A guest post from a friend, NoblemanPH, a student of IRBS Theological Seminary.

INTRODUCTION

The broad Reformed Evangelical movement was shaken when one of its prominent preachers fell from grace a year ago. The news brought shockwaves worldwide, especially to the broad Reformed Evangelical Movement here in the Philippines. As we converse with other Christians in our local place regarding the issue, I cannot forget one particular pastor's comment: "Probably one of the reasons why he fell from grace was his 'overfamiliarity' with the Scriptures and theology." Over time, I wrestle with his comment in my thoughts. It deeply troubles me, which led me to ask: Is it possible that a theologian can fall from grace due to his overfamiliarity with Scripture? Is theology in and of itself a kind of knowledge that can be studied, exhausted, and even outlearned to the point that a theologian can proclaim, "I am now overfamiliar with the things of God"?

The pastor's comment regarding the preacher, theology, and Scripture reflects his own understanding of theology. To say that you can get overfamiliar with the Bible is to say that the study of theology can be exhausted by a finite, imperfect mind. But is that the proper way of understanding theology? What is theology in the first place? Who is the object of theology? Who are its subjects? How did theology come to us? How can the past help us understand and give us a proper method of doing theology?

In this two-part article series, I submit that a correct understanding and an appropriate method should be employed to do theology theologically. The primary assertion of this material is that, if we believe and acknowledge that theology, as a practice, is the contemplation of the infinite triune God (object) by finite creatures (subject), it will lead us to a theological methodology that deeply honors God and humbles the Christian theologian. By incorporating the theological maxim, Finitum non capax Infiniti (the finite cannot contain the Infinite) in our theological inquiry, a well-guarded theological method will follow; a method and understanding of theology that will edify and enrich the Christian mind, body, and soul, together with his faith and practice.

DEFINING THEOLOGY AND APPROPRIATING ALL OF ITS ENTAILMENTS

To begin, we need to define theology. In its etymology, theology is composed of two words: theos, meaning God, and logia, meaning words, sayings, and discourse. Simply put, theology means discourse about God. In this regard, Franciscus Junius helpfully defines theology as "either the discourse of God Himself, or discourse or reasoning concerning things divine."1

Expounding it in a trinitarian lens, we could say that "theology concerns what may be known about God as revealed by the Father, mediated through Christ, and received by faith through the Holy Spirit, to the end that we will be led back unto Him."2

The Object and Subject of Theology

It is clear, then, that theology has one object: God and all things in relation to God. Since "from Him, and through Him, and to Him are all things (Romans 11:36)," the triune God is the principium essendi of theology. As the uncaused Cause and the unmoved Mover, He is the "ultimate and irreducible explanation of the existence and essence of all things."3 Everything begins with God, and all things lead back to Him. As the infinite One who is "blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and the Lord of lords, who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light," (1 Timothy 6:15–16), God is the first principle of all things (causa efficiens), the purpose of why things exist (causa finalis) and the archetype of all created things (causa exemplaris).

Anyone who knows and understands theology can be called its proper subject. In this sense, both the Christian and the community of Christians are the rightful recipients of theology. At this juncture, it is vital to introduce that a person can only be called the proper subject of theology if he meets the following prerequisite: conversion and the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:11–14). In other words, the theological enterprise must and can only be pursued in the economy of grace.

