Transcript Lecture 3: How to Do Theology:

HOW TO DO THEOLOGY:
A study into the process of doing theology
“Systematic Theology may be defined as
the collecting, scientifically arranging,
comparing, exhibiting, and defending of all
facts from any and every source concerning
God and His works.”
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer,
Systematic Theology, 1:6.
1
Introduction to Theological Method:
Lecture 6b
I.
The Nature of Theological Method.
II.
Why Harmonize/Systematize Theology?
III.
Theological Methodology.
IV.
How Should We Then Live?
IV.
Appendix 1: Is Systematizing/harmonization a
social construction of Western thought?
2
Part I.
The Nature of Theological Method
3
What is relation between theology and logic?
• Basic logic tells us to demand three things:
– Clear definition of terms;
– True data (true premises);
– And logical arguments (proofs).
The rules of logic do not change when we insert
Biblical claims or theology into the content.
4
What method should we use?
• Though the laws of logic must apply to
theological method, what about the laws of
other, more specific methods, such as the
scientific method?
• While there is nothing wrong with the scientific
method, to say we should only believe what is
proved by the scientific method is contradictory,
for the principle itself, namely, that we should
believe only what can be proved by the scientific
method, cannot be proved by the scientific
method.
5
What method should we use?
• What about using Descartes “Universal
Methodic Doubt?”
• This method does not begin with
unquestioned assumptions, but with doubt.
Subject everything to questioning. If it can
be doubted, throw it out.
6
What method should we use?
• Universal Methodic doubt is not appropriate for theology
if theology is more like getting to know another person
than like getting to know a concept or a material thing.
– You can’t get to know people if you assume that everything
states is false until it is proven to be true.
– Best method for understanding people is not methodic doubt but
methodic faith: Assume that the other person is telling the truth
until you have good reason for believing that he or she is
ignorant or lying. So if theology is like friendship with another
person than it is like chemistry, then the appropriate method will
be methodic faith rather than methodic doubt.
7
What method should we use?
• Should we use Ockham’s Razor?
– William of Ockham, a 13th British philosopher,
claims:
“hypotheses should not be multiplied without
necessity”- in other words, you should always
prefer the simpler explanation.
8
What method should we use?
• Should we use Ockham’s Razor?
– William of Ockham, a 13th British philosopher,
claims:
“hypotheses should not be multiplied without
necessity”- in other words, you should always
prefer the simpler explanation.
9
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
A. Theological methodology involves both truth &
ideas:
1. Systematic Theology is primarily based upon
truths derived from special and natural
revelation.
2. Theological method engages exegetical, biblical,
theological, & philosophical claims of truths.
3. Theological method accepts those claims of
truths that harmonizes with already established 10
facts.
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
As Dr. Charles Hodge states in Systematic Theology,
1:1:
“If, therefore, theology be a science, it must include
something more than a mere knowledge of facts. It
must embrace an exhibition of the internal relation of
those facts, one to another, and each to all. It must be
able to show that if one be admitted, others cannot be
denied. “
11
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
Definition of coherence:
Critical to theological method is coherence. Coherence
is an epistemological test for validity by examining the
harmony, unity, and consistency of an idea to an already
established system or harmonization of beliefs. If the
propositional statement does not harmonize with the
system of beliefs, then either the idea is wrong, needs
refinement, etc. or the settled doctrines as we know
them are wrong.
12
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
Definition of coherence:
However, the chances that the settled
doctrines are invalid are very unlikely if we
have consistently followed a plain, normal,
grammatical-historical-literary method of
interpretation.
13
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
B. Justification for this system is two-fold:
1. External witness: The witness of harmony,
symmetry, and unity of nature, personhood,
physical laws, and social well-being; first
principles of logic, and other investigative
disciplines of study which seek to harmonize
ideas with established facts.
