Practicing Humble Theology

 

The Foundational Necessity of Humility in Theological Epistemology,

and the Proper Method of its Application[1]

 

By: Joseph M. Gleason – December 2005

OUTLINE:

1. Introduction
2. Humility is a Scriptural Requirement for Seeking Knowledge of God
3. The Necessity of Humility also Receives Extra-Biblical Attestation.
4. Humility With the Word of God is a Requirement, not a Suggestion
5. Pride is Most Apparent With Those Who Blatantly Contradict Scripture
6. Humility is Necessary When Determining Definitions of Individual Words.
7. Humility is Necessary When Determining the Grammatical Sense of Scripture
8. Conclusion

 

Introduction

Does the Bible suggest that humility is a necessary prerequisite for seeking true knowledge of God?  And if so, how does epistemological humility work itself out practically?  When engaging in theological investigation, how can humility be consciously exercised?  When using one’s mind in relation to revelation and the Word of God, how can pride be escaped?  What are some examples of pride in exegesis, which can be avoided?

 

 

Humility is a Scriptural Requirement for Seeking Knowledge of God.

 

Humility is earmarked by the Scriptures as a necessary prerequisite for the theological endeavor, as many Christians throughout history have agreed.  In reference to the one flavor of humility known as “repentance”, Martin Luther said that “the entire life of believers” should be “one of repentance.”[2]  And shortly after, Luther expounded that “its meaning is not restricted to penitence in one’s heart; for such penitence is null unless it produces outward signs in various mortifications of the flesh.”[3]  Similarly, humility in general is not just a nebulous inward feeling that must be conjured up by the Truth-seeker.  Rather, there are concrete ways in which humility, or the lack thereof, works its way out of the theologian’s pen. 

 

It is important for the theologian to embrace humility at all times.  This truth is amply demonstrated by Scripture itself, and has also been attested to by great theologians throughout history.  In the Law, History, and Wisdom Literature[4], Scripture demonstrates that humility is a prerequisite necessity for anyone who wishes to seek to know God, and a number of early church fathers and reformers have indicated likewise.

 

In the Law, there are at least two prominent texts which demonstrate the close tie that exists between a man’s humility and his concomitant knowledge of God.  Numbers 12:2-8 and Deuteronomy 8:3 both highlight this important point.

Consider this passage from Numbers 12:

So they [Miriam and Aaron] said, “Has the LORD indeed spoken only through Moses? Has He not spoken through us also?” And the LORD heard it.  (Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth.)  Suddenly the LORD said to Moses, Aaron, and Miriam, “Come out, you three, to the tabernacle of meeting!” So the three came out. Then the LORD came down in the pillar of cloud and stood in the door of the tabernacle, and called Aaron and Miriam. And they both went forward. Then He said,
“Hear now My words:  If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, make Myself known to him in a vision; I speak to him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses; He is faithful in all My house. I speak with him face to face, even plainly, and not in dark sayings; and he sees the form of the LORD.  Why then were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses?”   (Numbers 12:2-8, emphasis added)

“Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth.”  Moses wrote five books in the Old Testament, and yet this statement of his superlative humility specifically shows up here, in Numbers 12:3.  Why?  The Holy Spirit certainly did not place this verse here by accident.  It comes directly in the midst of a passage which inquires into the ways of God’s revelation to man.  Immediately prior to verse 3, Miriam and Aaron do not question whether God has spoken through Moses; they just wish to assert that God has spoken through them on an equal level.  On the other side of verse 3, God Himself calls Miriam and Aaron before Him, and proceeds to declare to them the superiority of revelation which He has granted to Moses.  Thus, the inclusion of verse 3 tells us a great deal:  According to this passage, we learn that God has chosen to grant His clearest revelation to the man who has the greatest humility.[5]  Thus, the powerful tie between humility and theological epistemology is poignantly demonstrated.

