Nathan

McQuiston

Systematic Theology

COLLAPSE

Demarest defines systematic theology as “The attempt to reduce religious truth to a coherent and relevant whole for the church” (Elwell, 2001, 1162). It is related to biblical theology by providing the big picture that biblical theology uses to break down each truth of each book and author of each section of the Bible and feeds systematic theology by showing the units that make up the whole (Elwell, 2001, 1164). Biblical Theology provides the individual units that systematic theology organizes in a cogent whole that is easily understood and applied to the contemporary church (Elwell, 2001, 1162). Systematic Theology is also related to historical theology by presenting the final conclusions of each contributor in the history of the church and is the ever-developing byproduct of years of debate and deciding (Elwell, 2001, 1164). All of the individuals and sects that have debated theology have coalesced and confronted error in their formulation of doctrine and we have their conclusions included in systematic theology. One can also readily see in history how certain doctrinal slants affected the church with differentiating emphases and the church today can decipher what should be believed and what should be avoided and the church has the compendium of instruction in systematic theology. Philosophical theology is also related in that philosophy gave a thought-pattern of logic to explain the complexities of the faith (Elwell, 2001, 921). The doctrines of the church must be presented logically and coherently for the truth to be believed and philosophy gives us a paradigm to follow and teach for comprehension (Elwell, 2001, 921).

In my current ministry context, systematic theology (with the employment of the other disciplines) is the best and most effective. I pastor in a semi-large city with a church “on every corner.” There are so many churches and various denominations and ideologies that one has numerous opportunities to find somewhere to worship on a Sunday morning. There are two suburbs in the city: the rich section and the poor section (which is where the church is located). Systematic theology is needed because the poor people are intimidated by the large edifices and wealthy congregations and both need to see how Christ cares for them. All need to see that theology is relevant to them. Many view the rich as religious and the poor as not and both need a theology that speaks to their hopelessness and gives them hope. However, even though we have a university and educated people, most people around the church are simple and uneducated due to the poor educational facilities and thus biblical theology can break down the hard concepts to make it more understandable, historical theology can combat the false religions to show how they have been shown to be fallacious, and philosophical theology can be used to convince the university professors and the plethora of students that live in the area from many varied religions that Jesus is the Way. Thus, systematic theology is the best method that utilizes all the other three disciples for the saving knowledge of Jesus.

Reference

Elwell, W. A. (ed). (2001). Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group.

Stephanie Holloway

Systematic Theology
COLLAPSE

In Elwell’s Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, B.A. Demarest defines systematic theology as, “The attempt to reduce religious truth to a coherent and relevant whole for the church.”[1] As a family pastor, I must employ systematic theology for proper preaching and teaching of the lessons I give to the children and teenagers in my church. According to Demarest, “Systematic theology incorporates the data of exegetical, biblical, and historical theology to construct a coherent representation of Christian faith.”[2] Demarest further explains, “Finally, practical theology applies the results of systematic theology to preaching, teaching, counseling, and formation of the spiritual life.”[3]

As part of systematic theology, exegetical theology deals with using proper hermeneutical methods to discover the true meaning of the biblical text, and as Demarest asserts, it, “. . .provides systematic theology with its most important building block.”[4] Without properly discovering the meaning of the biblical scriptures one is using, one cannot preach an effective, truthful, meaningful message. This requires treating the Bible as a whole, using historical context, and determining whether a passage is literal or allegorical, to name a few of the aspects of employing proper exegesis to the scriptures.

Concerning biblical theology, Demarest believes that it, “. . .sets forth the message of biblical books by author or other scheme of grouping.”[5] There are over 40 authors of the books of the Bible and grouping them together by author gives insight as to the meaning of the texts as well as providing consistency of meaning throughout an author’s works. Another way of grouping the biblical books are by historical books, writings, poetry, and prophecy. Still yet, one may group them by the approximated time they were written. Being able to group the books in various ways gives a deeper understanding to the scriptures because it can provide reference for historical context or lead to providing reason for purpose or motivation for why the book was written and who it was written to.

“Historical theology traces the church’s faith topically through the various eras of its history,”[6] states Demarest. It is important for biblical scholars and pastors to understand the historical beliefs of the church, how they have changed over the years, and how they relate to the scriptures themselves. Without the practice of historical theology, one may easily follow or teach outdated or unbiblical beliefs resulting in heresiac doctrine or cultic practices.

Finally, in Demarest’s article, he does not mention philosophical theology by name but instead incorporates philosophy with systematic theology in that he states, “. . .philosophy and theology are overlapping disciplines.”[7] In contrast, Millard Erickson in Christian Theology defines philosophical theology to be used within systematic theology and makes these claims about it, “Here lies a major value of philosophy for the theologian: scrutiny of the meaning of terms and ideas employed in the theological task, the criticizing of its arguments, and the sharpening of the message for clarity.”[8]

Given the above definitions, I would have to say that systematic theology seems to be the most encompassing of all the previously mentioned theologies. Therefore, in my calling, systematic theology would be the most important one for me to use in my ministry context. With that being said, I further believe it is of great importance as a pastor to understand the truth of the scriptures through proper exegesis and to not only understand them in their historical context but to know when and how to practically apply them to our lives today, when applicable, given the time and culture in which we now live.

Bibliography

Demarest, B.A. “Systematic Theology,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. ed. Walter A. Elwell. 1163-64. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2017, https://app.wordsearchbible.com.

Erickson, Millard J., Christian Theology, 3rd ed., 14. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015. https://app.wordsearchbible.com.

[1] B. A. Demarest, “Systematic Theology,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2017), 1163, https://app.wordsearchbible.com.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Demarest, Systematic Theology, 1163.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed., (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker Academic, 2015), 14, https://app.wordsearchbible.com.