History as Theology:

When we want to find foundation for our theology, it seems natural for us to turn to platitudes, those verses of Scripture that are repeatable and unhindered by outdated Bible names and context, simply timeless ideas. However, these statements, on their own, lose a lot of their power. They are bantered about as pithy solutions to deep and varied issues until they are seen as too worn or insufficient for all the applications for which they are used.

Moral ideas need foundation themselves, lest their import is assumed to come from the feeling the comment produces, which holds no real power at all, not at least lasting power. Let me see if I can give a practical example of what I mean. The statement: “You should probably think really hard before breaking the law again,” is a perfectly profitable statement, but on its own, it does not move one to take it too seriously. Especially if all we can think back to is a possible traffic violation. Big whoop.

On the other hand, if you are standing in front of a judge who is just about ready to throw the book at you and is giving you one last chance before incarceration, it carries much more weight. It is the same statement, but it is given real world application and import. Context is key. With this truth in mind, we must try to reconstruct in our mind why our favorite memory verses are said in the first place. They are, almost, if not always said as response to some real historical event or fact.

“God is love,” is a beautiful idea, but it has, when taken on its own, led to less than helpful views of God as a sentimental being, never willing to discipline, sort of like the God of Rob Bell’s, Love Wins. The terms “God” and “love” do not stand on their own as timeless ideas. No, the writers of the Bible are always using their terms in the context of their Hebraic understanding, which is defined by the OT. When we then think of the statement, “God is Love,” we get a rich understanding of just what this means. It means that Yahweh, the personal God of Israel, the Lord Most High, the One God that exists without equal is Holy-love, a love that is expressed of a superior to an inferior to bring restoration and healing without transgressing justice.  Lovey-dovey flies out the window when we see this God for who He is.

We do not learn about the definitions of our terms from other moral platitudes given elsewhere. That would just move the problem back a step. No, we learn who God is and what His love is like by reading about God through story, real story, but story nonetheless. We know God demands justice, because we see him, in our minds eye, demand justice through the literature of the OT. We know that He is merciful as well for the same reason.

So, we read the OT, and we muster through the stories, and we think that just because we know how the story plays out that we know the Scripture, but if we do not ask “Why,” why is this story told, what is the author trying to teach, we do not learn much at all. Knowing the story is the first step. It is foundational. The various lesson that we learn of God and man do not jump right off the page some times (often times), but after we know the stories and we come across what seems to be a nice moral statement, the light bulb goes off. “Ah, he did not just make that up; he got that from (this or that) story.” God acts in real space and time to reveal His self and His plan for us.

God uses unrepeatable history as a solid foundation to demonstrate who He is and what He cares about. He then becomes the measuring stick for humanity, and by comparison, we see the depths of our need for Him. The Bible’s history then stands as the foundation for its lessons. Many think that once we get the “timeless” lesson, we can then discard the story itself, but that is a huge mistake. Without the history the lessons become disassociated platitudes that come to mean whatever they make us feel. We end up in square one again.