14
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
B. Justification for this system is two-fold:
2. Internal witness: The witness of Jesus use
of Scripture, the fulfillment of prophecy, both
the biblical, logical, and philosophical basis of
and results of using a plain, normal, literalgrammatical, historical, literary method of
interpretation, and correlative evidence to
what we already know to be true in Scripture:
15
archeology, history, etc.
The Nature of Theological Method:
C. Since the Bible is special revelation, a collection of
divine propositional truths within literary context (s),
the theologian does the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
collect,
authenticate,
arrange, and
exhibit divine truths in their internal relation to each
other (coherence):
16
The Nature of Theological Method:
D. Critical to theological methodology is an examination
into one’s spiritual life before the process is to begin for
you don’t want to hinder the illuminating ministry of
the Holy Spirit. Stated differently, since we are dealing
with divine truth, seeking to accurately represent His
interests, we must be dependent upon the Holy Spirit.
To study and “do” theology “according to the flesh” is
disrespectful, dishonoring, short-sighted, and even
hypocritical.
17
The Nature of Theological Method:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Are you rightly related to God?
Have you confessed all known sins (1 John 1:9)?
Are you grieving the Holy Spirit?
Are you quenching any aspect of the Holy Spirit in
your life?
5. Are their areas in your life whereby you are
unwilling to submit over to God?
6. Are you yielded to God?
18
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
An overview of the process:
E. An overview of the
six-step theological method:
19
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
An overview of the process:
1st Step: Inductively arrive at an
exegetical proposition that accurately
reflects the intended meaning of the
Author/author that harmonizes with
first principles of logic (e.g., Law of
Non-Contradiction). For example: Man
is totally depraved (Romans 3:23).
20
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
An overview of the process:
2nd Step: Propositional statement is then
tested for coherence by a synchronic
application both biblically (letting Scripture
interpret Scripture) and already settled
doctrinal beliefs. In other words, does the
propositional statement cohere with what the
Bible teaches elsewhere and what we already
know to be true doctrinally?
21
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
3rd Step: The statement then is
comprehensively formulated from exegesis,
authorial intent, and within the boundaries of
settled doctrinal beliefs. Then cogent
justifications are offered and appropriate
illustrations are made; we need to know why
we believe what we believe.
22
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
4th Step: The propositional doctrine is then
examined under the lens of general revelation
and natural law to see potential doctrine
successfully coheres with these foundational
prescriptive beliefs (Romans 2:12-15). If the
doctrine violates general revelation and
prescriptive natural law, it is suspect.
23
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
5th Step: Then one examines the
propositional statement under the lens of
historical theology for correlative insight.
Historical theology is valuable because many
doctrinal mistakes, debates, creeds, &
formulations have already been discussed in
past eras of theological discourse &
development.
24
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
6th Step: Finally, personal and community
life-applications are made in order to test
livability. The doctrine is suspect if we can’t
apply it in our love-relationship with God,
seeking only to do that which will give God
the most glory.
25
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
Summary:
My method of theological coherence implores you to
appropriately, carefully, meditatively, purposefully,
prayerfully, microscopically, reflectively, repeatedly, &
comprehensively examine to see if your exegetical
propositional statement coheres and harmonizes with first
principles of logic, Bible (concentric: author, sentence,
paragraph, book, author’s writings, testament, and Bible) ,
settled doctrinal beliefs (dogmatic theology), & natural law.
Then one proceeds to examine historical theology for
correlative insight and conclude by establishing appropriate26
life application.
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
Let’s take a deeper look into the
six-fold method of
theological coherence:
27
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
1. Inductive Approach: Ascertain and state the
truths of Scripture:
a. diachronically,
b. exegetically,
c. Inductively,
d. Logically, i.e., First Principles of Logic
(e.g., law of non-contradiction).
28
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
2.
Cohere the propositional statement to the
following (synchronic approach):
a.
Passage, unit of thought, book,
biblical theology, & the whole Bible.
b.
