“It strikes me how rare these kinds of words, outlines, and dissective ways of thinking are in the Bible, which preocupies itself with earthy stories rather than airy abstractions, wild poetry rather than tidy systems, personal and contextual letters rather than timeless, absolute pronouncements or propositions. I have often wondered, Why doesn’t the Bible consist of an ordered schema, like the average curriculum of a semenary? Of course, I’m not against our systematic theologies. I’m begining to see them as an artifact of worship from the modern era, no less sincere or magnificant than medieval cathedrals–in fact, you could call them modern conceptual cathedrals. Rather than condemning, I am simply noticing that our systematic theologies are themselves a modern phenomenon.” (>>)
Thursday, August 18th, 2005 :: 12:35 PM
1) Aaron Shafovaloff »» August 21st, 2005 @ 10:19 am
Surely the Bible isn’t merely systematic: it indeed has wild poetry and song and narrative. But it does have systematic thought. Romans. It is the most systematic presentation of the Christian faith, something Paul wrote to promote the gospel on his way to be a missionary to Spain. So far from being a modern phenomenon, pulling together the Christian worldview and summarizing it finds it roots in Paul (and early church history!). Just like writing wild poetry to the glory and grandeur of God finds its roots in David.