Materialistic Theology - What Does it Teach? Is it Orthodox in the Historic Context?

This term, in the main, identifies, and is one and theex­plained in mortal concepts began to move in.
same with, Christian Zionism (q.v.) and its branchesVery few people in the first eighteen-hundred years of
such as Dispensationalism (q.v.),the Church be­lieved that the Jews were still the
Hyper-dispensationalism (q.v.) and Pre-millennialism (q.v.).chosen people of God and that a Jewish Dispensation
Dr. Alva J. McClain, founder of Grace Theologicaland Kingdom would re­turn at the end of the age.
Seminary, in his book entitled The Greatness of theIt was not until after the Enlightenment that this view
Kingdom, attempted to dismiss the condemnation ofbecame acceptable in any theo­logical circles. In
the Orthodox label Materialistic Theology by citing thetry­ing to categorize, identify, and condemn this
instance of a young, loud-mouthed, over-fed preacherview Orthodoxy labeled it materialistic. By this,
who de­clared crudely,Orthodoxy meant to say that this was a theological
"The Kingdom of God is a spiritual matter; the Kingdomattempt to explain things of the new cre­ation not
of God has already been established within you. Don'tonly in terms belonging to the old creation, but in
you gentlemen know that the Kingdom of God is notdoctrines that belonged to the old creation, since this
eating and drinking but righteous­ness and peacewas the only understanding available to the
and joy in the Holy Ghost?' And then the speakerEnlightenment theologians who were promoting these
reached hungrily across the table and speared anotherrationalistic views. Religious scholarship may have been
enormous piece of fried chicken."intellectual, learned and critical, but it lacked spiri­tual
"Well," said Dr. McClain, "if the Kingdom of God caninsight. St. Paul said, in II Corinthians 5:17, "If any man is in
exist now in a two hundred pound preacher full of friedChrist he is of the new cre­ation. The old creation
chicken without any reprehensible mate­rialistichas passed away and ev­erything is now
connotation, perhaps it could also exist in the samecomprehended in, and consist in the new creation."
way among men on earth who will at times be eatingThey Quarrel between Orthodoxy and Materialistic
and drinking under more perfect conditions in a futureTheology
millennial kingdom" (Greatness of the Kingdom, p. 520,Materialistic Theology does not agree. They would
Alva J. McClain, Moody Press Edition, 1968, BMHcorrect that by saying, "Not everything that is of the
Books Edition, 1974, fifth printing, BMH Books, Dec.old cre­ation has passed away yet. There is still to
1983).be a lit­eral, political, national, territorial Kingdom of
One does not know if Dr. McClain was trying to drag aGod on this earth that will exonerate the materialistic
red herring across the path with this straw-man routineintentions and goals of the Law of God as it applied to
or if he really did not understand the meaning of thenations and governments. This is necessary in order
term Materialistic Theology. Pay no attention to thethat God's efforts not meet with frus­tration and
questions, "Who would have eaten the 'enormous'de­feat."
piece of fried chicken if the loud mouthed preacherThey Natural Religious Mind is Blind to God's Truth
who disagreed with Dr. McClain's doctrine had not?" or,Orthodoxy answers that this is a failure to properly
"What was such an obscene piece of fried chickenunderstand the Plan of Redemption from the beginning.
doing on the table of a bunch of theology students toGod never had such a plan for this world and
begin with?" The point is missed in this narrative. Thetherefore no frustration and defeat is possible. It is true
issue of Materialistic Theology has nothing to do withthat God offered such a pro­gram to the Nation
whether some­thing that is spiritual can also beof Israel under the Old Covenant, but the failure of that
physical and material. The is­sue is tied up with thecovenant, which had only a school teaching
changes brought on by the Enlightenment and theas­signment to bring us to Christ, was well
invasion of the Age of Reason into the arenaprophesied in ad­vance. Four hundred and thirty
Con­servative Theology. With the change fromyears before the Covenant of the law was
faith to rea­son as the test of truth, theologiansestablished at Sinai the Covenant of Promise was
began to lose the ability to envision the developmentmade and con­firmed in Christ. That covenant,
of the Kingdom in this world as having to do with thesaid St. Paul in Galatians 3 and 4, never called for an
heart and the spirit, the Jerusalem which is above, andearthly Jerusalem, but one which was heavenly in
that realm identified by Jesus as "no longer of thisnature and physical reality. It is that for which Abraham
world."searched when he looked for a city that had
The Church is the Kingdom of God on Earth in thefoundations whose builder and maker was God. That
New Testamentcovenant never called for a natural seed but for the
This had been no problem at all for the Orthodoxchildren of Promise who were from all na­tions of
Fathers. In The City of God, St. Augustine makes itearth and who were Abraham's seed according to the
clear that the Church is the Kingdom of God on thisPromise through the New Birth and through faith in
earth. But with the advent of Evangelical ConservativeJesus Christ. The fact that Christian Zionism fails to
theology and apologetics, reasonable, logicallyunderstand that and can only see a na­tional
defensible, empirically con­crete explana­tionsfamily and an earthly Jerusalem and kingdom, is the
that could be understood by the natural mind andvery reason why it is called the Materialistic View.