Below is a paper written for an Introduction to Theology class at DTS. It is a response paper to two introductory books about theology, but let me explain the picture.
I think theology is much more essential to Christian faith than the average Christian realizes. It's a forgotten essential, as this paper tries to prove. Hence, I show you a rusty old gear without which many a machine would cease to run. Theology is like that gear. We need it for Christianity to run, and you can hate it all you want, but without it, the Christian life goes no where.
I hope you enjoy.
Introduction
The
purpose of this paper is to respond to the assertions made in Who Needs Theology? by Grenz and Olson,
and A Little Book for New Theologians
by Kapic. These books represent an introduction to the study of theology on the
most basic level, trying to assist laity in appreciating the need for theology.
Before responding to these works, a brief attempt at defining basic theological
terms will be undertaken. The theses of the respective books will then be
presented and summarized, followed by an evaluation of and response to the
theses.
Definitions of Theological Terms
The
following terms will be defined by various respected sources and then
synthesized into an original definition: (1) Theology, (2) Biblical Theology,
(3) Historical Theology, (4) Systematic Theology.
Theology
Ryrie
gives, I think, the best three-point qualification of theology, from the
Christian viewpoint:
“(1) Theology is intelligible. It can be comprehended
by the human mind in an orderly and rational manner. (2) Theology requires
explanation. This, in turn, involves exegesis and systematization. (3) The
Christian faith finds its source in the Bible, so Christian theology will be a
Bible-based study. Theology, then, is the discovery, systematizing, and
presentation of the truths about God.”
Norm
Geisler gives, I think, the most comprehensive while concise definition of Theology.
“Theology is a rational discourse about God.”[1]
In class, another concise definition was given, “faith seeking understanding.”[2]
Christian theology was defined in class as, “any Christian ‘conversation’ about
the triune God (truth).”[3]The
definition I have synthesized, from a Christian perspective, is as follows:
Theology is the statement of organized thought that pursues knowledge of God.
Biblical Theology
Hodge
defines the difference between Biblical and systematic theology well. “The
office of [biblical theology] is to ascertain and state the facts of scripture.
The office of [systematic theology] is to take those facts, determine their
relation to each other and to other cognate truths, as well as to vindicate
them and show their harmony and consistency.”[4]
Ryrie says biblical theology, “deals systematically with the historically
conditioned progress of self-revelation of God in the Bible.
The
definition I have synthesized uses the term theology as defined above. Biblical
theology is Theology whose organized thoughts are expressed in the Bible.
Historical Theology
Historical
Theology, according to Enns, is “the unfolding of Christian theology throughout
the centuries.”[5]
I see no point in trying to improve on as clear a definition as this one.
Systematic Theology
It
might be noted that the definition provided of theology is actually a
definition of systematic theology. This is a valid point. I see little
difference between theology at all and systematic theology, other than a
difference in quality. Systematic might be called “better theology,” or “more
organized theology,” but all theology is systematic, it just might not be
systematized very well. The other difference may be to specifically state that
Systematic Theology’s sources are divine revelation as opposed to any thoughts
that pop into one’s head. Again this is a differentiation of quality and not
much else. That being said, other definitions of systematic theology are worth
noting.
Berkhof assumes the definition of
systematic theology as, “the systematized knowledge of God, of whom, through
whom and unto whom are all things.” [6]
“Humans responding in a systematic way to revelation (especially in Scripture),
expressing the truth about the triune God in language informed by culture and
the Christian tradition.”[7]
“An attempt to construct a comprehensive and consistent whole out of all revelation from God, whether special
(biblical) or general (natural) revelation.”[8]
“A science which follows a humanly devised scheme or order of doctrinal
development and which purports to incorporate into its system all the truth
about God and His universe from any and every source.”[9]
Authors’ Theses
Who Needs Theology?
A Little Book for New Theologians
Kapic’s
thesis revolves around the peripherals of theology, not theology itself.
Kapic’s goal seems to be to show why to do theology and the right ways to do
it, so as not to become spiritually dry, morally vacant, or religiously
zealous. This goal can be seen in statements like, “Theological reflection is a
way of examining our praise, prayers, words and worship with the goal of making
sure they conform to God alone,”[12]
and “theology is about life, and it is not a conversation our souls can afford
to avoid.”[13]
Kapic
spends the book building a heartfelt case that theology should be heartfelt,
and if it is not, then it is not theology at all, merely academic pursuit
leading to legalistic whitewashed tombs. Each chapter builds on the spiritual
life of a true theologian tackling subjects like prayer, community, suffering,
and love of scripture. Kapic is adamantly fighting against the common outcome
of seminary study: spiritual vacancy. His goal is to prevent such an outcome
and preserve love of God while pursuing knowledge of God. The two cannot be
divorced.
