I think one of the reasons why conservative circles like the SOP so much is because it's clear cut, black and white. You can take a sentence "No line of manual training is of more value than agriculture." and thereby decree that everyone must participate in agriculture. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we shouldn't learn how to grow a garden. What I'm saying is, why are we so quick to pull the commanding sentences from the SOP and so slow to engage in a deep study of the Bible first? My theory? It's easier to enforce something that has already been stated than to study out principles which can then lead to conclusions based on those Biblical principles.
It's like learning to eat healthily. Recently, I've begun trying to eat more fruits and vegetables and whole grains (I'm still working on the whole grains part!). I love reading news articles on the latest discoveries about food and enjoy learning about how food can heal the body or help prevent disease. There's just one problem, though. There is so much information out there about the different things you need to have in your diet to ensure optimum health, that to eat everything every single day would require you to be munching 24/7. Now that wouldn't be very healthy, would it?
The same can be applied to statements found in the SOP. While there are excellent chapters written on many different topics, when you are trying to condense them down to what is the most important for the task at hand, it can become overwhelming. To try to incorporate every single admonition given would require us to walk around with huge tomes in our hands to refer to, as we make sure we aren't making any mistakes. I know, I'm being facetious, but there is some truth to my point.
I haven't got it all figured out yet, but one thing I do know. I wish we could hold the Bible up high as our standard and actually study from it first, before we march to the SOP to prove our points.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Share a thought or two. . .