Opus 2025-245: Is?

Have you noticed how often we have to fall into the Bill Clinton trap and ask, “What is the meaning of ‘is’?”

If God had wanted us to have a well outlined systematic theology, He would have included one of those in the Bible along with a subject and scripture index.

The book of Romans does not qualify.  It is not well outlined.  It is not well defined.  It may be Paul’s attempt but it falls short of what we would want and we are forced into the same paradox that we have in the rest of scripture:  interpretation.

For instance, Paul is constantly talking about the law.  He uses the term works, and the phrase “works of the law” as synonyms.  I find myself asking, “What does he mean by the law?”  It would seem obvious, and yet it isn’t.  In Galatians we see him putting everyone who seeks circumcision into a category of rejection by God.  Then later we see him having Timothy circumcised.  We see him rejecting the rituals of the law, then we see him shaving his head and taking an oath in order to avoid the criticism of the legalist party.  Somewhere in between that and salvation by works, has to be the actual truth.  We seek that truth at our peril if we think we have found it in a way better than anyone else.

I don’t claim to have the answers.  Sometimes I can’t figure out what I am talking about.  At the same time I am learning that my primary source for what I believe must be the actual words of the Bible taking into consideration what the words mean in context.  It must not be the bobbing and weaving done by scholars and theologians.  They, like us, come with their bags packed and too often, instead of going to the source, they go to their prepared outlines.

We can know the truth but we need to be careful it is truth and not an opinion based on tradition.

homo unius libri