The word "theology" means the "science of God." In general usage it includes not only a study of God as such, but also a study of His relations to His creatures and to the universe. It therefore embraces such subjects as God's attributes and nature, His self-existence, omnipotence, omniscience; creation; His law as an expression of Himself and of His will concerning His creatures; His love as revealed in the incarnation and in the plan of salvation, and a study of the plan itself; His justice, including the final eradication of sin; and His abounding grace in the final definition of the status of redeemed man.
From this it appears that theology concerns itself with that which is of most importance to man. Without discounting the value of any other science, the science of God holds, or should hold, supreme interest. It deals with the fundamental facts of life and death. Its interests embrace all that is of value in the life that now is. It reaches beyond the grave and throws light on the hereafter. It deals, not with theory only, but with life. It is the only science that challenges the complete man, and calls into activity every power of his being. It is the science of sciences, in which all other sciences find their ground and explanation, and without which they become a meaningless aggregation of unconnected facts having no bearing on life and disconnected from it.
Some sciences demand a keen, analytical mind that can recognize and weigh facts, properly evaluate and classify them, and from the findings deduce unbiased conclusions. Such sciences may be_ very valuable -and_ necessary_ They demand a specialized grade of intelligence, but do not call forth all the powers of the mind. A man may be a great scientist and be possessed of a brilliant intellect, and yet leave utterly uncultivated such noble powers of the mind and heart as the appreciation of love and beauty, of virtue and innocence, of nobility of character. He may study the laws of heredity and environment; he may be deeply impressed with the structure of the celestial universe; he may marvel at the exactitude of chemical laws; yet these studies may leave him insensible to human needs; they may not impress upon him the necessity of caring for the wonderful structure—the human body—with which God has entrusted him; they may leave him callous and indifferent to the laws of both God and man. A scientist may have a great mind, but a small heart; a wonderful intellect, but a seared conscience; a discerning mind, but no discerning spirit; a profound knowledge of insects, but none of God; a great reputation, but little character.
These statements are not intended to indict science or scientists. God forbid! Many there have been who are not only great scientists, but also great men. We owe them a debt of gratitude for what they have accomplished and have been. The only point here made is that particular sciences of man do not necessarily call for the development of all the powers of mind, and that the science of God—theologyis the only science that demands and uses every power of mind, heart, and body. An understanding of God ennobles the mind and calls forth its best efforts; it enriches life, and makes it more susceptible to the good and beautiful; it arouses feelings of love, of tenderness and pity; it gives direction to life, and taps the springs of devotion and self-sacrifice; it gives meaning to existence, and inculcates respect for the wonderful vehicle through which the soul's activities are communicated. It may truly be said that the science of God surpasses all other sciences, not only because it is higher as God is higher, but because it is all-embracing.
Seventh-day Adventists hold to the Bible as - their- rule of -faith—As statements in the Bible are capable of different interpretations, however, and as wrong teachings have from time to time been urged upon our people, it has become necessary to define more particularly our understanding of certain points. As heresies spring up and we are called upon to meet them, we are compelled to define our faith upon the questions at issue. In this way the Seventh-day Adventist denomination has already passed upon many important points which may no longer be deemed debatable.
An illustration of this is furnished in the question as to the time when the Sabbath begins. When our brethren first received light on the true Sabbath, they joyfully began the observance of the seventh day of the week as the Lord's holy day. Having observed Sunday from midnight to midnight, many began the observance of the seventh day in the same way, and kept the Sabbath from twelve to twelve, midnight. Others, however, noted that the Bible stated that the Sabbath should be kept from "even to even." This they interpreted to mean from six in. the evening to six the next evening, and hence these began and ended the Sabbath at this hour. They believed the Bible sustained them in this view rather than in the acceptance of the secular reckoning from midnight to midnight. Others again, however, believed that "from even to even" meant from sunset to sunset, whatever time that might be according to location and time of year, and found support in the Bible for their conclusion. Still others observed it from sunrise to sunrise.
For some years this matter was left undecided, and Adventists differed in the time of their observance of the seventh day, each believing his to be the Biblical view. Joseph Bates strongly contended for the six to six position as the most logical and Biblical, and carried many with him. The matter pressed for solution. After much discussion, it was finally settled that the sunset to sunset position was the true and Biblical one, and that the ministry should so teach and all Adventists so observe. Henceforth labor was to cease Friday evening in time to begin the proper observance of the Sabbath when the sun went down. It availed nothing to argue that it would be much more convenient to have a definite hour all the year round at which to begin the observance of the Sabbath. The church had spoken, the Lord had spoken, the matter was settled.
It was so also in regard to tithe paying.
Many years went by before our present system was adopted. Divergent views were held and maintained. At last tithe paying as at present practiced was adopted, and unanimity of belief arrived at. We became a tithe-paying denomination. This, however, did not settle some other, and important, resultant questions, such as the exact use of the tithe, just what constitutes tithe paying under certain conditions, and the individual conscience and tithe paying. It is for these reasons that tithe paying is not made a test of church fellowship. We have had definite instruction along certain lines as to what the tithe may or may not be used for, but the future will doubtless see a still closer study of the question, not to change any fundamentals, but to bring greater uniformity of practice.
The denomination has passed through similar experiences in regard to such issues as health and dress reform, pantheism, personality of the Holy Spirit, righteousness by faith, church polity, Spirit of prophecy, foreign missions, and others. The broad outlines of our faith have always been clear, but many details have called for definition and solution. Some of these are still awaiting decision.
In this clarifying of our positions, heresy has played no small part. It is never commendable to be on the wrong side of a question, but God can cause even that which is evil in itself to serve His purpose. Some one has rather flippantly said that "a certain number of fleas are good for a dog; they keep him scratching." So with heresy. It is inconvenient at times. It keeps harping on comparative nonessentials. It attacks the body with nasty little bites that cause burning and irritation. Like the "fleas," it is hard to catch. It has strength for its size, but uses it mostly in causing pain. It can make tremendous leaps in opposite directions, and seems undisturbed by facts. But it does serve a certain purpose. It causes God's people to examine more closely the reasons for their faith, and is thus made to serve the purpose of truth. We have been told that if other means fail, heresy will come in and compel us to study. Viewed in this light, heresy becomes both a rebuke and an incentive.
It is certainly unfortunate that we have been so recreant in our study of the Scriptures that God has to permit false teachings to come in to compel us to do that which we should be only too willing to do without such incentive. We need to study every point of faith. We need to examine and reexamine the positions we hold. Close, searching scrutiny is needed. It is not enough to accept the findings of others. We must know for ourselves what the truth is. Unless we are rooted and grounded in the truth, we will be uprooted when the storm comes. To change the metaphor, only those who have dug deep and founded their house on the rock, will stand amid the storms of the last days.
Theology, or the science of God, deals with the deep things of God as well as with the more obvious ones. A systematic study of any one subject will lead to a clearer perception of all truth. Seventh-day Adventists above all people should know the truth and love it. They should systematically and prayerfully consider and examine the reasons for their faith. Were this done, God might save us from the false doctrines now prevalent. We need to know not less but more of the science of God and salvation. Our prayer should be, "Spare Thy people, O Lord, and give not Thine heritage to reproach."
College View, Nebr.
* Last summer, President Andreasen, of Union College, gave a course in Systematic Theology at our Advanced Bible School. One of the most profitable courses offered, it is being repeated this year. This article shares a few of the choice principles studied, and we have promise of others to follow.—Ed.