Responses to Theses
Who Needs Theology?
While
I appreciate what Grenz and Olson try to do with Who Needs Theology? I find their approach bothersome and
unnecessarily convoluted. They go to great lengths to expand the definition of
theology, but then spend the remainder of the book re-shrinking the definition
again. I understand why they do this. They want their reader to be willing to
talk theology, and they do this by pointing out that everyone is a theologian,
so it’s silly to avoid theological conversation. This takes away the resister’s
excuse. He can’t say, “I don’t like to think about theology,” because, by Grenz
and Olson’s definition, yes he does like to think about it. Everyone does! I
believe they took this road to get around the barrier of starting theological
conversation.
I
would guess that Grenz and Olson recognize that the way people use the words “theology”
and “theologian” implicitly refers to professional or vocational theologians
studying theology as a part of their job. That is largely the purpose of
chapter two, which shows the different levels of theological study, from folk
to academic. I wish they had merely begun there not spent so much time working
up to that, because they spend the majority of the book then discussing
professional and academic theology.
Granted,
these are very picky points. Overall, I do like the book and would recommend it
to friends who think they don’t need theology. It would likely do much to open
the eyes of a fearer of theology. For me, however, having studied theology for
a few years, I spent much of the time waiting for Grenz and Olson to get to the
point. I didn’t need to be convinced to love the study of theology, which is
what they spent a great many pages doing.
A Little Book for New
Theologians
This
book was revitalizing and fascinating to me. As stated above, I have already
spent some time studying theology, and I have experienced and am experiencing a
few of the errors this book is trying to ward off. For that, I cherished this
read. While holding to a high level of scholarship, Kapic managed to restore
the heart of theology to me, loving God. This is a rare combination.
He rightly quotes Warfield, “Love theology, of course: but
love theology for no other reason than it is THEOLOGY – the knowledge of God –
and because it is your meat and drink to know God, to know him truly, and as
far as it is given to mortals, to know him whole.”[14]
This book reminded me of the danger of studying theology, but also the joy of
it, and the latter came out stronger.
Conclusion
Both
Who Needs Theology? and A Little Book for New Theologians are
helpful and useful books in their own right, but for two different reasons. The
former is useful in getting people to recognize their need for theology at all
and giving big picture ideas of what theology is and what it is not. The latter
is useful in bringing the heart and soul of theology off the page, and keeping
theology a matter of worship more than of study. Both books were blessings to
me as a student who sometimes needs to be reminded of the heart behind what we
do as theologians.
Bibliography
Berkhof, L. Systematic
Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979.
Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1976.
Enns, Paul. The
Moody Handbook of Theology. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2008.
Geisler, Norman. Systematic
Theology in One Volume. Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House, 2011.
Grenz, Stanley and Roger Olson. Who Needs Theology?. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1996.
Hodge, Charles. Systematic
Theology in Three Volumes. Vol. 1.Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986.
Kapic, Kelly. A
Little Book for New Theologians. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2012.
Kreider, Glenn. “What is Theology: Definitions of
Some Key Terms.” Unpublished class notes for ST 101. Dallas Theological
Seminary, Fall Semester, 2015.
[1]
Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology in
One Volume (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House, 2011), 13.
[2]Glenn
Kreider, “What is Theology: Definitions of Some Key Terms,” unpublished class
notes for ST 101 (Dallas Theological Seminary, Fall Semester, 2015).
[3]
Ibid.
[4]
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology in
Three Volumes (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986) 1:1-2.
[5]
Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of
Theology, 2nd ed. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2008), 433.
[6]
L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology, (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), 19.
[7]
Kreider.
[8]
Geisler, 14.
[9]
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (Grand
Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1976), 1:5.
[10]
Stanley Grenz and Roger Olson, Who Needs
Theology? (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1996), 117.
[11]
Ibid, 150.
[12]
Kelly Kapic, A Little Book for New
Theologians (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2012), 18.
[13]
Ibid, 20.
[14]
Kapic, 74.
No comments:
Post a Comment