 

Deuteronomy 8:3 also attests to the need of humility for the gaining of theological knowledge:

 

“So He humbled you, allowed you to hunger, and fed you with manna which you did not know nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the LORD.” (Deuteronomy 8:3)

 

To focus more specifically on two key parts of this text, consider the following excerpt:

 

                “So He humbled you . . . that He might make you know . . .”

 

God humbled the people of Israel for the expressed purpose of giving them particular knowledge about Himself.  And interestingly enough, this particular bit of knowledge concerns man’s need to live “by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the LORD.”  Thus, for all who believe the Bible to be the Word of God, the necessity of humility at every turn cannot be overestimated.  If God’s people needed to be humbled to even gain knowledge of the need to live by God’s Word, then how much more do we need to be humbled when we are dealing directly with that Word?  Certainly there is no point at which human pride is acceptable in the theological enterprise.

 

In the OT Historical books, perhaps the single best illustration of the current inquiry is in Ezra.  In this passage, the prophet Ezra proclaims that humility is a prerequisite for learning the “right way” from God:

 

“Then I proclaimed a fast there at the river of Ahava, that we might humble ourselves before our God, to seek from Him the right way for us and our little ones and all our possessions.”  (Ezra 8:21)

 

The reason for the fast was to demonstrate humility, and the reason for the humility was to “seek from Him the right way”.  Clearly, Ezra recognized that knowledge from God should only be sought by those with humble hearts.

 

In the Wisdom Literature of the Old Testament, both Psalms and Proverbs highlight the connection between humility and the attainment of knowledge from God:

 

“The humble He guides in justice,

   And the humble He teaches His way.”  (Psalm 25:9)

 

“. . . with the humble is wisdom.”  (Proverbs 11:2b)

 

Note the direct connection between humility and theological knowledge that is drawn by Psalm 25:9.  To whom is it that the Lord “teaches His way”?  It is only to the humble.  Likewise, in Proverbs 11:2b, note the emphasis given to the necessity of humility.  The writer points out that wisdom is specifically given to those who are humble.  Thus, if we wish to pursue the wisdom of God, what course must we take?  The path of humility is the only choice.  The author of Proverbs leaves no other option.

 

 

 

The Necessity of Humility also Receives Extra-Biblical attestation.

 

Christians throughout history have also attested to the importance of humility.  Just for example, let us take a look at a poignant passage from the early church.  Merely a century after the death of the last Apostle, Origen quoted Psalm 131:1 -- “Lord, my heart is not haughty, nor mine eyes lofty: neither do I exercise myself in great matters, or in things too high for me.”, and then he penned these words concerning humility:

 

Now these words show that he who is of humble mind does not by any means humble himself in an unseemly or inauspicious manner, falling down upon his knees, or casting himself headlong on the ground, putting on the dress of the miserable, or sprinkling himself with dust.  But he who is of humble mind in the sense of the prophet, while ‘walking in great and wonderful things,’ which are above his capacity . . . ‘humbles himself under the mighty hand of God.’ [6]

 

As Origen said, the theologian must sense that he is dealing with “great and  wonderful things” which are “above his capacity”.  But all too many theologians treat the Word of God as if it were all too common, and subject to their whims and fancies, as if it were a mere writing of man.  Some discount portions of the Bible altogether.  Others accept the Word on a superficial level, but insert manmade definitions into key words, wholly altering the Holy Spirit’s message.  Others accept both the words and their definitions, but subtly toy with the grammar of sacred Writ, in order to turn the holy Scriptures into a vehicle for the thoughts of sinful men.  All of these common occurrences are concrete examples of man’s pride refusing to submit to the revealed Word of God. 

 

 

 

Humility With the Word of God is a Requirement, not a Suggestion.

 

But isn’t every theologian well aware that numerous people twist various Scriptures, or even discount them altogether?  This certainly is not new information.  But it is important to recognize the close connection that exists between human pride and such practices.  It is important to consider this issue as an outworking of sinful pride, rather than merely saying such actions are “incorrect”.    A theologian might well say, “1) Don’t question God’s Word,  2) Seek for the Biblical definition of all words, and  3) Carefully look at the grammar used in the Bible.”  But as good at this list of imperatives may be, it can become all too easy to treat it simply as a “good recipe” for success, rather than as a concrete and critical list of examples concerning how a man of humility must approach God’s Word at all times. 

