Systematic vs. Biblical Theology

Don,

Biblical theology is interested in studying the diverse (but not divided) 'theologies' of the various books of the Bible. In the context of biblical theology, you might find yourself discussing Paul's theology, or John's. This work would, ideally, be closely based on exegesis. Systematic theology is concerned with making larger connections -- basically, "large-scale plot analysis." It should be based on the insight gained from exegesis and biblical theology. So rather than privileging one form of study over another, we should understand each as necessary to the best practice of the other.

My guess is that a person who would argue in favor of biblical theology *against* systematic theology probably has an issue with the unity of Scripture -- i.e., they disagree that we can properly speak of a theology in Scripture, instead of rival 'theologies.' Some would go even farther, as Dietrich Ritschl does in THE LOGIC OF THEOLOGY, and argue that even biblical theology is not possible, since it presupposes a systematic intent with a particular book.

Anyway, I hope this is helpful....

Mark
[email protected]

 

Actually, biblical theology is an attempt to determine theology via the Bible, without the necessity of a presupposed system. The father fo this movement was Geerhardus Vos
(1862-1949):"To take God as source and end of all that exists and happens, and to hold such a view suffused with warmth of genuine devotion, stands not only related to theology as the fruit stands to the tree: it is by reason of its essence a veritable theological tree of life."
(The Pauline Eschatology, p. 61)

See
Biblical Theology and Redemptive Historical Hermeneutics and FAQs

[ November 14, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Temple:
biblical theology is an attempt to determine theology via the Bible, without the necessity of a presupposed system.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This seems a bit misrepresentative. Systematic theology is not an attempt to determine theology without the Bible as might be inferred from your statement. ST is not about determining theology per se. It is about correlation of the truth. If we believe in the unity of God, then we believe that he only gave one truth system. Therefore, all truth must correlate together. ST is that correlation of truth. Biblical theology runs the risk of isolationism -- isolating one text from the large corpus of revelation. It then runs the risk of coming to a conclusion that is clearly contradictory. Chris, you should know as well as anyone that a doctrine like the OV of God is a demonstration of the weakness of biblical theology. If you do not correlate, you come up with unbiblical positions. To me, biblical theology without systematic theology is useless; a good systematic theology necessarily grows from a right biblical theology.

Let me hasten to add that some view ST as proof-texting or as a philosophical system. ST rightly done considers each verse in its context and then places it in the appropriate theological category or categories.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Don:
For instance, the statement "ST rightly done considers each verse in its context and then places it in the appropriate theological category or categories" seems to presuppose that there are certain theological categories already in place; in my feeble mind, it seems like a better stance to say that we systematically look at verses, passages, etc. and determine if they're related to other verses, passages, etc., and develop categories that way.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are absolutely right. I did not mean to imply otherwise. At the present, ST is divided into essentially ten (I think) categories though some have others: Bibliology, Theology Proper, Angelogy, Pneumatology, Anthropology, Christology, Hamartiology, Soteriology, Ecclesiology, and Eschatology.

I may have missed one here. I am going off the top of my head. The categories have been developed over time but they are not imposed on Scripture as much as they are taken out of Scripture. IN looking at a verse in context, we are seeing how it relates to other verses and categorizing it with those verses. Then we attempt to define the relationship between all the verses on a given topic.

 

I was neither endorsing nor condemning BT, nor trying to misrepresent anything. I was merely trying to articulate what the professors of BT mean by it. Vos was very conservative, not like OVs, and probably the site I noted could explain it better than I could.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Temple:
I was neither endorsing nor condemning BT, nor trying to misrepresent anything. I was merely trying to articulate what the professors of BT mean by it. Vos was very conservative, not like OVs, and probably the site I noted could explain it better than I could.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good enough ... just wasn't sure.