Discussion on whether theology has to be systematic May 15th, 2015 Ed Chait May 14, 2015 Does theology have to be systematic? Like · Comment Seen by 24 Tim White Eventually, since we learn about an organized God who desires us to know Him And learn of Him. And since the process involves renewing the mind, our learning requires that we can mentally catalog what we learn in a systematic way. Systematic understanding helps us grasp ideas that are not clearly described but assumed we would discover. Yesterday at 1:34am · Like · 2 William Brenner Not Charismania. Yesterday at 1:43am · Like · 1 Ed Chait I asked because I read an article on Spurgeon this morning that said that he “gave up” on systematic theology. Yesterday at 2:00am · Like Patrick Thompson As much as could be said about this topic, the brief answer would be to define first of all what theology is, which is the study of the Word of God from what God has revealed to us from the Scriptures. Then looking at systematic, we see how all parts fit together and how one point impacts every other detail. “God is not the author of confusion” and His Word does bring unity, coherence, and consistency. Yesterday at 2:51am · Like · 2 Ed Chait I think I interpreted the statement in that article as absolute and that didn’t seem possible. Thanks for your help guys! Yesterday at 2:58am · Edited · Like Robbie Holmes I always thought systematic theology was the beginning of all other theologies, for example, if you want to study Christology surely you use systematic (to some degree) to amass all relevant information required? love to hear if this is right or wrong though! Yesterday at 4:21am · Like · 1 Evan PlanteSystematic Theology is both a title of study and a method of study. It is what is says: a study of theology done systematically. What this does not say is that it is comprehensive — covering all the more specific “ologies” (Christology, Soteriology, etc.). Systematic Theology tells you everything you every wanted to know about God (but were afraid to ask), as well as concepts you didn’t know existed. It teaches you things that you didn’t know that you had to know… and probably a few that you wished you hadn’t learned. It is the broom that sweeps the entire room. Yesterday at 6:37am · Edited · Like · 1 Ed Chait It also makes it harder to find an acceptable local church. Yesterday at 9:12am · Like · 1 Justin Tilghman There are many types of theology. The foundational type is really Biblical theology which seeks to determine theological doctrines taught in the Scriptures, such as Pauline emphasis on justification or Johannine emphasis on love, etc. So no, theology doesn’t have to be systematic. 15 hrs · Like · 1 Ed Chait Does that then mean that all of Scripture does not necessarily need to be held together and understood through a single unifying system? 15 hrs · Edited · Like Justin TilghmanNo, it doesn’t necessarily mean that. It just means that there are more ways to look at theology than just systematically. Systematic theology is actually defined as theology that develops an over-arching view of theological doctrines from biblical, and extra-biblical, sources. Biblical theology is solely focused on what Scripture says about a particular topic, without going to extra-biblical sources, and how that doctrine has been developed an understood throughout the Bible. For example, Biblical theology would be interested in how the concept of salvation was developed and articulated in the Edenic period, the Abrahamic period, the Mosaic period, in the ministry of Jesus, in the ministry of Paul, etc. with the point of understanding the doctrine through the Bible as a whole. 15 hrs · Edited · Like · 1 Ed Chait OK, I understand, thank you Justin. 15 hrs · Like Justin Tilghman You’re welcome. I appreciate your question because I was only recently introduced to other types of theological study. I’ve always thought that there was only systematic theology but apparently there are many ways of looking at things. We just all tend to like systematic theology because, well, it’s systematic smile emoticon 15 hrs · Edited · Like · 1 Marc Weiss Funny, this is one of those issues that I think works (systematic theology) but is only one way to see it. Yes, theology is systematic, but it does not have to be systematic. I believe the answer is simply that God is greater than we can comprehend and while systematic theology has merit, God is so much more than one view. Hope that came our properly. 14 hrs · Like · 1 Ed Chait And I think that’s what the article meant by saying that Spurgeon “gave up” on systematic theology. He stopped trying to make *everything* fit together neatly. I think. 14 hrs · Like · 2 Joseph Ford Systematic Theology should be the last “ology” to be looked at. As stated earlier, it connects the dots of all the other “ologies.” If one starts with ST, it’s possible to come up with ideas not postulated in the individual “ologies.” 12 hrs · Like · 1 Marc WeissWell, I like systematic theology – but not everything will fit in a man made ‘ology’. It will make sense, but no one can say for certain. Example: In the Targum, there is a concept called the Memrah. This means the Word of God. It was a being equal to, but not the same as God. As you look at the writings (predating Jesus) one begins to see that the Memrah really fits into the Old Testament and probably is Jesus Incarnate. No one can see God and live, but Jacob was face to face with God. Who was it? I believe it was Jesus. That example used – I have no evidence of that. I can say it ‘fits’ but is it 100% correct? I do not know. 11 hrs · Like · 1 Marc Weiss I hope that made sense. 11 hrs · Like · 1 Tim WhiteStudy is either systematic or tends to be memorization of random facts and details. Even Jesus taught systematically. “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself (Luke 24:13).”You study the dimensions of something to understand where it fits, to appreciate its size, or to master its use. For any of those three (and any others that I can imagine), there must be a systematic thought process and organization. Paul prayed that his students “…may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.”Any other approach, IMHO, is too milky. “For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of the oracles of God. You need milk, not solid food, for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil. Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, and of instruction about washings, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits (Hebrews 5:12-6:3).”The use of the word “στοιχεῖον” (stoicheion) in the above verses for “basic principles” indicates systematic, organized understandings of the scripture. We even teach (I hope) that one of the study techniques that is necessary to understand the Bible is to compare the Bible verses with the Bible message. Compare scripture to scripture. That is a systematic approach and insures against your theology from becoming soggy in the milk.