 

As a case in point, the author is acquainted with one Greek scholar who was an advisor for a certain pastor.  On one occasion, the pastor had spent all week working hard on his sermon, and finally had everything in place.  On Saturday, the evening before he was to give the sermon, he asked the scholar whether a particular Greek word could carry a certain meaning.  The man looked at the Scripture passage, and said that the word might carry a couple of possible nuances, but that the pastor’s supposition was an impossible interpretation.  The pastor said he was sorry to hear that, but unfortunately, one of the key points of his sermon depended upon that particular fallacious definition of the Greek word.  Sadly, though this pastor was well versed concerning the rules of sound Biblical exegesis, he still figured he had the leeway to ignore them occasionally, when more complete submission to Scripture would cause discomfort.  This is a specific example of the type of pride that blinds men to God’s revelation in Scripture, and this is the specific brand of pride that the author wishes to controvert.  We might toy with a recipe, adding a bit of oregano here, and a pinch of salt there.  Recipes may be safely modified to some extent, to fit our personal tastes.  But we have no such prerogative with the inspired Word of God.  Anything less than total submission is nothing short of sinful pride.

 

 

Pride is Most Apparent With Those Who Blatantly Contradict Scripture.

 

The most obvious form of this pride can be seen when theologians altogether discount passages of Scripture.  For example, in chapter 7 of “Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism”, Bishop Spong quotes a league of Scripture passages, including Colossians 3:18, Romans 11:8, and 1 Corinthians 14:35.  The quoted passages speak of wives submitting to their husbands, God’s reprobation of many Jews, and a woman’s proper place in church, among other subjects.  Then, immediately after quoting all these texts, his first question is, “Is this the Word of the Lord?”[7]  For a theologian who consistently and repeatedly belittles, rejects, and reinterprets God’s Word, this question is eerily parallel to Satan’s first recorded reaction to the relaying of God’s Word, with the infamous response of, “Hast God said . . .?”[8]

 

After parroting Satan’s questioning of God’s Word, Spong continues:

 

As such, these verses would certainly present us in this age with problems.  But these words make no claim to be the words of God.  They are rather the words of Paul, a first-century Jewish convert to Christianity, lifted verbatim out of this voluminous correspondence.  There is no doubt but that this man Paul was a powerful shaping influence on Christianity.  There is also no doubt but that he was passionate, specific, complex, emotional, frail, controversial, self-centered, and human.[9]

 

Later in this chapter, after quoting several passages from 1 Corinthians, Spong concentrates his comments on Paul’s teachings regarding women in the church:

 

In these verses Paul revealed himself as uncritically part of the patriarchal system that so informed the Hebrew Scriptures.  He has been quoted to support those opposed to the ordination of women to either the priesthood or the episcopacy. . . . By modern standards such attitudes are not only inadequate but wrong, and they are rapidly being abandoned.[10]

 

The problem with theologians such as Spong is quite simply a lack of humility.  The oldest sin, pride, has convinced him that he has the prerogative to question the validity of Scripture.  As Young has pointed out, the problem is that such a man “will not humble himself to the point of mere obedience.”[11]  The specific nature of this pride raises its head when a person wrongly “presupposes that the investigator may subject the words of the Bible to his own unaided mind and may pass a judgment upon them.”[12]

 

As Young has also said:

 

We are not, therefore, to come to the Bible in the belief that we can subject it to certain test of our own devising.  Nor, in our study, may we advance theories which conflict with what the Bible itself says.  How then must we approach the Bible?  There is only one way; it is the way of humility.[13]

 

With this statement the author heartily agrees.  The root problem with liberal critical theologians is not primarily with their faulty science, literary criticism skills, or practical morals.  Instead, the root cause of the problem is their pride.  The solution will not be found in additional education, modified literary techniques, or appeal to popular opinion.  Rather, the solution will only be found when such theologians lay down their pride and humble themselves before Almighty God.  Until their knees are willing to bend before Him, their ears will be unable to hear Him.

