Doctrine, or, The Fallen Nature of Systematics

So, I was thinking after church today about doctrine. Actually, about doctrine and evangelism and biblical interpretation and living a 'Christian' life (an idea that distresses me enough to be a set of essays, but not to be written today).

I believe that doctrine is not to be the First Thing, as in, that which is Priority #1. In fact, it may not even show up in my Top Five. And here's why: Doctrine cannot circumscribe God. It is a part of man's attempt to understand, and true, complete understanding is not something that the limitations of human nature allows for. I think that's a safe statement to make regardless of whether you believe humans were created by God or whether God doesn't exist and therefore didn't create humans, or some other viewpoint. The simple reality is that the human mind, soul, and body cannot completely, truly understand. Anything. In part, yes. Good enough for forward motion, yes. Completely and truly, no. And if it can't circumscribe God, it cannot convey reality.

God comes first.

The thing is, I think that's easily recognizable. And I think most Christians can recognize that. But when you then ask, "Well, what do we do with that?", nobody really knows. Because God's un-understandable. Yes, he comes first, but I can't grasp him, so what do I do? So people set about making it simpler (another topic that could easily warrant it's own set of essays). They don't necessarily do so intentionally, they do so out of a perceived necessity. And it is necessary. Humans need something to follow, whether instructions or people or vibes or zeitgeist. So where's the problem?

Doctrine is all about systems. Whether the system is rational and logical, or intuitive and mystical, doctrine revolves around ordering things so that they can be understood and, thus, followed or adhered to. Making them static. God, however is not static. He is dynamic. And reality is dynamic. Certain things stay the same, just as God himself is characterized by his unchangingness, yet there is no staticness. The foundation is set, but the connections move.
This dynamicism is something doctrine can't convey. You can make a "dynamic" doctrine, but it won't convey what is unchanging.

Doctrines, like ideologies (they are brothers), are insufficient.

So, I think the point here is, you have to keep looking beyond the doctrine to what it is trying to talk about. Where is the real thing?

God is the real thing. And following him is interacting. The doctrine can serve as a marker or a signpost, but God is the one to interact with. And that requires real work, both intuitive and learned. It requires actual interaction, true relationship, honest communication, quality time spent.







Not that I'm any good at it...