27% Jonathan Edwards 20%

• No related posts