Systematic Theology: Introduction to Systematic Theology

 * Notes for a class I'm teaching on Systematic Theology

Systematic Theology

 

What is Systematic Theology and Why does is matter?

 

1.     Definitions:

 

a.     “Systematic theology is any study that answers the questions, ‘What does the whole Bible teach us today?’ about any given topic.”  Wayne Grudem ST, p. 21

 

b.     “The attempt to summarize religious truth or the belief system of a religious group (such as Christianity) through an organized system of thought carried out within a particular cultural and intellectual context (see method of theology).”  Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, p. 111

 

c.     “Evangelical theology can be defined as systematic reflection on scripture and tradition and the mission of the church in mutual relation, with scripture as the norm.”[1]

 

d.     John Frame  “theology is the application of God’s Word by persons to all areas of life.”[2]

 

e.     “Theology, then, must be a secondary description, a reinterpretation and reproclamation of Scripture, both of its propositional and of its nonpropositional content.  Why do we need such a reinterpretation?  To meet human needs.  The job of theology is to help people understand the Bible better, not to give some sort of abstractly perfect account of the truth as such, regardless of whether anyone understands it or not.  Rather, the job of theology is to teach people the truth of God.  Although Scripture is clear, for various reasons people fail to understand and use it properly.  Theology is justified not merely by its correspondence with the truth—if that were the criterion, theology could do no better than simply to repeat Scripture—but theology is justified by the help it brings to people, by its success in helping people to use the truth.”[3]

 

2.     Goals of systematic theology:

 

a.     Task-oriented theology

 

The ultimate aim of theological reflection is to assist in the church’s task of bringing about the “obedience of faith…among all the nations” (Rom. 1:5).  Evangelical theology is task-oriented reflection upon scripture in light of the practical needs of ministry and mission.  Evangelical theology’s task is to be the church’s servant in the extension of the kingdom of God in the world and in the believer’s heart.[4]

 

Theology should never be a merely academic enterprise, but rather the search for biblical understanding in the context of the ministry and mission of the church.  The point of theological reflection is to “let the earth hear His voice.”  Evangelical theology is properly “task theology,” i.e., theology hammered out in response to the challenges posed by the Great Commission.[5]

                        

Systematic theology is a tool for extending God’s dominion in the world; it is dominion-oriented.[6]

 

b.     To help people

 

“It is all too easy for us to imagine that we have a higher task than merely that of helping people.  Our pride constantly opposes the servant model.  And it is all too easy for us to think of theological formulations as something more than truth-for-people, as a kind of special insight into God himself (which the biblical writers would have written about, had they known as much as we)… Our theologies are merely attempts to help people, generally and in specific times and places, to use Scripture better.”[7]

 

3.     Relationship to other branches of theology:

 

a.     Biblical Theology:  

 

“Biblical theology gives special attention to the teachings of individual authors and sections of Scripture, and to the place of each teaching in the historical development of Scripture.”  Wayne Grudem ST, p. 22

 

·      Two crucial ideas: process and progress

 

“The first term (process) teaches us that both the character and task of Biblical theology is that of tracing the great themes of salvation history according to their historical order of unfolding.  The second  (progress) informs us that the focal point of Biblical theology is not only the historical unfolding of God’s self-revelation but also the expansion and upward movement of that revelation.”[8]

 

b.     Historical Theology: “a historical study of how Christians in different periods have understood various theological topics” Grudem, p. 21

 

c.     Philosophical Theology: “studying theological topics largely without use of the Bible, but using the tools and methods of philosophical reasoning and what can be known about God from observing the universe”  Grudem, p. 21

 

d.     Triangle: Biblical studies  Systematic Theology  Apologetics

 

·      Need to understand the what the Bible says before we can accurately do systematic theology

·      Need to know what we believe (systematic theology) before we can accurately defend it

 

 

 

4.     Why study systematic theology?

 

a.     Know God better: John 17.3

 

b.     Protect the church: 1 Timothy 4.11-16; 2 Timothy 2.14-18; 4.1-5; Titus 1.9-11

 

c.     Promotes godliness: 1 Timothy 4.6-8

 

d.     Form of spiritual warfare: 1 Timothy 4.1-5

 

e.     One of the means of salvation: 1 Timothy 4.16

 

f.      Comfort in the midst of deep pain: Psalm 102.25-27 (deep theology) and see vv. 1-11 (deep pain)

