I am surprised by people who say "I don't believe in that" but when you ask them what study or research they have done to support their belief, they say "none". I just don't believe that.
This kind of thinking (or anti thinking) seems quite common today.
Especially on the "big" issues.
There appears to be very little systematic theology present in the modern believers life. I understand why. Systematic theology is the process of studying the entire scriptures on a topic or theology and applying the counsel of the whole scriptures to discover the truth.
We are basically too busy to do this. So, we settle for a verse. We take it at face value and build a teaching on it.
Sermons and devotions seem to do this the most. We end up with novel sized theology which leads to novel theology (a new form of fiction) sounds good in an argument or discussion, but is too flimsy to base your life on.
Joshua 1:8 was a call to Gods people that formed the foundation of their thinking: "this book of the law shall not depart from your mouth but you shall meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written in it"
This day and night process is not for the time poor, but maybe it is time to realize that God is the one who provides us with our time. The number of our days is written in his book. I wonder how many of our days we have spent in His?
Catch ya round.
Jabinl
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yeap, you got that right.
ReplyDeleteHi Jabin, this is an important blog mate and it’s great to see what you are writing about. While I agree with your basic concern about the indifferent attitude many Christians have toward engaging Scripture (and I come across it all the time too), I feel your conclusion is perhaps a little broad. Let me explain. I would say that at least in the conservative Christian scene, the history of our highly systematic theologizing has been largely responsible for the "anit-thinking" attitude you speak of. I would go further and say that this issue stems not from lack of desire or even effort but from people's disillusion with the process of bible study that has for so long been thrust upon them. The problem with a systematic approach to the bible is that it is generally only interesting to the people who have been trained in it. To the everyday believer who is struggling to comprehend God in the craziness of everything, it is an unnatural and awkward way to engage with Scripture.
ReplyDeleteYour statement in the second paragraph of your post, "we settle for a verse. We take it at face value and build a teaching on it," is in fact the very thing systematic theology is often guilty of doing. Going at the bible from a propositional perspective we try to link one verse or theme with another and formulate a set of doctrines that can be laid out in clear propositions. These proposals (systematic theologizing) tell us what we believe, and by implication what we do not. While there has been benefit to this, it means that the parts of the bible that do not fit neatly with our formulas are often overlooked. Some of the most moving and dramatic parts of the bible have in this method been relegated to the fringes in favour of others that can more easily be explained.
A Narrative approach to the bible reclaims all the stories therein and strives to see God encounter us in the midst of the ambiguity and complexity of our lives (and our stories) without necessarily trying to impose a set of formulas to our situation. I think that a narrative approach to theology is not only more natural for people of a post-modern era but it is in fact more conducive to the flow of the bible. Most of the bible is made up of stories where God turns up in the most unlikely of situations...and, as we see in the bible, God mostly works through unpredictable non-leaner means.
Unfortunately, while systematic theology would not disagree with this, the method generally assumes the opposite, thus alienating many people (including those you speak of in your post)?
In many ways systematic propositional approaches are inclined to be quite reductionistic. They are not wrong necessarily, but in a time when the majority of people are further from the Christian story than ever before, this ageing method is, in my opinion no longer sufficient for engaging with people outside the church. And, for the reasons I have already mentioned, I would also say that it is even unhelpful for edifying those within the Christian community.
If I could suggest two books, I would say get “The Shaping of Things to Come” by Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch and,” Know your Story-the Power of Narrative in Clergy Leadership” by Hester and Walker Jones.
Cheers
Simon G. Rattray