This may be a question for GreekTim. If I have books on repentance, the law and the gospel, legalism, and Jesus Christ how can I tell if they are biblical or systematic?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Biblical vs systematic theology
- Thread starter evangelist6589
- Start date
plain_n_simple
Active Member
The Holy Spirit
Your question suggests views that are biblical could not also be systematic. Thus I suspect you have a "special" meaning in mind for systematic.
If you study all that the Bible says about different subjects, say like, God, Jesus, Salvation, End Times, the result will be biblical views that are systematic. So the concepts are not mutually exclusive.
The problem with reading the work of others, such as a book on repentance, is you do not know if the author "cooked the books" to fashion an agenda driven outcome.
For example, God grants repentance. Now a Calvinist would claim, that means God alters someone with total spiritual inability, using irresistible grace, and causes the person to willingly repent. Non-Calvinists would say, no, God allows people who understand the gospel to receive it wholeheartedly. Only by doing your own prayerful study could you reconcile those two systematic, yet differing views.
If you study all that the Bible says about different subjects, say like, God, Jesus, Salvation, End Times, the result will be biblical views that are systematic. So the concepts are not mutually exclusive.
The problem with reading the work of others, such as a book on repentance, is you do not know if the author "cooked the books" to fashion an agenda driven outcome.
For example, God grants repentance. Now a Calvinist would claim, that means God alters someone with total spiritual inability, using irresistible grace, and causes the person to willingly repent. Non-Calvinists would say, no, God allows people who understand the gospel to receive it wholeheartedly. Only by doing your own prayerful study could you reconcile those two systematic, yet differing views.
Greektim
Well-Known Member
Not sure if you understand the question.
Evan, is it a synchronic study or a diachronic study? In other words, does it treat all "relevant" passages in equal terms or does it treat all "relevant" passages as they progress the idea/theme of the gospel, legalism, repentance, and etc.? Are predetermined philosophical categories used to study a theme (Christology, anthropology, hamartiology, etc.) or is the narrative of Scripture determining the theme to be studied (kingdom, covenant, God's presence, etc.)? These are just a few ways to know. You can also tell by the author. Some authors are totally engrossed in one or the other that they can't think outside of that realm. I speak mostly of systematicians, but it is true of biblical theologians as well.
John Walvoord is one author and the rest are Calvinists. So perhaps the book on Christ by Walvoord may be biblical theology. I don't know.
Systematic Theology attempts to treat things topically and attempts to arrive at a consistent presentation of a topic by examining all the scriptures that relate to that topic.
Biblical Theology attempts more to treat subjects as they arise in the Biblical canon and as they are developed by the Biblical writers in the progression of the Biblical canon.
Biblical theology and systematic theology are two different manners of arranging the teaching of the scriptures. Biblical theology seeks to understand the progressive unfolding of God's special revelation throughout history, whereas systematic theology seeks to present the entire scriptural teaching on certain specific truths, or doctrines, one at a time. Biblical theology is thus historical and chronological in its design; and in fact, a close synonym for biblical theology, at least in its wide-angle task of accounting for all of special revelation, is the term “redemptive history”.
plain_n_simple
Active Member
or, you might not understand the answer lol.
Greektim
Well-Known Member
To help those get acquainted w/ Biblical Theology as a theological discipline... you can read Köstenberger's article from Themelios 37.3 (2012): 445–64 here.
Greektim
Well-Known Member
Nope... pretty sure you didn't understand the distinction between the academic disciplines of systematic theology and biblical theology.
Greektim
Well-Known Member
Doubtful... Walvoord was a systemetician through and through. And most dispensationalism is pretty weak on biblical theology b/c they want a hard discontinuity. That makes for a difficult biblical narrative.
My guess is, based on the subjects mentioned, they are likely studied from a systematic approach.
The book on repentance looks at the doctrine in the OT/NT/Synoptics/Pauline letters all in different chapters. That's why I thought Bible theology.
Away from my Mac so can't post links to books sorry.
Jesus Christ our Lord Walvoord
The Law and the gospel Ernest Reisinger
law and Liberty a biblical look at legalism
Repentance first word of the gospel
Greektim thinks he is a mind reader like Mr. Rippon. I did not even attempt to address the difference between Greektim's distinctions, I addressed to OP.
The view I expressed matched completely the view expressed by others. Note that the issue, cooked books, was spot on with the disclosure that many of the books were from Calvinists. I will leave it to others to discern whether Greektim is an entrenched Calvinist.
Greektim
Well-Known Member
The fact that you think this has anything to do w/ Calvinism tells me you don't understand the difference. And your pride won't let you admit that there is still more to learn from someone who, though you disagree w/ him theologically and has probably studied more than you, there may be some benefit from listening. But alas...
Well we do have enough trolls...
:applause: That actually made me lol...thanks man.:thumbsup:
Biblical theology and systematic theology are distinct. Biblical theology is restricted to concerns/issues that arise within specific biblical texts (not the Bible as a whole) and are restricted to those texts. For example, if you wanted to explore repentance using biblical theology as a method, you run the risk of developing an incomplete doctrine (you would not be dealing with all that Scripture has to say about your subject). Systematic theology examines issues using the Scripture as a whole, but is not limited to that source. Systematic theology is dependent on biblical theology, but most of the issues we discuss cannot be adequately addressed with biblical theology alone.
Based on JonC's post, there appears to be at least two conflicting views of Biblical Theology as defined by various academics.
Here is a view consistent with JonC's thoughts:
Basically, what I posted in post #3 was spot on, and the middle earth response of post #5 was unnecessary.
Last edited by a moderator:
The problem with the your view in post #3 is that Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology are disciplines in themselves and both strive to faithfully represent Scripture within their own disciplines. You are right that the two are not mutually exclusive, but that does not mean that they are not also distinct. Systematic Theology is dependent on Biblical Theology, but Biblical Theology in itself does not form most of doctrines of which you speak. Instead of making up definitions, perhaps it would be a good idea to simply look up the meaning of those terms.