 

Many would readily agree that self-proclaimed theologians such as Spong are guilty of dealing with God’s Word in an egregious way.  But there are many more subtle ways of wresting holy Writ, which are more difficult to detect, and are thus much more likely to release their poison into the thoughts of even those who hold a high view of Scripture.  In the above example, while Spong lacked humility, he was at least open enough to admit his unwillingness to depend totally upon God’s revealed Word.  But sadly, there are also many who pay lipservice to the priority of God’s Word, and yet who nevertheless subordinate it to the thoughts of men.  With their mouths, they admit God’s Word to be an infallible source of eternal Truth.  But with their pens, they subtly distort the definitions of particular words, or the grammatical senses in which certain words are found.  By doing this, they seek to transform the Almighty Creator into a ventriloquist’s dummy, as they attempt to breathe their own manmade thoughts into the medium of Scripture.

 

 

Humility is Necessary When Determining Definitions of Individual Words.

 

            Many people profess to accept the Scriptures in their entirety, superficially declaring their allegiance to everything written in the Bible.  But then they replace certain key words with manmade definitions, wholly altering the Holy Spirit’s message.  One such person who has done this is Pastor Rick Warren.  In order to garner support for one of his pet theological beliefs, he wrests Proverbs 29:18 from its Inspired position, and redefines a key word at the heart of the text.[14]

 

In Rick Warren’s article, “What’s on Your Mind?”,[15] he discusses the Bible’s teachings about how our thoughts influence six areas of our life.  His sixth statement is this:

 

MY IMAGINATION INFLUENCES MY ASPIRATION. In other words, your dreams determine your destiny. To accomplish anything you must first have a mission, a goal, a hope, a vision. "Without a vision the people perish." Proverbs 29:18[16]

 

 

Regardless of whether or not our destiny is affected by our dreams and goals, has Rick Warren dealt faithfully and humbly with this specific text of Scripture?  It is the author’s position that he has not.

 

First, what is the Hebrew word for “vision” in this text, and how does Scripture normally employ it?  The Hebrew word here is “chazown”[17], and is used 35 times in Scripture.  Every time it is used, except one[18], it is in reference to a revelation from God.  It is used to refer to a revelation from Him directly[19], or is used in reference to the revelation of Scripture Itself.  But in no case is it ever used as Rick Warren uses it, in reference to the “mission”, the “goal”, or the “hope” of a mere man.  Is it a bad thing to suggest that people should have goals?  No.  But it is a bad thing to twist Scripture to support one’s argument.  And Proverbs 29:18 has nothing to do with the goals of man.

 

Second, even if Pastor Warren had not bothered to take the time to look up the Hebrew word for “vision” in this text, he could have at least consulted multiple English translations, to see how Hebrew scholars generally translate the word.  Consider the nine following sample translations of this verse:

 

o        “Where there is no vision, the people cast off restraint; But he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” (ASV)

o        “Where there is no vision, the people are unrestrained, But happy is he who keeps the law.” (NASB)

o        “Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” (KJV)

·         “Where there is no prophetic vision the people cast off restraint, but blessed is he who keeps the law.” (ESV)

·         “Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; but blessed is he who keeps the law.” (NIV)

·         “Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; But happy is he who keeps the law.” (NKJV)

·         “If people can't see what God is doing, they stumble all over themselves; But when they attend to what he reveals, they are most blessed.” (The Message)

·         “Where there is no vision [no redemptive revelation of God], the people perish; but he who keeps the law [of God, which includes that of man]--blessed (happy, fortunate, and enviable) is he.” (Amplified)

·         “When people do not accept divine guidance, they run wild. But whoever obeys the law is happy.” (NLT)

 