 

g.     Worship: Psalm 145; Revelation 4 and 5 

 

·      Rev 4.11  praise (“Worthy”) for God the Creator

 

·      Rev 5.9, 12  praise (“Worthy”) for Lamb as Redeemer

 

5.     How should we study systematic theology?

 

a.     Prayerfully

 

“Men who know their God are before anything else men who pray, and the first point where their zeal and energy for God’s glory come to expression is in their prayers….Yet the invariable fruit of true knowledge of God is energy to pray for God’s cause—energy, indeed, which can only find an outlet and a relief of inner tension when channeled into such prayer—and the more knowledge, the more energy!  By this we may test ourselves.”  J. I. Packer Knowing God, p. 24

 

·      Seek to pray what you are learning in systematic theology—bring every doctrine into your prayer life

 

b.     With help from others—especially teachers in the church

 

·       Ephesians 4.8-12 (teachers as gifts from Christ to the Church!  This includes teachers from the past!)

 

c.     For the sake of others

 

·      1 Corinthians 8.1-13

 

d.     With rejoicing and praise: 

 

·      Psalm 139.17

·      Psalm 19.8; 119.14, 103, 111, 162

·      Romans 11.33-36

 

e.     With obedience

 

·      Matthew 7.24-27

 

“Of what use is it to discourse learnedly on the Trinity, if you lack humility?  Lofty words do not make a man just or holy; but a good life makes him dear to God.  I would far rather feel contrition than be able to define it.  If you knew the whole Bible by heart, and all the teachings of the philosophers, how would this help you without the grace and love of God?”  Thomas a Kempis The Imitation of Christ (book one, chapter one)

---

[1] John Jefferson Davis Foundations of Evangelical Theology, 43.

[2] John Frame The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, 76, 81.

[3] John Frame The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, 79-80.

[4] John Jefferson Davis Foundations of Evangelical Theology, 9.

[5] John Jefferson Davis Foundations of Evangelical Theology, 45.

[6] John Jefferson Davis Foundations of Evangelical Theology, 47.

[7] John Frame The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, 80.

[8] Don Garlington, “The Biblical-Theological Method” in Exegetical Essays (3^rd ed.), Wifp and Stock, 2003, p. 1.

Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology: My Footnote Mention

 Something fun to report...

Wayne Grudem recently put out the second edition of his Systematic Theology.

On page 898, footnote 35, I am mentioned...

Is the Qur'an Sufficient?

I’ve been reading Nabeel Qureshi’s book No God But One: A Former Muslim Investigates the Evidence for Islam and Christianity (Zondervan, 2016).  The book is very good on a number of topics.  Scattered throughout the work are comments on how Muslims approach the Qur’an.  This is instructive since it is easy to fall prey to the idea that since Muslim’s have a holy book therefore they treat it the same as Christians do their holy Scriptures.  Evangelical Christians have spoken of various attributes of the Bible as Scripture.  For example, Wayne Grudem in his Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994) speaks of four characteristics of Scripture:

1.     Necessity: The necessity of Scripture means that the Bible is necessary for knowing the gospel, for maintaining spiritual life, and for knowing God’s will, but it is not necessary for knowing that God exists or for knowing something about God’s character and moral law. (p. 116)

2.     Authority: The authority of Scripture means that all the words in Scripture are God’s words in such a way that to disbelieve or disobey any word of Scripture is to disbelieve or disobey God. (p. 73)

3.     Sufficiency: The sufficiency of Scripture means that Scripture contained all the words of God he intended his people to have at each stage of redemptive history, and that it now contains all the words of God we need for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly. (p. 127)

4.     Perspicuity/Clarity: The clarity of Scripture means that the Bible is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by all who will read it seeking God’s help and being willing to follow it. (p. 108)[1]

In contradistinction to these concepts within evangelical Christianity, Quereshi brings out the difference within Islam.  Within Islamic teaching regarding the Qur’an there is the doctrine of abrogation.  Qureshi writes:

“Grasping the orality of the Quran helps with understanding the controversial phenomenon of abrogation.  While Muhammad was still alive, he would give recitations that cancelled previous ones.  In other words, he would tell his followers that certain portions of the Quran he had relayed before were no longer to be recited as part of the Quran.  This was met with resistance, as people asked him how the Word of God could be cancelled.  The response is recorded in 2.106 of the Quran, which asserts that Allah can substitute verses in his divine scripture because ‘he has power over all things.’

