Systematic Theology, Biblical Theology, Historical Theology, and Philosophical Theology

For B. Demarest systematic theology is, "The attempt to reduce religious truth to a coherent and relevant whole for the church." (Elwell, 1162) What such a definition portrays is that systematic theology has a way of causing the truth to be learned and understood while both reducing it to fundamentals and by portraying all relevant details through those fundamentals. Systematic theology thus would focus attention upon a few concepts that ideally would be believed to underwrite all relevant truth that is purposed for presentation.

When G. F. Hasel attempts to describe biblical theology he writes the following,

"Neo-orthodoxy and the biblical theology movement shared the common concern to understand the Bible as a fully human book to be investigated with the fully immanent historical-critical method and yet to see the Bible as a vehicle or witness of the divine Word. This means a meshing of the modern naturalistic-evolutionary worldview as developed by natural science, modern philosophy, and critical history with the biblical view of a God who gives meaning and coherence to this world in his personal acts in history." (Elwell, 163)

If biblical theology realistically involves a mixing of a evolutionary world view with a biblical view of God, then many conservative scholars may be left to wonder how biblical theology could ever be a godly pursuit to engage in.

If for example a person believed that God evolves as a result of human history or that we evolve a understanding of God as a result of human history, then such a view would greatly reduce the perceived value of the scripture as being relevant and important for today's reader. If a person uses systematic theology to reduce biblical truths to a few principles such that all relevant biblical truth could be displayed in context of those principles, then with biblical theology implemented the results could in fact be a practice of exegesis that relies upon evolution for its underlying interpretative method. Overall, the danger of using systematic theology to 'systematize' the perceived truths that biblical theology would attempt to discover with evolution as its main tool is that this process could in fact metaphorically make evolution into a key that is valued for unlocking all mysteries given enough adaptation and time.

The danger in relying upon evolution for use as a primary tool that permeates all other tools is that people could easily find themselves without focus upon the true and living God. In this regard people could find such value in evolution as a process that they could take evolution to be like the very thing that brings order out of chaos in all things. This quality of bringing order out of chaos can became like a god in itself, and without the ability to differentiate between God and the evolutionary process, a person may find themselves worshipping evolution without even realizing it.

A case to be made is that the power in biblical theology is not in its power to utilize evolution, but instead biblical theology has its true power in its ability to explain biblical truth in the new cultural and intellectual context of contemporary times. In contrast systematic theology is mainly about finding an underlying truth or principle for a great many biblical details and discoveries, but unlike biblical theology it is not concerned with finding a single truth that dominates all truths or even many truths for that matter. Overall, biblical theology can develop truths that act as like the building blocks that provide for the construction of a systematic theology.

For J. P. Callahan historical theology is described as follows,

"...it is concerned with understanding specific doctrinal affirmations, themes, and practices according to their own grammar and use; historically, it is concerned with the concrete shape of doctrines in their circumstances. Rather than merely a chronicle of what Christians have thought about specific doctrines, historical theology seeks to identify the historically influenced and influential character of the Christian faith as well as the theological character of the faith's historical identity." (Elwell, 557)

The point to be drawn out of what Callahan writes is that historical theology is significantly about understanding the story behind what Christianity did and the influence or impact that such events had that could be fundamentally termed as Christian. Most important about historical theology is that it would seek to build theological explanations through times and events, and in this regard it can be used to explain how God works over time and circumstances.

Historical theology is different from biblical theology in that it has its scope open to explaining how God worked or works in any time period. Thus, historical theology opens the possibility for portraying God as actively working throughout the world such that the theology of God can be extended far past the two thousand year old stories of the bible. In this regard historical theology may not seek to incorporate the types of leaning that biblical theology uses to explain biblical truth in a new context, but instead it is concerned with the results of what has already taken place as a result of history at work.

Historical theology differs greatly from systematic theology because it does not seek primarily to synchronize various theological truths in a system, but instead it seeks to report what has already taken place as a result of Christian truth or Christian activity. In this regard historical theology is much more reflective whereas systematic theology would seek to use such careful reasoning as to resemble logic at the best and formulas at the worst. Overall, historical theology has a way of allowing for contemplation of the past such that a careful understanding could be gained of prior mistakes and pitfalls for the sake of taking a careful course of direction for the future.

When considering how historical theology, biblical theology, and systematic theology all compare in light of philosophical theology, a person would be best to ask the value of each along with their strengths and weaknesses. Ultimately philosophical theology would concern itself greatly with understanding the truth and wisdom of the subject of theology in general, and this may take the form of various questions regarding the fundamental nature of theology. In this regard philosophical theology could became the driving force for improving theological thought so that historical theology, biblical theology, and systematic theology may all benefit as a result, however the value placed on philosophical endeavors to act as a driving force for transforming the subjects being philosophized about is perhaps given low worth by the rise of specialized thinkers that develop their specialization out of a need for defining how their specialization is unique in light of other ways of interpreting the same material.

Why Philosophical Theology is Important to Me

In many regards philosophical theology is perhaps the most important approach to theology that I can have as an approach for future ministry. Having a former interest in philosophy, an undergraduate degree in the subject, and a network of people that span a decade with similar interests, no good reason exists for not continuing in the field. Overall, the question of what approach to take for theology in ministry in such an example is perhaps best answered by asking what approach would lend itself to the greatest service in ministry.

Some people may be more inclined to be better servants by approaching theology from a vastly different way than me, and such a fact would suggest that approaching theology much differently than me may be more fruitful for them. The point is that a person's approach to theology perhaps is not a one size fits all situation. Overall, a point to be made is that the reason why philosophical theology would be the best approach for me is because it would provide me with the best outlet for utilizing my talents for providing the greatest amount of service to others.

Bibliography:

Elwell, Walter. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2^nd ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001.