The first three of these translations simply use the word “vision” to translate the Hebrew word “chazown”, and thus might superficially be interpreted according to Rick Warren’s method.[20]  However, the next six Bible versions clearly leave no room for such a definition.  The ESV, NIV, NKJV, Amplified, and NLT each make it clear that a revelation from God is the point of this passage.  And even The Message translation does not allow for Rick Warren’s definition.  Even without consulting the original language, he still could have averted error, merely by taking the time to consult a number of English translations for the sake of clarification.[21]

 

In reference to this misuse of Proverbs 29:18, Tim Challies sums up the issue well:

 

It is possible that a brief, careless reading of one translation of the Bible could lead to confusion as to this verse's meaning. But for anyone who rightly handles the Word of God, paying attention to the sense of the text and to the meaning of the specific words used, the meaning of this verse is obvious. This verse says nothing of the importance of having a church that is led by vision or a visionary. Ironically, this verse should underscore the importance of honoring God's revelation, and warn those who would water it down by sloppy or deliberate misuse.[22]

 

This verse is not complex and is not beyond understanding.  Figuring out the true definition for “vision” in Proverbs 29:18 is not difficult.  But Pastor Warren was faced with two choices.  He could submit Himself to every verse of Scripture, whether or not it served his own purposes.  Or he could exalt his personal agenda, and employ Scripture however he pleased, in order make his case appear to have support from the Word of God.[23] Sadly, in this case, Pastor Warren chose the later.  But this is not the path to be taken by an exegete who is humble.  Rather, the humble theologian must always bow before the clear text of Scripture, regardless of whether the Biblical word-definitions support his personal agenda.

 

 

Humility is Necessary When Determining the Grammatical Sense of Scripture.

 

Some people profess to accept the Scriptures in their entirety, supposedly adhering to all that is said in the Word of God.  And they even faithfully accept the correct Biblical definitions of individual words.  But then, on a level which is more difficult to detect, they subtly toy with the grammar of sacred Writ, in order to turn the holy Scriptures into a vehicle for the thoughts of sinful men.  For a case in point, consider Chrysostom’s wresting of both John 6:65 and 10:25-26.[24]

 

In John 6:65, Jesus said, “Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto Me except it were given unto Him from above from my Father.”

 

Chrysostom interprets as follows:

 

. . . Then He added, “Except it be given him from above from My Father”; thus persuading them to deem God His Father, not Joseph, and showing them that it is no common thing to believe in Him.  As though He had said, “Unbelievers disturb Me not, trouble Me not, astonish Me no.  I know of old before they were created, I know to whom the Father hath given to believe;”  and do thou, when thou hearest that “He hath given,” imagine not merely an arbitrary distribution, but that if any hath rendered himself worthy to receive the gift, he hath received it. [25]

 

Chrysostom’s error here is similar to that of a person who would dare to switch the indicative of Jeremiah 7:23 with the subjunctive, substituting the sentence “I will be your God and you will be my people”, with the sentence “I will be your God if you will be my people”.  The first is unconditional; the second is not.  The first is Scripture, the second is not.

 

Similarly, Crysostom has subtly revamped the grammar of John 6:65, so that a message is conveyed with is far different from that intended by the Holy Spirit.  The actual text of this verse plainly states that the Father must first give a man to Christ, before than man can be capable of coming to Christ.  The “giving” is the cause, and the “coming to Christ” is the effect.  And according to Chrysostom’s exegesis, giving and coming are both involved, so no mistaken word-definitions have been employed.  But note that he has reworked the grammar, so that the cause-effect relationship of “giving” and “coming” have been switched.  He says, “if any hath rendered himself worthy to receive the gift, he hath received it.”  But in what manner can one “render himself worthy”, except by coming to Christ?  Surely no one can become worthy while ignoring or fleeing Christ.  Thus, Chrysostom would have us believe that the “coming” must precede the “giving”.  But if he is correct, then John 6:65 should read thus:  “Therefore said I unto you, that no man can be given unto Him from above from my Father, except he first come unto Me.”  This statement may be a fair paraphrase of some Arminian assertions made on TBN.  But it is certainly not an accurate reading of Scripture.  Chrysostom has not exercised grammatical humility while dealing with this text.

