SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY SUNDAY SCHOOL: OBJECTIONS TO SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGYThis was for Church Systematic Theology Sunday school some time ago, thought I share this with you:
PART III: OBJECTIONS TO SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY
I.
INTRODUCTION: There are people who might object
to systematic theology or the construction of a theological system. This is a survey of possible objections.
a. Objective:
Demonstrate that the objection is either internally problematic or problematic
in light of what Scripture teaches.
II.
Skepticism
a. Objection
stated: “We can not know any true Christian doctrine.”
b. Responses
i.
Christians can know things about God and Jesus Christ
1. Otherwise,
why would the Scripture say, “Grace and
peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord”
(2Peter 1:2)?
2. The
Bible recognizes that there are things that are not known by the Christian but
there are also spiritual truths that can be known because they are revealed by
God:
“The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed
belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of
this law.” (Deuteronomy 29:29)
SUMMARY: Systematic
Theology is possible because God reveals Himself in the Bible.
ii.
The epistemic tension within skepticism
1. Does
the skeptic know that true Christian doctrine can not be known?
a. If
so, how does he know that?
i.
Did he know it because it is somehow illogical to know
God?
1. How
does he know that logic as he knows it would apply in the realm of theology,
which for the skeptic is an unknowable realm?
ii.
If he does not know, then his objection is meaningless.
1. This
would amount to the skeptic saying that he does not know if Christian doctrine
can be known or not. If he does not
know, he does not know.
SUMMARY: Skepticism knows
too much or too little for its own good.
III.
Post-Modernism’s Anti-‘System’
a. Objection
stated: There is not and/or we should not develop a system of theology.
b. System
defined: A group of doctrines that are interconnected and/or
interdependent. In other words, the set
of doctrines share a relationship.
c. Fragmentation
as a key characteristics of Post-Modernism
i.
There is a philosophical undercurrent that is popular
with the mainstream culture which believes there is no unity or continuity of
ideas.
ii.
Those who engage in Post-Modern philosophy or theology
are thus highly susceptible to embrace the contradicting or the irrational.
1. For
a response to this, see the portion below on Irrationalism.
iii.
Often, this type of objection cast suspicion on all
theological systems (as defined above) as being nothing more than man-made.
d. Response
i.
The teaching about God is Systematic in God’s mind and
not Man-made
1. God
knows everything about himself and everything else
a. “God, therefore, has a ‘systematic’
knowledge of himself and of the world, since He knows His own plan exhaustively
and since the world perfectly conforms to that plan.”
i.
See Job 37:16, 1John 3:20
b. Note:
This is the foundation of Systematic Theology: All doctrines exist in the mind
of God, and we would expect doctrines to ‘fit’:
i.
These doctrines are internally coherent and not
contradictory
1. All
knowledge (including the laws of logic) is in Christ (Colossians 2:3) and He is
not a God of disorder (1Corinthians 14:33)
ii.
These thoughts have a relation of dependence with one
another
1. Example:
Doctrine of Justification presupposes the Justness of God, Christ propitiation
of His righteousness presupposes Original Sin (Roman 5:15), etc
IV.
Irrationalism
a. Objection
stated: Christianity must embrace the irrational since it is in essence
irrational and we must therefore reject systematic theology.
b. Response
i.
Christianity is not irrational
1. In
Christ “are hidden all the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge. I tell you this so
that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments.” (Colossians 2:3-4)
2. Christians
are not to embrace the irrational since it is foolish but seek wisdom instead.
a.
“Wise men
store up knowledge, but the mouth of a fool invites ruin.” (Proverbs 10:14)
ii.
Irrational theologies is self-refuting
1. If
it is irrational, there is no need for the opposition to refute these types of
theology. They are self-refuting.
a. Just
pinpoint how their theologies internally negate one another.
2. If
it is irrational, then there is no point to accept their theology anyways or to
talk to this fool.
a. “Do not speak to a fool, for he will scorn
the wisdom of your words.” (Proverbs 23:9)
3. If
it is alright to be irrational, and there is an attempt on their part to show
systematic theology is irrational, they failed in rationally trying to make a
case to reject rational systematic theology.
a. In
essence, it’s an inconsistent, self-refuting, double standard affair.
V.
Pragmatism
a. Objection
stated: Systematic Theology is not useful or practical.
b. Response
i.
Christianity is doctrinal
1. “Watch your life
and doctrine closely. Persevere in them
because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers.” (1Timothy
4:16)
ii.
Doctrines have value by itself even without practical
usefulness
a.
“Wisdom is
supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it
cost all you have, get understanding.” (Proverbs 4:7)
b.
“Buy the
truth and do not sell it; get wisdom, discipline and understanding” (Proverbs
23:23)
iii.
Christianity’s doctrines leads to practical living
1. Ideas
have consequences
a. What
you believe about reality will impact how you live in reality.
i.
Example: Belief in global warming v.s contrary belief, AIDS
is spread by talking vs. AIDS is spread by blood, etc
2. Likewise,
doctrines have consequences in daily life
a. For
example: Be self-controlled since the end is near (1Peter 4:7); Do not be
sexually immoral because of God’s omnipresence (Proverbs 5:20-21)
iv.
Pragmatism Problem
1. How
does one know what is useful?
a. Discussion
of this is a discussion of values
i.
Who’s value shall we use, the Bible’s, the culture’s,
etc?
1. Not
to answer these questions or to be agnostic about values would be very
impractical in daily living
VI.
Pride
a. Objection
stated: Systematic Theology leads to pride.
b. Sin
of intellectual elitism is real.
i.
“Knowledge
puffs up, but love builds up” (1Chorinthians 8:1b)
c. Systematic
Theology itself is not to be blamed, but the sinner is.
i.
Analogy: You can not blame your robbery of a classmate
on him just because he’s rich.
d. Pride:
How we should not study theology
i.
Repent, lest you be disgrace
1.
“When pride
comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom.”(Proverbs 11:3)
ii.
In session five, we will cover how Christians ought to
study theology with their character.
| 