The proposition to other doctrinal
statements or settled beliefs. Look for
consistency, harmony, symmetry & unity.
29
Synchronic Approach:
Begin with the “Word” and progress towards “Bible”
BIBLE
TESTAMENT
AUTHOR’S WRITINGS
BOOK
PARAGRAPH
SENTENCE
WORD
30
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
3. Formulate comprehensive doctrine:
a.
Formulate & offer biblical, logical,
theological, & philosophical justification;
answer the question “why.”
b.
Present illustrations (illustrations shed
light on the cogency of your proposition).
31
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
C. Remember, any systematization that you do must
be made with diligence, attention to detail, care,
and reverence. I would argue that many
differences of opinion or poor statements in
theological discourse are due to hermeneutical
mistakes and un-tested assumptions which
unfortunately have been incorporated into a poor
theological system or belief paradigm.
32
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
D. Any systematization must also be thoroughly
comprehensive and if possible, exhaustive; every
detail must be examined and correlated. Consider
the following quotations from Dr. Charles Hodge
regarding those who were not comprehensive in
their harmonization of God’s Word [Systematic
Theology, 1:11].
33
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
“An imperfect induction of facts led men for ages to believe that the
sun moved round the earth, and that the earth was an extended
plain. In theology a partial induction of particulars has led to like
serious errors. It is a fact that the Scriptures attribute omniscience to
Christ. From this it was inferred that He could not have had a finite
intelligence, but that the Logos was clothed in Him with a human
body with its animal life. But it is also a Scriptural fact that
ignorance and intellectual progress, as well as omniscience, are
ascribed to our Lord. Both facts, therefore, must be included in our
doctrine of his person. We must admit that He had a human, as well
as a divine intelligence.”
34
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
“It is a fact that everything that can be predicated of a sinless man,
is in the Bible, predicated of Christ; and it is also a fact that
everything that is predicated of God is predicated of our Lord;
hence it has been inferred that there were two Christ's,—two
persons,—the one human, the other divine, and that they dwelt
together very much as the Spirit dwells in the believer; or, as evil
spirits dwelt in demoniacs. But this theory overlooked the numerous
facts which prove the individual personality of Christ. It was the
same person who said, ‘I thirst;’ who said, ‘Before Abraham was I
am.’”
35
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
“The Scriptures teach that Christ’s death was designed to reveal the
love of God, and to secure the reformation of men. Hence Socinus
denied that his death was an expiation for sin, or satisfaction of
justice. The latter fact, however, is as clearly revealed as the former;
and therefore both must be taken into account in-our statement of
the doctrine concerning the design of Christ’s death.”
36
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
4. We need to evaluate our propositional statement
against first principles of moral belief, ie., what we
know to be universally true and self-evident such
as those prescriptive moral commands inscribed
upon the human heart (Romans 2:12-15). For
example:
37
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
A.
Since we sow what we reap and reap what
we sow, does our theological proposition
harmonize with the witness of godly & noble
virtues & consequences (Galatians 5:22-23;
Colossians 3:1-17)?
B.
Since we are designed by God, does it
harmonize with the witness of our human design
(Genesis 1:26-27; Psalm 139; Romans 1-2)?
38
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
C.
Since we inherently know what is right
from wrong, does it harmonize with the
witness of our conscience (Romans 1-2)?
39
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
D.
Does our theological proposition
harmonize with the invisible attributes of
God as revealed in creation (Romans 1-2)?
E.
Does our theological proposition affirm the
“golden rule” of “Do unto others as you
would have them do unto you?”
40
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
5. Test the coherence of your potential proposition
once more, but this time, looking for harmony
and consistency in historical theology:
41
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
a. Historical theology may offer additional justification.
b. Historical theology may have already debated a similar
doctrinal belief.
c. Historical theology may even shed light on how this
proposition may impact communities of belief and the
society (s) around them, positively and/or negatively.