 

Chrysostom deals similarly with John 10:25-26:

 

“I told you often,” He saith, “and ye believe not: the works that I do in My Father’s Name, they are they that bear witness of Me.” . . . ”But”, He saith, “I told you, and ye believe not, because ye are not of My sheep.”. . . ‘Observe how in renouncing He exciteth them to follow Him.  “Ye hear Me not,” He saith, “for neither are ye sheep, but they who follow, these are of the flock.”  This He said that they might strive to become sheep.[26] (emphasis added)

 

Note the repetition of identical error.  Chrysostom accurately quotes the passage from John, which clearly says that the Pharisees don’t believe “because” they are not of Christ’s sheep.  If they were God’s sheep, then they would hear Him, but since they are not His sheep, they cannot hear Him.  Their lack of sheep-ness is the cause, and their lack of belief is the effect.  Being sheep would cause them to hear and believe.  But no attempt at hearing and believing can change them into sheep.  And yet Chrysostom suggests that Jesus “exciteth them to follow Him”, so that “they might strive to become sheep.”  Being sheep would cause them to be followers, but Crysostom gets the cart before the horse, and suggests that they should follow, so that they could become sheep.  He confuses the cause with the effect.  Once again, Chrysostom has failed to exercise grammatical humility with the Bible.  If a theologian is to avoid the error of Chrysostom, then there must be no tampering with the inspired grammar of Scripture.

 

Conclusion

 

So, what questions have been resolved by this brief study?  What has been displayed that can help the theologian better approach his weighty task?  It is the hope of the author that two key points have been made clear:

 

1)                           Scripture teaches that humility is a necessary prerequisite for seeking knowledge of God.  It is a Biblical imperative, and is not optional.

 

2)                           Humility is not merely a feeling, a state of mind, or a verbal confession, but actually works itself out through the pen of the theologian in concrete ways.  The theologian must exercise humility by submitting himself totally to every word of Scripture, no matter how discomforting.  He must exercise humility regarding the Biblical definitions of individual words.  And he must display humility when conveying the grammar of the text.  As Calvin said:  “he who is not satisfied with Scripture desires to be wiser than is either proper or desirable.”[27]  Every word, every definition, and every grammatical nuance has been inspired by the Holy Spirit, and must therefore be held beyond contestation. 

 

Of course, as the reader will note, only the surface has been scratched in this brief paper.  There are numerous, far more subtle methods which have been employed by theologians in order to twist Scripture.  Sometimes this is done consciously, and sometimes this is done accidentally.  But in every case, it is a mishandling of God’s Word, and is therefore sin.  Let us not draw back from calling a spade a spade.  Pride is the oldest sin in existence, and its grip upon fallen man has not yet been loosed.  And to this day, man’s lack of humility has consistently blinded him to various facets of God’s revelation.  Thus, if the theologian would truly seek to think God’s thoughts after Him, then all selfish pride must be intentionally rooted out.  And this can be accomplished only by the help of the Holy Spirit.  The strength of the link between human pride and faulty exegesis cannot be overestimated. 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

 

Calvin, John.  Calvin’s Commentaries, 22 volumes, trans., William Pringle (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999).

 

Challies, Tim. Where There is No Vision (http://www.challies.com/archives/000869.php, 2005).

 

Dillenberger, John, ed., Martin Luther: Selections from His Writings (Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor, 1961).

 

Roberts, Alexander and James Donaldson and A. Cleveland Cox and A. Menzies, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325, 10 volumes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951-56).

 

Schaff, Philip and Wace, Henry, eds., A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Church, 28 volumes, 2 series, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952-56).

 

Spong, John Shelby. Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism (New York: HarperCollins, 1992).

 

Warren, Rick. What’s On Your Mind? (http://www.purposedrivenlife.com/insights/, 2005).

 

Warren, Rick.  The Purpose Driven Life (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002).

 

Young, Edward J. Thy Word is Truth (Carlisle, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1957).