Qureshi goes on to note how this doctrine of abrogation comes to negate the sufficiency of the Quran:

“Not all abrogated verses were left out of the text of the Quran, though Muslim scholars have classically taught that there are multiple types of abrogation, including abrogation of text-not-law and abrogation of law-not-text.  In other words, they teach that Allah intended certain verses to be recited but not practiced, and other verses to be practiced but not recited.  For these reasons, Muslim scholars turn to the records of Muhammad’s life, the hadith, for clarification.  In addition, as we have already seen, more Islamic practices actually come from hadith and not from the Quran.

“This is why Muslims do not believe the Quran is sufficient for Islamic practice, but it requires authoritative hadith.  Very few Muslims believe in the sufficiency of the Quran, and these ‘Quran only’ Muslims are often deemed heretical by mainstream Muslims.” (pp. 109-110—bold-face added)

In a later discussion of the issue of putting apostates to death Qureshi returns to these concepts:

“Some Muslims point out that the Quran does not command the killing of the apostates, and arguably they are correct.  But Islam is not a sola scriptura faith; it has always used hadith to supplement the Quran.  Anyone who prays the five daily prayers would have to admit this, because not only are the words for the prayers not given in the Quran, even the number of daily prayers is not mentioned.  The Quran mentions only three daily prayers, and it does not delineate the words or postures for any of them.  Although there are legitimate ‘Quran-only’ Muslims, they have always been an extreme minority in Islam.  Most Muslims who argue against the law of apostasy using a Quran-only approach are using reasoning that would radically alter their Islamic practice if applied consistently.

“Alone similar lines, some peaceful Muslims argue against the law of apostasy based on Quranic verses such as 2.256, which says, ‘There is no compulsion in religion.’  In order to say this, though, they are also disavowing Muhammad’s example.  Muhammad did not interpret that verse in that manner, as his actions in hadith repeatedly show.  That is why, classically, Muslim theologians have listed 2.256 among the abrogated verses we discussed in the previous chapter.  Ibn Kathir, for example, says 2.256 was abrogated by 9.29, which tells Muslims to fight Jews and Christians.  Popular Muslim scholars have vociferously defended these traditional interpretations throughout the twentieth century.” (p. 136—bold-face added)

In light of Qureshi’s discussion it does appear that the traditional Islamic view of the Quran does not include a notion of sufficiency.  Morevover, the vast amount of material from hadith literature that needs to be considered for a right interpretation of the Quran it appears that the concept of perspicuity is also severely compromised.[2] 

---

     [1] Grudem uses the language of “clarity” in his Systematic Theology but I like the older term “perspicuity.”  Grudem himself uses the older term in a 2009 presentation “The Perspicuity of Scripture.”  Available online: http://www.waynegrudem.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Perspicuity-of-Scripture-for-Themelios-Word-97-3.pdf.

     [2] The words of James White are appropriate as well: “A careful and fair comparison of the literature of biblical exegesis produced by believing Christian scholarship with that of believing Islamic scholarship is striking.  The intricate, complex studies found among Muslims in the hadith sciences is the closest parallel to the in-depth, original-language-based exegesis of the New Testament among Christians.  The Muslim battleground of debate on these issues is focused upon Islamic tradition, while for believing Christians it is focused upon the text of Scripture itself.”  What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Qur’an (Bethany House, 2013), 163.

Wayne Grudem on the "Stupendous Affirmation" of the Bible as the Word of God

In preparation for preaching a portion of Psalm 119 I remembered these words from Wayne Grudem about the Word of God.  He gave them in a 1999 Evangelical Theological Society presidential address.

But do we ponder the implications of this stupendous affirmation? We are saying that throughout the entire history of the world, and throughout all written documents of all civilizations, the eternal, omnipotent Creator of the universe, the God who will one day judge every human being who has ever lived—this God who is over all has given the human race just one collection of his written words: This book. The Bible. 

The Bible alone is the Word of God written. There are no other written words of God anywhere else in the entire world. And the Bible in its entirety is the Word of God written. Every single bit of this book in the original documents has a fundamentally different character from every other bit of writing in the entire world.

--Wayne Grudem, “Do We Act As If We Really Believe That ‘The Bible Alone, and the Bible in its Entirety, is the Word of God Written’?”  1999 ETS presidential address JETS 43 (2000), 5.