42
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
“The student of nature having this ground on which to
stand, and these tools wherewith to work, proceeds to
perceive, gather, and combine his facts. These he does not
pretend to manufacture, nor presume to modify. He must
take them as they are. He is only careful to be sure that
they are real, and that he has them all, or, at least all that
are necessary to justify any inference which he may draw
from them, or any theory which he may build upon them.”
~ Dr. Charles Hodge, Systematic theology, 1:9.
43
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
6.
Lastly, Test its livability by application:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Yourself;
Family;
Community;
Society.
44
I. The Nature of Theological Method:
E. Before we move onto consider why we should
seek theological coherence (harmony, unity, and
consistency), let’s review two other
complementary theological methods by two
outstanding theologians:
Theological Method proposed by Dr. Norman Geisler &
Theological Method proposed by Dr Mike Stallard.
45
1.
Exegesis: inductive logical Approach:
2.
Synchronic Approach: biblically & doctrinally:
3.
Harmonize doctrine, offer justification, & illustrate:
4.
Harmonizes with General Revelation and Natural Law:
5.
Historical Theology offers Correlative Insight:
6.
Appropriate Applications: Test of Livability:
46
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
Consider Dr. Norman Geisler’s Approach from
Systematic Theology, v.1.
Step 1:
Inductive Basis in Scripture.
Step 2:
Deduction of Truths from Scripture.
Step 3:
Use of Analogies (illustrative support by
good analogies).
Step 4:
Use of General Revelation and Natural Law.
Step 5:
Retroductive Method (use of all information to
refine, nuance, and fill out our understanding 47of
what is meant in previous steps).
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
Consider Dr. Norman Geisler’s Approach:
Step 6:
Systematic Correlation (of all information into
a fully orbed doctrine through the use of the laws of
logic that insist all truth must be non-contradictory).
Step 7:
Each doctrine is correlated with all other doctrines.
Step 8:
Each doctrine is expressed in view of the orthodox
teachings of the Church Fathers.
Step 9:
Livability is the final test for Systematic Theology
(Christianity is not merely metaphysics or
theoretical; it is also ethical and practical).
48
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
Consider Dr. Mike Stallard’s Approach:
Level 1:
Biblical Theology (restricted to authors & history).
Level 2:
Integration or synthesis across authors and history
(has been called “Intermediate biblical
theology”).
Level 3:
Categorization or systematization of the results of
integration.
Level 4:
Validation or invalidation of truth claims from outside the
Bible.
Level 5:
Application to Life.
49
I.
The Nature of Theological Method:
Consider Dr. Mike Stallard’s Approach:
Now having considered a theological method, let’s
proceed to examine why we should seek harmony,
unity, and consistency:
Part II
50
II. Why Harmonize, Seek Unity, &
Consistency?
1. Natural Purpose: We have a natural tendency to collect and
harmonize those things of which we observe; it is part of our
God-given human design, a constitutive aspect of our humanity.
2. Cognitive/Psychological Purpose: Rarely in any discipline of
study are we satisfied with fragmentation, tension, & mass of
uncollected ideas or facts:
a. Ecology (complementary aspects of unity within diversity of life)
b. Geography (facts and collections).
c. Philosophy (critical thinking)
d. Hard sciences (e.g., chemistry, physics)
e. Music (e.g., tension/resolution).
f . Aesthetics (e.g., Monroe Beardsley)
51
II. Why Harmonize?
3. Pedagogical Purpose:
“If we would discharge our duty as teachers and
defenders of the truth, we must endeavor to bring all
the facts of revelation into systematic order and mutual
relation. It is only thus that we can satisfactorily exhibit
their truth, vindicate them from objections, or bring
them to bear in their full force on the minds of men”
Hodge, Systematic Theology, 1:2.
