I work in the field of engineering. Mostly electronics. (Actually, a lot more complicated than that, but no matter.) I've worked in this field for quite awhile. And in all the places I've worked in this field, I've been interested to note the two kinds of engineers you'll find. First, there are the system-type, and then there are the task-type. Okay, my terms. So I'll need to explain.
The task-oriented engineer is by far the most common. This one is given a task and focuses his or her effort on completing that task. He is told, "Make a widget" and he will put his nose to the grindstone (so to speak) figuring out the best way to make this widget. This, in fact, is what makes an engineer different than, say, a secretary. A secretary is told "Handle everything" and he/she will be juggling all sorts of tasks, issues, problems, and such. But an engineer is focused. Paperwork, parts availability, sometimes even whether or not the science even exists are all side issues. There is a singular focus to accomplish the task without interference or interruption from other considerations. That is the task-oriented engineer.
The system-oriented engineer is a different sort of animal and, as such, not quite as common. I suspect the systems engineer is powered less by the goal and more by innate curiosity. This engineer will get the same task -- "Make a widget" -- but this one won't settle for the best way to design and build such a device. Instead, he/she will ask, "Now, how is this thing going to be used? How does it fit in with other things? What kind of language will it need to speak or what kind of skills will it need to have?" And on it goes. This engineer will consider the entire system in which the device is supposed to live and then go from there.
The task engineer will (typically) provide a very good product. It will do all that the widget is supposed to do. Will it work in the environment in which it is supposed to work? That all depends on how well the widget was specified. The system engineer, on the other hand, will produce a widget that will certainly work within the environment in which it needs to operate. This may mean that it isn't as clever as the task engineer's device, but it does mean that it works. That is, at the end of the day, the task engineer's widget may need to be modified to fit into the system. Or the system may need to be modified to fit the widget. "There, see?" the task engineer will say, "It works great on 18 volts." "But ... we don't have 18 volts in our system." "Well, you're going to have to get it."
It occurs to me that people who study the Bible are much the same. There are "task-oriented readers" who focus on the verse at hand, and there are "system-oriented readers" that examine the whole thing. A "task reader" (TR, for short) will, for instance, read 2 Peter 3:9b which says, "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." There it is, in plain English. The Lord is not willing that any should perish. But ... the "system reader" (SR, for short) will say, "But ... many do perish." You see, that's not found in this text. You have to look elsewhere. And now there's a problem you need to figure out. A TR will read, "Judge not that you be not judged" and say, "See? You are not to judge anyone else." An SR will say, "But ... the rest of the text talks about right ways to judge!" And now there's a problem you need to figure out.
In the case of the two engineers, the problem is solved by modifying the system or the task. In the case of Scripture, you can do neither. It would seem, then, that the best option is to read texts ("task") with a view to all of Scripture ("system") to be sure the two of them are in line. If not, you'll need to adjust your understanding.
Scripture is a system. It is the Word of God -- all of it. As such, it works together. All of its parts work together. Paying close attention to a piece can be helpful, but always keep a "system view" to be sure that you're not failing to properly understand the piece. All the pieces fit together. Be sure you're not comprehending some pieces in a "task view" that don't fit in a "system view". Works better that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment