Graeme Goldsworthy says, `you will never be a good biblical theologian if you are not also striving to be a good systematic and historical theologian` (Themelios 28, No 1, 2002). Discuss.
In the following essay I will be looking at and discussing the differences between Biblical theology, Systematic theology and Historical theology and looking at the benefits of each of them and how they work together with each other, as well as doing an evaluation of the Goldsworthy/Trueman debate. Graeme Goldsworthy says in his book According to Plan:
“Who of us does not find at least some parts of the Bible difficult to understand? It is easy to ignore the problems by keeping to the well-worn paths of familiar passages. But when we begin to take seriously the whole Bible is the Word of God, we find ourselves on a collision path with the difficulties. It is at this point that we need biblical theology to show us how to read and understand the Bible.” (Goldsworthy, 1991, p. 17)
The main aim of this essay is to explore the different methods of theology in accordance to studying the Word of God, so that we can avoid misunderstanding what a particular passage actually means and to help us to efficiently read the Bible and to put the Word of God into our own lives more effectively.
Millard J. Erickson describes the definition of Theology simply as “The study or science of God” (Erickson, 1983, p. 21)
Biblical theology:
Biblical theology is a method of studying the Bible, where you look for overlapping themes that occur throughout the Bible. Graeme Goldsworthy points out in his book According to Plan (Goldsworthy, 1991) that a fundamental theme of the Bible is the covenant’s that God makes, so we see throughout the Bible God making covenants with people and nations. Using biblical theology while we study the Bible helps give us a better picture of how each verse, book chapter all works together in bigger picture and how it is all relevant.
Systematic theology:
Systematic theology is a method of studying the Bible that is sometimes called Constructive theology or Dogmatic theology. Its aim is to look at different topics of the Bible, (Sin etc.) one topic at a time and will try and summarise everything the Bible says about that topic in a well organised and structured way.
Historical theology:
Historical theology is a method of studying the Bible, were it looks back over the history of the church since the Bible was written, and looks at how Christian theology has developed. It looks at parts of history were Christian doctrines and beliefs have changed.
Each one of these different styles of theology are a great help to us as we sit down and personally start studying the Bible or even just a certain passage in the Bible. Not only is each one on it’s on a great help and resource to us as we study the word of God but when we start to bring each of these styles together and putting each of them into practice we are opened up to a whole new view and understanding of the Bible.
Benefits of each:
If we look at the benefits of using the method of Biblical theology, we see that it helps us with passages in the Bible where we maybe just do not have a clue like “You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk. Exo 23:19 ESV), and wonder to yourself why it’s there or what it even means, and then we come to a verse like “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 timothy 3:16 ESV) and we struggle to figure out how Exodus 23:19 has any benefit to us or any relevance to our lives. It helps us to look at how that certain passage fits in conjunction with the rest of God’s word.
The benefits of systematic theology is that, it helps us take a specific passage from the Bible, and then helps us to place it into a category of certain topics that appear throughout the Bible. When preparing a sermon or a Bible study on a particular using systematic theology can be a great help when looking to find another verse in the Bible that is related to the passage you have or that backs up or cooperates with it.
Gregg R. Allison says in his book Historical Theology:
“One benefit that historical theology offers the church today is helping it distinguish orthodoxy from heresy. The term orthodoxy here refers to that which the new Testament calls “sound doctrine” (1 Tim. 1:10; 2 Tim. 4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1), that which rightly reflects in summary form all the teaching of Scripture and which the church is bound to believe and obey.4 Heresy, then, is anything that contradicts sound doctrine. It is false belief that misinterprets Scripture or that ignores some of the teaching of Scripture, or that incorrectly puts together all the teaching of Scripture.” (Allison, 2011, p. 24)
I would agree with this statement made by Gregg R. Allison because as we look back on the history of the church and study it we start to see what Christian doctrines the church have accepted and decline and we can from that we can examine wither what we are about to teach or read fits in with the Christian doctrine we believe in. Gregg R. Allison also states in his book Historical Theology: “historical theology helps the church understand the historical development of its beliefs.” So we see by using Historical theology we are able to get a better grip and understanding of how are beliefs as Christians have development and been strengthened throughout history and that even today it is continuing to develop.
Working together.
Biblical & Systematic theology:
Don Carson says in his article, how to read the Bible and do Theology well: “In some ways, BT is a kind of bridge discipline between exegesis and ST because it overlaps with them, enabling them to hear each other a little better.” (Carson, 2015)
In order for use to use systematic theology affectively we must use biblical theology with it and Vis versa. We see that systematic theology looks at a passage and draws out different meanings within that passage, and that biblical theology will seek to draw the one mean meaning within the passage. So for systematic theology to be sound in doctrine it must cross examine that passage with biblical theology in order to confirm wither or not the meanings fit in with the big picture of the Bible. Using biblical theology a long side systematic theology gives it a stronger foundation.
When using biblical theology we look are looking for a constant theme throughout the Bible, but when we using systematic theology alongside of it, we are able to better organise our findings and better equip us to cross reference passages that contain the same theme.
Richard B. Gaffin, Jr. states in his article “Systematic Theology and Biblical Theology”: “Biblical theology focuses on revelation as an historical activity and so challenges systematic theology to do justice to the historical character of revealed truth.”