52
II. Why Harmonize?
4. Discovery Purpose:
a. The truths of the Bible are all related and determined by the
nature of God who is the One and Only Triune God,
absolutely logical, coherent, and harmonious. Thus, His
creation reflects those aspects.
b. Just as He has purposed us with a mind and ability to study
His creation and discover the inorganic and organic relation
and harmonious combination, we should study Scripture and
discover the harmony, symmetry, and unity of God’s
revelation.
53
III. Why Theological Method?
Part III:
Why is theological method necessary:
54
III. Why is Theological Method
Necessary?
A. Since the Holy Spirit inspired the Scripture
(verbal, plenary), there is continuity of thought
from Genesis 1:1-Revelation 22:20
B. Since God is logical, coherent, and consistent,
His Word is going to be logical, coherent, and
consistent even within literary, historical
contexts.
55
III. Why is Theological Method
Necessary?
C. He created humanity in the image of God which
is holistic: content, authority, community, &
representation. Thus, we are designed with a
predisposition to analyze, arrange, categorize,
collect, and correlate; it is part of our
teleological, prescriptive design.
56
III. Why is Theological Method
Necessary?
D. We are purposefully designed to analyze,
arrange, categorize, collect, and correlate; it is
one purpose of our God-given teleological
design.
E. The use of the mind is critical in seeking,
learning, & loving God as opposed to antiintellectualism, existentialism, experientialism,
and mysticism.
57
III. Why is Theological Method
Necessary?
F. We are inherently aesthetically pleased with
consistency, harmony, and unity in architecture,
art, music, etc.
G. We are purposefully designed to assume the
trustworthiness of our God-given sense
perceptions (five senses).
58
III. Why is Theological Method
Necessary?
H. We are purposefully designed to trust our cognitive
faculties.
I. We are purposefully designed to take for granted that
we perceive, compare, combine, remember, and infer.
J. We are purposefully designed safely rely upon these
mental faculties when used appropriately (vision for
seeing).
59
III. Why is Theological Method
Necessary?
K. We are designed to believe with assurance of those truths
which are not learned from experience, but which are given in
view of the teleological design of our human nature.
L. We also recognize in God’s design of creation that every effect
must have a cause; that the same cause under like
circumstances, will produce like effects; that a cause is not a
mere uniform antecedent, but that which contains within itself
the reason why the effect occurs.
60
III. Why is Theological Method
Necessary?
Therefore, in the words of Dr. Charles Hodge:
The student of nature having this ground on which to stand,
and these tools wherewith to work, proceeds to perceive,
gather, and combine his facts. These he does not pretend to
manufacture, nor presume to modify. He must take them as
they are. He is only careful to be sure that they are real, and
that he has them all, or, at least all that are necessary to justify
any inference which he may draw from them, or any theory
which he may build upon them.
Systematic theology, 1:9.
61
III.
Why is Theological Method Necessary?
The bottom line…
The goal of having a coherent
biblical-theological method is to
(1) expose inadequate
justifications for belief and (2)
provide a solid basis for
validating or invalidating truth
claims.
62
IV. How Should We Then Live?
A. Appreciate the Author of our theology: The
one and only Triune God; if God said it, we
need to know it.
B. Learning theology is pleasurable for there is
no greater pursuit than that of the study of
God.
63
IV. How Should We Then Live?
C. Correct theology is crucial for appropriate
and godly behavior.
D. Resist all forms of anti-intellectualism
because we are commanded to know,
practice, and defend the truth (2 John; Jude).
64
IV. How Should We Then Live?
E. Resist continental theory because it is selfdefeating, anti-authoritative, and cynical; it is
vacuous for it only offers a critique of
modernism based upon an unbiblical mindset
and a rejection of metaphysics. And though
their critique against modernism is insightful at
times, their assumptions are self-defeating.
65
IV. How Should We Then Live?
F. Teach people how to do theology for
themselves. It is not merely enough to assist
them, we need to enable them. It is not merely
enough to teach them what they believe, they
need to know why. Finally, we need to proactively equip ourselves so we can equip others
in proclaiming, practicing, & protecting the
biblical doctrines of the Christian faith (Jude663).
IV. How Should We Then Live?
G. Take ownership regarding why you believe
what you believe.
H. Sound theology protects us from erroneous
exegetical claims and proper exegesis informs
our theology.
I. Remember: What we believe in one area of
theology tends to directly or indirectly impact
all other areas of theology.
67
IV. How Should We Then Live?
J.
Don’t neglect, overlook, or reject certain facts in
Scripture that are uncomfortable or unpopular.
k. Don’t distort or pervert claims of Scripture because
they don’t cohere to your theological worldview.
Rather, evaluate and adjust accordingly even if it
means that you will be humiliated for what you
believe. It is by far to be teachable than arrogant, esp.
since you are representing God’s interests.
68
IV. How Should We Then Live?
As Dr. Charles Hodge says:
“He [theologian] should remember that his business is not to set
forth his system of truth (that is of no account), but to ascertain
and exhibit what is God’s system, which is a matter of the
greatest moment. If he cannot believe what the facts of the Bible
assume to be true, let him say so…long, however, as the binding
authority of Scripture is acknowledged, the temptation is very
strong to press the facts of the Bible into accordance with our
preconceived theories.”
Systematic Theology, 1:14.
69
Appendix 1: Why Systematize or
Harmonize Doctrine?
A. Continental critical, structural theorists and even
postmodern evangelicals contend that systematizing
theology needs to be rejected because it is a biased,
modern mindset that is actually imposing a social
construction upon theological methodology:
1. Systematization/harmonization is a product of
modernism.
2. Systematization contends for an Archimedean point of
70
view.
Appendix 1: Why Systematize or
Harmonize Doctrine?
3. Systematization/harmonization contends for objective
truth that transcends time, space, and culture.
4. Systematization ignores context; how can we be able
to even see objectively if we are “inside” and not
“beyond” culture?
71
Appendix 1: Why Harmonize?
b. Response to critical, continental theorists:
1.To systematize, harmonize, categorize, and arrange is
not a modern construction for it has always been a natural
tendency in our God-given mindset to systematize; it is
expressed in every era of both church and secular history
(e.g., Plato’s Republic; Aristotle’s Metaphysics).
2.To not harmonize/systematize is not pragmatically
workable for one can’t live without arrangement,
identification, categorization, prescription, or
systematization.
72
Appendix 1: Why Harmonize?
3. To not harmonize/systematize is counter-intuitive; we
instantly & negatively react to fragmentation and discord.
4. Continental perspective is self-defeating- for how can
they claim that there is no objective truth, an Archimedean
point of view that transcends time, culture, and
geography; their view is self-defeating.
73
Appendix 1: Why Harmonize?
5. To not harmonize/systematize is rebellious to
the harmony, symmetry, and consistency in the
teleological design of creation, human design,
community, and the inherent need to depend upon
others for mutual protection, economic
development & trade, procreation, aesthetics, &
entertainment.
74
Appendix 1: Why Harmonize?
6. To not harmonize/systematize is even rebellious towards
the teleological design of the local and universal church
whereby we are created and gifted to compliment each
other as the body of Christ.
7. To not harmonize/systematize is rebellious against first
principles of logic, teleological design of language (see
the writings of Leon Chomsky), and mathematics.
8. To not harmonize/systematize goes against the harmony,
unity, consistency of God Himself, the one and only 75
Triune God.
Appendix 1: Why Harmonize?
As Charles Hodge states:
“We cannot know what God has revealed in his Word
unless we understand, at least in some good measure,
the relation in which the separate truths therein
contained stand to each other. It cost the Church
centuries of study and controversy to solve the problem
concerning the person of Christ; that is, to adjust and
bring into harmonious arrangement all the facts which
the Bible teaches on that subject. [Systematic theology,
76
1:2].”