A few other assumptions must be considered for us to understand and practice theology theologically. In the present context of the broad Reformed Movement, all may agree and accept the preceding affirmations above. However, some may still have an incorrect articulation and application in how they appropriate the object (a wrong view of God) and the subject (a wrong method for the theologian) of theology in their theological inquiry. Thus, the maxim finitum non capax Infiniti must be incorporated. Since God, as the Uncreated One, is "immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible,"4 and mankind, on the other hand, are created, finite, and lowly creatures, we must impose a proper Creator-creature distinction lens, as we do theology. This would mean that when we contemplate God through His Word, we must remind ourselves that He is infinite, and that we are not. Theologically, this would lead us first to distinguish between two genera (genus) of theology: one genus of theology that is infinite, boundless, and absolute, and another genus of theology that is finite, imperfect, yet sufficient for the theologian. The former can be called archetypal theology. Also called theologia in se, this genus of theology can be summarized as God's perfect and absolute knowledge of Himself and all things, known only to Him. This knowledge (or theology) is therefore simple, uncreated, eternal, infallible, and incommunicable to any created beings (angels and men). This theology belongs to God alone and can only be worshipped, not investigated upon.5 The latter genus can be rightly called ectypal theology. Also called theologia nostra, this refers to the "our" and "us" of theology: the theology of finite, created beings. In contrast to the archetypal, ectypal theology is created, accidental, finite, discursive, and acquired, yet sufficient for the theologian. This knowledge is communicable, and as far as the infiniteness of God is concerned, this theology is the outflow of God's goodness and condescending grace towards creaturely beings. As finite and imperfect as we are, these distinctions must be rightly appropriated in our theological inquiry, humbling us that we, as the subjects of theology, can never exhaust the Object, the endpoint for us being only worship and praise, not the containment of God.

Second, to presuppose that God is infinite and men are not, must lead the theologians to use the correct language for their "creature talk" and most especially for their "God talk." This means that in our predication of God, the analogical method must be employed. This specific mode of predication means that when we attempt to describe, proclaim, and affirm the truths about God and connect them in relation to us in creation, we make use of the analogy of being, namely that God can be predicated as partially alike the created things, yet partially and infinitely different from the created things. As a rough but hopefully helpful example:

If things in the world have goodness within them, this must in some way reflect, however imperfectly, the goodness of God…God Himself is being and has unity, truth, and goodness in Himself since He is the cause of these perfections in creatures. We don't perceive these features or attributes of God directly because we don't experience God in Himself, but we can infer from the created world that these features of being must be present in God in some higher, incomprehensible way, according to analogy. That's to say God truly is good, but in a higher and most complete way, distinct from those forms of goodness that are found in created realities.6

Because God is the efficient cause of all things, everything in the created world is derived from Him (Acts 17:28). The analogy of being orders our speech and thinking, informing us that all created things are participants in God's perfections and that God, as the most pure Being, is said to have all of these perfections in the fulness of its term infinitely and incomprehensibly. With this, analogical predication rightly appropriates the Biblical data concerning the Creator-creature distinction, the infinity of God, and the finitude of the creatures. Using the other predication methods appears to place undue emphasis on either God's transcendence (equivocal predication) or God's immanence (univocal predication), which can lead to problematic theological articulations and biblically unwarranted conclusions.

The aforementioned preliminary assumptions are crucial and should not be overlooked. I would submit that to depart from these presuppositions would be one step toward leaving the biblical and traditional articulation of the doctrine of God and others. The broad acceptance of old yet refurbished doctrines today, such as social trinitarianism, process theology, and theistic mutualism, is one example. So far, the maxim finitum non capax infiniti guards and guides our theological pursuit. It teaches us theologians to approach theology with humility, teaching us that our discourse about God will always be mingled with mystery and will always be received in astonishment, for God's thoughts are incomprehensibly higher than our thoughts and His ways infinitely higher than ours (Isaiah 55:8).

To the Triune God Alone be the glory!

Footnotes

  1. Franciscus Junius, A Treatise on True Theology: With the Life of Franciscus Junius (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 92. ↩

  2. Charles Rennie, "Lecture 1," ST-601 Foundations of Theology (2025). The original working definition given by Dr. Rennie is as follows: "Theology concerns what may be known about God as revealed by God, mediated through Christ, and received by faith, to the end that we will be led back to Him." ↩

  3. Charles Rennie, "Lecture 1," ST-601 Foundations of Theology (2025). ↩

  4. Corey Bailey, ed., The London Standards: Three Forms of Baptist Unity (Biloxi, Mississippi: Victory Ridge Ministries, 2023). Chapter 2, paragraph 1. ↩

  5. Junius, A Treatise on True Theology, 86. ↩

  6. Analogy (Aquinas 101), The Thomistic Institute. ↩