Qualities of good systematic theology
Which qualities do you look for in a good systematic theology?
I'm interested in clear writing, without which little will be understood; a demonstration of exegesis, to be sure of the Biblical case for the relevant concept; an interaction with relevant material, especially, but not exclusively, within the evangelical camp; and a sense of the importance of the ideas under discussion.
What would you add to the list?
I'm interested in clear writing, without which little will be understood; a demonstration of exegesis, to be sure of the Biblical case for the relevant concept; an interaction with relevant material, especially, but not exclusively, within the evangelical camp; and a sense of the importance of the ideas under discussion.
What would you add to the list?
posted by C G | 5:29 PM
2 Comments:
I look for someone who is not just bleeding a doctrinal framework through a text. The classic example of this is John Gerstner - a fine scholar and godly man - who sucummbed to this temptation when he found a tulip in John 3.16. I am looking for someone who has not only studied the biblical material, but one who has preached or taught it. That is why Culver's systematics is appealing.
Good list, C G. I like succinctness and a good structure as well. Wayne Grudem is a good example of this, but you'd want to go on from him to something a bit deeper.
I also like one that you can go to and get the answers fairly quickly, like A.A. Hodge.
But above all, deliver me theology with ardent love for God and His life-giving truth. Systematic theology shouldn't be cold and clinical. Theology is ultimately the study of God, His salvaation, and His good will for us, and shouldn't that lead us to worship our great God?
I have commented on various systematic theologies elsewhere as you know, although I do not confess myself an expert. (Someone updated his post with comments about Grudem, I see.) I guess all STs have their defects.
Post a Comment
<< Home