My apologies for having been so long between posts. I promised for a while to post on a topic that has blossomed into something more than even 3 or 4 posts can contain. For that reason, I'm going to continue to explore the concepts of "Systematic Transformation" on my own for the time being. Rest assured, I will be posting on the topic as soon as I feel prepared to do so.
In the meantime, I wanted to reflect briefly in this post on a conversation I had recently with a friend. We were discussing some theological topics, like the nature and function of inspiration, historical and genre criticism, and the like (I know, all very riveting topics). We began to discuss what has become a the trending topic in my experience here at Trinity: the nature and scope of God's sovereignty and providence. After bringing him up to speed on similar conversation I had just finished having with another friend, I brought the question to him:
"I don't mean to put you in a box, theologically speaking, but where do you fall on the Calvinism-Arminianism-Open Theism spectrum?"
"I don't," he replied. "I think all of those stances are a result of forcing the text to answer a question which it never asked of itself."
A thought-provoking response, to say the least. I have long argued that "a text can not mean what it never meant" (in the tradition of Fee and Stuart), but I don't think I've ever let that truth actually take hold of my theology. The basic implication on Systematic Theology is the loss of the starting point. Any theologian who responsibly does Systematic Theology, as far as is possible, will tell you this process:
1) Exegesis: We must first seek to understand what the text meant in its original context. In other words, we must find what the author meant when he wrote.
2) Biblical Theology: Once exegesis has taken hold, we must now evaluate prevailing themes, such as Kingdom, Salvation, God, Man, Sin, etc. The whole of the references for each individual theme must be taken into account in order to understand set theme.
3) Systematic Theology: Based on our findings in Biblical Theology, we can begin to order our findings in a "system" that describes God, Creation, and the interplay thereof.
There is a glaring flaw in this process that must be addressed: What if God doesn't interact with creation in a "systematic" way? In other words, what if we actually can't put a formula to God's providence? What if God's will comes about in a variety of ways on Earth?
Don't burn me at the stake for being postmodern just yet. I'm not rejecting the absolute nature of truth; rather, its systematic nature is being called into question here. For the last 500 years or so, we've lived in a culture that values science above all else. Something possesses the quality of being "true" if it is measurable, observable, and able to be put into formula. Gravity, as an example, is true because it is measurable (the force of Gravity=9.81 m/s/s in Earth's atmosphere), observable (try jumping off a second-story balcony if you disagree), and able to be put into formulae.
Theology is not immune to culture's influence here. For instance, if one were to ask you why a given prayer of his/hers was not answered, how would you respond? We are inclined to try and answer in some formulaic way. Perhaps it wasn't God's will, or perhaps he/she didn't have enough faith. Is our world really that simple? No, of course not.
All I'm thus suggesting is for a re-focus when it comes to reading Scripture. If you're reading the Bible for the purpose of systematizing the state of things, you're missing out on so, so much! Certainly, there are truths we can surmise from the Bible, as God is truth and chooses to reveal himself through Jesus Christ and, to us, through Scripture. All I'm suggesting is that God cannot be bound by our systems of logic, advanced as they might be, at the cost of the transformative power found in his revelation.
I will leave this topic for the time being after one analogy. Growing up, I loved putting together lego sets. To this day, Santa still puts a set in my stocking every Christmas. I would open the box, and no matter how big the set was, I couldn't walk away until it was finished. The great frustration, obviously, came when I thought I had completed the set, only to find a small piece or two still in the box. Ever have this happen to you? You're putting together that bike for your child late on Christmas Eve, and when you think you've finished, you find a nut and bolt laying next to you?
I find that much Systematic Theology is done to this end. One spends an immense amount of time in research, construction of an argument, and defense of the conclusion only to find a nut and bolt left in the box that doesn't seem to fit. At this point, more often then not, I find the prevailing practice to be the disposal of the nut and bolt rather than the deconstruction of the bike to make sure, for the safety of its rider, that it is then completed.
When you push any theological system to its limit, you will find the proverbial piece that doesn't seem to fit. Our logic, although a gift from God for the pursuit of him, is never perfect, because we are finite creatures. At one point in history, everyone "knew" that the Earth was the center of the universe, and at another, everyone "knew" that the Earth was flat. The brightest and most educated minds of the given times came to these conclusions! I'm not saying that we should immediately cease and desist all practice of theology. I am, however, suggesting we consider the questions the text asks of us before we begin forcing our questions back on the text.
My prayer is that you and I would be so overwhelmed by the love found in the person of Jesus Christ that we would have no choice but to be transformed, to look only how to love God better and others with the whole of our selves. May God's love and grace captivate you as you approach the Word from this point forward. God is so much bigger than our logic anyways.
A big "thank you" to my good friend Elliott Siu for the discussion that sparked all this thought. And now, here's to hoping the chasm between posts is bridged more quickly this time. Until then, grace and peace to you all.
like.
ReplyDelete