I’m at a conference. We are debating documents that talk about what we believe. They are written in language that is technically very precise. And hard to understand.
I’m sure that theologians, those who study God, would argue that this language is challenging for some, but is necessary to delineate who is on which side of very precise theological distinctions.
I know that other people listen to the distinctions and the delineations and the language and argue that this should be translated into ordinary language (or they just argue).
I am stuck firmly in the middle. It is necessary to have boundaries to belief. And it’s necessary to be able to explain those boundaries in ways that make sense to people whose first language is English, not theological dictionary.
I spent some time recently trying to explain what is different about the denomination I am part of. I’m ordained, which means I’m a reverend. And that means I should have some clear way to explain what we believe. But I discovered that it is hard to explain how we differ from and are similar to other groups, when my friend doesn’t know details about those other groups either.
Nor should she have to.
Trying to avoid the confusion, I started, “Well, we are pretty pro-Jesus.” That wasn’t much help, though it probably is more inviting of conversation than, “The Gospel originates in and manifests the holy love of the eternal, triune God.” I mean, both are true and accurate, but the laughter that the first statement triggered was more relaxing than the quizzical look the second would bring.
What I’m discovering in my conversations is that I need to work even harder to make the abstract put on flesh. Conference will be done soon. That will help. I hope, anyway.
300 words a day 
Frank Reed
Jon – Interestingly enough I just took a step into what I hope is not a confusing venture by picking up Grudem’s Systematic Theology yesterday. It’s suppose to be in plain English for mere mortal believers like myself. So far I question his definition of plain English but I intend to work through it.
In the end, this is all about the heart. We can fill as many heads with intellectual ‘stuff’ as we want but if their heart is not connected to Christ then it’s nothing more than a day at the library, in my opinion.
LikeLike
Rich Dixon
I wonder about the technical theological language you describe. I wonder why–who benefits, other than seminarians and professsional theologians?
Distinguishing your group from my group by technical theology–why? I know there’s a historical difference between Lutherans and Methodists and Presbyterians, but do those differences really matter to anyone outside denominational leadership?
I get digging into Scripture. I’m not sure why we dig into human words with such fine-toothed combs. I wonder if parsing ideas about Jesus is a source of job security for professional religious types who get their identity (and paycheck) from maintaining and enhancing differences between groups.
But I also realize that we need to be clear about what we believe. It can’t just be “love Jesus and be nice.”
Anyone have the answer?
LikeLike
Joseph Ruiz
Rich i don’t have the answer but love the context and question you present. Frank I admire you courage a friend of mine has the book and the table of contents is daunting for me. Jon I am amused by the contrast of this discussion and Jesus walking up to tax collectors, fishermen saying c’mon guys let’s go for a walk. I wonder if some of the theology is tied to our culture and our need for intellectual answers.
I agree with Frank it is ultimately about the heart. By the way i think debate on the intellectual is good as long as we are just debating for the fun of it. The challenge is moving toward the unity of the faith, recognizing different gifts and body parts for example, and not allowing the discussion to divide us.
Be well Jon
LikeLike
Glenda Watson Hyatt
Interesting. The point that just jumped out is how doctrine is used to differentiate groups, to divide people*, rather than to unite us. That leads me to the question: it that division God-made or man-made?
LikeLike