Do baptists Even Have a "Systematic theology" of the faith?

Grudem's Theology is probably the closest, but because there are 57 varieties of Baptists and because any time there are three Baptists that gather there are 5 opinions, no one will agree. An excellent companion volume to Grudem's theology is Gregg Allison's "Historical Theology." I cannot recommend Allison's work enough. Should be required reading alongside the Bible.

Baptists, by and large, hold to an orthodox evangelical theology as expressed by many over the years. James P. Boyce wrote a systematic theology (Abstract of Systematic Theology, 1887) that few have ever mentioned around here. Read it free on-line here: http://www.reformedreader.org/rbb/boyce/aos/toc.htm

Leo Garrett wrote a 4-volume work on Baptist Theology as well as a systematic theology.

There have been TONS of other works written by Baptists of every stripe, but perhaps not collected in a single (or multiple) volume systematic, i.e., many have written on each part of a systematic or biblical (different than systematic) theology in individual volumes.

 

John Dagg wrote the first book [1857] on Baptist doctrine, Manual of Theology, recently republished by Gano Books.

Thomas J. Nettles has an excellent book out [By His Grace and for His Glory, revised edition published by Founders Press] which gives a brief history of Baptist doctrine and a discussion of the Doctrines of Grace.

 

Chafer is dispensational, as is the Dallas Theological Seminary, if that is your bent.

 

Erikson is used in some circles and I used it during my time at Southern for a few classes. He is Baptist and moderately Calvinistic in soteriology.

Chafer is not Baptist.

 

You must be off work today. :saint:

I'd encourage you to check out Erickson or AH Strong. Also see Thomas Oden or James Leo Garrett for more historical theologies.

There are others out there but that's a start.

Oh, and nothing is on par with Calvin's Insititues other than Barth's Dogmatics

 

Wow, that's a gross over-estimate of Allison's work. No offense but it isn't nearly that good.

 

I assume it is well regarded by dispensationalists though some dispensationalists are rejecting the idea of a "parenthesis" Church.

 

Perhaps not, but after reading all the errors in historical theology here and elsewhere, I will stand by my required reading caveat.

 

As a Systematic Theology, from a baptist viewpoint, I would stick with A.H. Strong's early edition....His later edition includes Theistic Evolution.

Barth's writing is deceptive in that he came out of German rationalism and he uses double-talk.

On the Institutes by Calvin, remember they were his first writings and went through many adjustments and changes. His commentary on Romans is more sound, from his non-baptist viewpoint.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I'm not saying Barth was Baptist, or Calvin either. Rather I'm saying the only systematic which comes close to Calvin's is Barth which is very good.

 

Barthianism isn't even close to fundamental theology. It was adopted by neo-orthodoxy, not fundamental Christianity. "You understand the Bible as you experience it." That was Barth. He lectured briefly at Chicago Divinity School alongside Paul Tillich, the father of modernism and chief proponent of existentialism and depth-psychology. I sat in their classes!!!

Cheers,

Jim

 

I usually have to point this out to you every three months or so;but the last time was as recently as December 13.

Jim, Calvin's commentary on Romans was published in 1540. It wasn't late in his life.The first few editions of The Institutes were published (in Latin) in 1536,and 1539. Are you trying to say that his theology in those early editions were markedly different that his commentary on Romans? Hardly. His other expansions of The Institutes were published in 1543,1550 and 1559.

If you think that his theology was different in his Romans commentary and that of his various editions of The Institutes --please document.

 

I am envious, Jim. I studied Tillich's Systematic Theology (3 vol.) in a class taught by one of his students. It was a great opportunity.

I would also mention James William McClendon Jr.'s 3-volume baptist systematic theology (Abingdon Press). His approach is largely narrative theology with an emphasis on biography. The structure of his 3 volumes is unconventional. He begins with Ethics, and follows up with Doctrine and Witness. In the introduction in Ethics, he presents a statement of what he calls the "baptist vision". The main points are: (1) Biblicism - "humble acceptance of the authority of Scripture for both faith and practice"; (2) Mission (evangelism) - "the responsibility to witness to Christ"; (3) Liberty (soul competency) - "the God-given freedom to respond to God without the intervention of the state or other powers"; (4) Discipleship - "life transformed into service by the lordship of Jesus Christ"; (5) Community - "sharing together in a storied life of obedient service to and with Christ".

Tim Reynolds

 

There are a lot deeper theologies penned by Baptists.

Do a search for Bruce Ware, Mark Seifrid, Tom Schreiner, Chad Brand, Sinclair Ferguson, and a few others that will pop up during a search for those men. That will keep you busy for quite some time.

http://www.christianbook.com/Christ... R. Schreiner&detailed_search=1&action=Search

http://www.christianbook.com/Christ...on=Search&Ne=0&event=ESRCG&nav_search=1&cms=1

http://www.christianbook.com/Christ...ad Owen Brand&detailed_search=1&action=Search

http://www.christianbook.com/Christ...on=Search&Ne=0&event=ESRCG&nav_search=1&cms=1

http://www.christianbook.com/Christ...r B. Ferguson&detailed_search=1&action=Search