Prolegomenon: Introduction to Systematic Theology 1

The Aim of Theology

There is at least a threefold aim of Theology. The aim of Theology involves the discovering and understanding facts of God: In relationship with us, and in relationship with the universe. The second is, the exhibiting and systematizing these facts. Sunistano- putting it all together and organizing truth. The third is, in applying these truth to our lives.

Knowing the facts of God without knowing God is a sad condition to be in. Knowing God and remaining ignorant of the facts is also a sad condition to be in. The former is like knowing everything there is to know about someone else's inheritance, the later is like being an heir, but not knowing what you have inherited.

The Possibility of Systematic Theology

What about the possibility of Systematic Theology?

Unbelieving Scholarship has no confidence in Scripture as a source for theology, or any other source then because in their view, Scripture contains contradictions, and many irreconcilable differences.

Others lay claim that NT Theology renders OT Theology obsolete. Their conclusion is that NT Systematic Theology is impossible; we must speak in terms of NT Systematic Theologies plural.

...there is a growing consensus even among New Testament scholars that any systematic theology that claims to summarize biblical truth is obsolete at best and perverse at worst. Any possibility of legitimate systematic theology presupposes that the discipline will look else where for its norms, or begin from some center smaller than or different from the Christian canon. (D. A. Carson, “unity and diversity in the New Testament: The Possibility of Systematic Theology,” in Scripture and Truth, p. 65)

However, Conservative Biblicist theologians accept the Scriptures as the true source of theology. This may be thought of as the Earnest Contender’s “Data Base”, “The Entire Bible Alone!” “Scriptures are the true source of Theology.” With this in mind I would like us to consider that there is such a thing as “progressive revelation.” Some examples of the kind of progression being refered to is like an acorn to oak tree, Old Testament to New Testament, Gospels to Epistles, the beginning of Acts to end of Acts.

We may also see this progression or growth in the writers of Scripture, for example look at the personal background of each writer. How did they mature in their relationship with God as indicated by their writings? Remember history is a part of the text too, (e.g. The OT is foundational to the NT) this is important information to tuck away for when we discuss interpretation a little later on.

Ultimately the possibility of systematic theology has a triad bases:

a.) The existence of God who has relations with the universe
and man.

b.) There is a capacity of the human mind for knowing God.

c.) God has revealed Himself to us.

The Necessity of Systematic Theology

The necessity of Systematic Theology may seem an odd thing to mention, but it is quite relevant and pertinent since some of us do not like to use the term “system” and prefer to think of our ideas about God as purely relational. If you are born again, doing theology is relational! Still normal minds automatically reconcile and/or correlate facts they receive. That is, a much higher kind of knowledge is obtained by isolated facts alone (e.g. Sports, remember "The Love of the Game"? One can know facts, but how do they all work together?), and at the same time putting them together so it is NOT just knowing the facts alone. My contention is that ST is necessary for propagating doctrine and defending “the faith” and ST helps unfold the meaning of Scripture.

The contemporary necessity of ST is also threefold and here at The Earnest Contender this is an imperative.

a.) Systematic theology must be understandable.

For the church at large we have few specialists who can teach through the mass media... Our best minds are siphoned off to seminaries where they are expected to write indigestible monographs for the half dozen men in the world who can understand what they are talking about. In the past doctors of the church wrote so that literate men could understand, and Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, and Wesley are much easier to read than [many of] our contemporaries... The greatest battle is the battle of the mind, and it is won by words that are shot like bullets-- smooth, sharp, powerful, and dead on target. (Robert Brow)

b.) Systematic theology must be relevant as it is tied to the great commission (Matt. 28: 19-20), BUT don’t throw away truth just because the relevance isn’t plain to see at the moment.

c.) Systematic theology must be personal.

(See, “Doing Theology in the Church”, by Robert Saucy, in The Necessity of Systematic Theology, edited by J. J. Davis)

Here are some sound reasons for Systematic Theology (and some $ 5.00 words, no charge)

1. Catechetical Root: Acts 2:42; we who are saved want to know apostolic teaching.

2. Exegetical Root: Developed because of deep commitment of the Word.

3. Homiletical Root: As preachers taught and preached.

4. Polemical (Disputing/Argument/ Debate) Root: As heresies arose and attacked.

5. Apologetic Root: Challenges as when the Word is attacked.

6. Ethical Root: A problem arose and had to be dealt with biblically.

7. Missionary Root: As the gospel spread out different applications were made.

Tuck it all away now. When we return to this study “Prolegomenon: Introduction to Systematic Theology” (sometime next week) I will begin with a question; “What are the materials of Systematic Theology?”