Biblical & Historical theology:
Don Carson states:
“Both BT and HT are aware of the passage of time in their respective disciplines: BT focuses on the time during which the biblical documents were written and collected, while HT focuses on the study of the Bible from the time it was completed. Put otherwise, BT focuses on the Bible, while HT focuses on what significant figures have believed about the Bible. BT functions best when interacting with HT.” (Carson, 2015)
Don Carson states in this paragraph, that Biblical Theology functions best when interacting with Historical Theology. I find this statement to be correct as we can see both coincide with one another. Biblical theology using Historical theology when it is look for main themes throughout the Bible. When trying to discern wither a certain theme found within the Scriptures is a true theme or wither it is just theme that seems like it would belong there, we bring in historical theology and look back over the history of the Christian church and the doctrines of the church and see if that theme actually fits in with what Christian doctrine believes.
Systematic & Historical theology:
Don Carson says:
“When studying what the Bible teaches about a particular subject (ST), one must integrate HT. In some measure, ST deals with HT’s categories, but ST’s priorities and agenda ideally address the contemporary age at the most critical junctures.” (Carson, 2015)
In order for us to use systematic theology to its full potential, we must use historical theology alongside of it. Systematic theology will look back over the history of the Christian church and will look at different themes that have occurred and then will look at what the bible teaches about them themes. Historical theology will use systematic theology when trying to organise and separate themes that have occurred over a period of time in the Christian church.
Biblical theology, Systematic theology and Historical theology all overlap and work together, we see in order to use biblical theology correctly and efficiently it must use historical theology and systematic theology alongside of it. Systematic theology will use biblical theology in order to make sure that its findings relate to the big picture of the Bible and as well as for creating a strong foundation for its findings. Historical theology will us both biblical and systematic theology in order to examine how Christian doctrines and believes throughout the time of the Christian church relate with the teachings of the Bible.
Goldsworthy/Trueman debate:
In Carl R. Trueman’s article A Revolutionary Balancing Act, Trueman is trying to get across a point that we mostly only need systematic theology in our churches today and that while he welcomes a certain model of Biblical theology to be used while studying the bible he says that it is taking away from the true meaning of passages within the Bible. He makes this statement in his article.
“We all know the old joke about the Christian fundamentalist who, when asked what was grey, furry, and lived in a tree, responded that ‘It sure sounds like a squirrel, but I know the answer to every question is ‘Jesus”.” (Trueman, 2002)
Basically that when we using biblical theology to exegete a passage of Scripture we manipulate it a certain way to always come to Jesus. He then goes on to say that some passages will not be about Jesus and will have a different meaning and purpose altogether and that while using systematic theology to exegete it we will find its true meaning.
In Graeme Goldsworthy’s response to Carl R. Trueman’s article, Goldsworthy points out that we need more than just systematic theology when we are studying the Bible as well bringing to surface just how important it is to have biblical theology while we do that. He says in his article:
“The witness of the NT is that the whole of the OT is a testimony to Jesus (e.g., Luke 24:15-49; John 5:39-47). Biblical theology takes this seriously and aims to show the legitimate pathway from the text to Jesus. Even NT texts are dealt with in this way since the application of any biblical truth to a Christian is in terms of his or her relationship to Jesus.” (Goldsworthy, Ontology and Biblical Theology – A Response to Carl Trueman’s Editorial: A Revolutionary Balancing Act, 2002)
Graeme Goldsworthy is pointing out that when using biblical theology it helps us to get a clearer picture and a better understanding how each passage in the Bible leads us Jesus, wither through his actions or character.
I would agree with Graeme Goldsworthy article more the Carl R. Trueman’s as I believe that each word, verse, chapter of the Bible is breathed from God and is therefore all leading us to Him and to relationship with him, I would agree with Carl R. Trueman’s claim that systematic theology is a strong method of studying the bible to get different meanings from within one passage, even if it isn’t clearer directing us to Jesus, but I believe that when we add Biblical theology alongside systematic theology when we exegete a passage we are then able to see how that passage fits in with God’s big picture of the Bible.
In Conclusion we can see how biblical theology, systematic theology and historical theology all work together, and how each of them enhances the performance of the other in relation to studying God’s word. In order for us to fully grasp the Bible we need to use each one of these methods so we can clearly teach and understand for ourselves exactly what each passage in the Bible is saying to us.
Bibliography
Allison, G. R. (2011). Historical Theology . Michigan : Zondervan .
Berkhof, L. (1984). Systematic theology. Norwich: The Banner Of Truth Trust.
Carson, D. (2015, September 24). How to read the Bible and do Theology well. Retrieved from http://www.thegospelcoalition.org: http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-bible-and-theology-don-carson-nivzsb
Erickson, M. J. (1983). Christian theology volume 1 . Michigan : Baker Book House.
Gibson, R. (1996). Interpreting God’s plan, Bibical Theology and the pastor. Carlisle: Paternoster.
Goldsworthy, G. (1991). According to plan. Leicester: Inter-varsity press.
Goldsworthy, G. (2002). Ontology and Biblical Theology – A Response to Carl Trueman’s Editorial: A Revolutionary Balancing Act. Retrieved from www.beginningwithmoses.org: http://beginningwithmoses.org/bt-articles/181/ontology-and-biblical-theology-a-response-to-carl-truemans-editorial-a-revolutionary-balancing-act
Grudem, W. (1994). Systematic theology. Leicster : Zondervan.
Richard B. Gaffin, J. (1976, Spring ). Systematic theology and Biblical theology . Retrieved from www.beginningwithmoses.org: http://beginningwithmoses.org/bt-articles/220/systematic-theology-and-biblical-theology
Trueman, C. R. (2002). A Revolutionary Balancing Act. Retrieved from www.beginningwithmoses.org: http://beginningwithmoses.org/bt-articles/180/a-revolutionary-balancing-act