• In Segment 14: How to do Theology On Step One: Identify the Issue the last paragraph is this: We have here a Möbius strip, which is a single strip of paper which is twisted once and connected so that we have a three-dimensional figure which has only one surface. You can place your pencil on it and trace all the way around, and it will cover both sides and come back to the beginning. The point is, on a Möbius circle, there is no starting place and no ending place. In the same way, these questions, this dialogue and theological discussion, may begin anywhere in the process. This is in the transcript but the video he did not say this. Likewise, in step two we have this paragraph: I have here an optical illusion. If you look at it from one perspective, it looks like a bird; from another, perhaps like a rabbit, if you’re creative enough. As you look at this, the difference between it is not the symbols, not the markings, but your perspective—how you interpret it. You emphasize certain things. When you look at the points, you see the bird. When you look the other direction, you see a rabbit. Again, it's in the transcript but the video he did not say it. Could you remove those paragraphs from the transcript please? Or is there another video where he says it but it's not in my software?
    1. Hi Hamilton, I always thought (maybe wrongly) that the transcript was what the professor said in the video. I usually don't read the transcript I watch the video so if these illustrations are input by Logos I have missed them all. Maybe I should be reading the transcript instead of watching the video. Thanks for your response.
    2. , the transcript should match the video. I haven't had time to look into the specifics of this issue yet, but my guess is that Dr. Sanders wanted to show an image that we didn't have the rights to display. We probably edited out that section of the video after getting it transcribed and mistakenly didn't cut it from the transcript. I'll put updating the transcript resource on my to do list.
    3. Thanks Miles, I thought I read in the past the video and transcript should match which is why I reported it.
  • Question for Miles: Using this course as an example but there are other courses too, but the Appendix is the Pro Screen casts and NT101 has them in the little outline before each topic to show where they belong, but other courses such as this do not. How do we know where to play the screen cast to align with the course? Those screen casts are awesome but for OT101 I added them to the end of the reading plan because I didn't know where to put them as I made the reading plan. There has to be a simple way to know where they go. Any input on this?
    1. You can ignore this Miles, it appears the products pages have what I am looking for.
  • started a discussion

    DiscussTH 101

    TH101


    Jerry Carter


    7/23/2019




    According to Strong: Theology is the Science of God and how he relates to the universe, this is good but limited. Theology would include, really looking at God and his work and how this would impact the goal of life in the light of this. We understand in theology, God desires to be known that he speaks and can be known. Correct beliefs about God are essential in true theology. My thought on the subject, is that we must be bible centric believers, our experience must line up to the scripture not the scriptures to our experience . A true understanding of God is essential and he has given us the self revelation of himself in the bible. My understanding of the course is the difference between biblical theology and systematic theology. Biblical theology uses the bible alone for theology, systematic theology allows for the use of resources outside of the bible for study, this is helpful. The definition from Pocket Dictionary of Biblical Terms describes it this way: Biblical theology is the discipline that attempts to summarize and restate the teaching of a biblical text or a biblical author without imposing any modern categories of thought upon the text. Rather, the goal is to understand the theology of a biblical book or author in its original historical context.

    Differences with biblical theology. Now I’d like to define systematic theology more fully. Systematic theology is different from biblical theology in a couple of respects. First, it’s open to contributions from outside the biblical text. For example, resources of philosophy, science, and tradition are drawn into systematic theology. Moreover, systematic theologies are structured by logical or dogmatic categories and often draw heavily on historical theology. It is interesting, for example, that systematic theologies sometimes are organized precisely around creeds. There are systematic theologies organized around the Apostles’ Creed or around the 39 Articles of the Anglican Church, or so on. So systematic theology can have different kinds of structures and be organized in different ways because of its content.

    The third thing I want to say is that systematic theology is culturally specific. It has a role in worldview formation and transformation that biblical theology doesn’t always have. It’s much more focused on questions from surrounding culture. It addresses and tries to respond to things that might be in a specific context. That means systematic theology will change from time to time, from place to place.

    So there are significant differences between these disciplines. Biblical theology is historically oriented, constrained by the biblical text and language and categories. Systematic theology has a broader set of resources as well as is structured in ways that reflect how it is culturally situated. How to do theology and the approach to theology is a strong point of this course. You can put it in broader context in a very simplified way by comparing the premodern world—the world before Descartes—with the world of modern, and then the postmodern world. In the premodern world, truth was something that was revealed, it was received—that is, God spoke and told us things, and we believed it. The truth was real and substantive. We believed in a real world, but our ability to find it through reason was extremely limited. The greatest truth, the most important truths, were those that were given to us by God or by a supreme being. The modern world doesn’t deny truth, but it, in a sense, dethrones God as the ultimate source of truth; now we discover truth through reason. We discover truth rather than having a revealed truth. Then, in the postmodern year, when they reject that, they go further and they say, “No, we don’t really discover truth; in fact, what we do is create truth.” I’ll explain a little bit about that in a moment.

    Ronn Johnson, Carl Sanders, and Michael S. Heiser, TH101 Introducing Bible Doctrine I: Theology, Divine Revelation, and the Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2013). God desires to be known and can be known through general revelation, creation, history and conscience and special revelation through the bible, miracles, dreams and visions, angels, and the Lord Jesus Christ. This past Sunday, a young man in the youth group of the church I pastor, came to me and said he was struggling with thoughts of atheism. I remembered Dr. Ronn Johnson's example of Carl Sagin, you may remember Carl Sagan, the now deceased scientist who said in an interview that he didn’t believe God existed. And the interviewer asked, “Well, what would you say if you were wrong and you stood in front of God someday?” and he made that famous, if not horrific, statement, “I’ll look Him in the baby-blues and tell Him that He never gave me enough evidence.” Well, now Mr. Sagan knows better because it’s very possible—I don’t mean to play it out as though I know what happened, of course—but it’s very possible that standing in front of God, God could have said, “Carl, hold up your hand; look at it. It’s waterproof, it moves by thought, it heals itself. You’re telling me you didn’t see a creator in something that you held onto the steering wheel every day with?” You see why, again, revelation is a moral issue. God is taking His time to explain things with us in some amazing ways. This example I also used, it removed the doubts from the young man. Thank you for this course. Dr. Heiser taught me so much about how we got the bible and that it is a human and divine book, so good. Dr Sanders is always a good teacher and did a great job in the limited space he had on theology. Over all the team teaching of the course made it very interesting and has all ready been helpful in a practical way in pastoral care.

    Ronn Johnson, Carl Sanders, and Michael S. Heiser, TH101 Introducing Bible Doctrine I: Theology, Divine Revelation, and the Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2013).


    Ronn Johnson, Carl Sanders, and Michael S. Heiser, TH101 Introducing Bible Doctrine I: Theology, Divine Revelation, and the Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2013).


    Ronn Johnson, Carl Sanders, and Michael S. Heiser, TH101 Introducing Bible Doctrine I: Theology, Divine Revelation, and the Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2013).

  • Officially started this course today for the certificate program.
    1. a joyful science
      "It is to be noted further that when it is conceived and executed correctly and resolutely, yet also freely and modestly, theology is a singularly beautiful and joyful science, so that it is only willingly and cheerfully or not at all that we can be theologians." Barth, K., Bromiley, G.W. & Torrance, T.F., 2004. Church dogmatics: The doctrine of reconciliation, Part 3.2, London; New York: T&T Clark. logosres:chrchdog4p32;ref=KD.KD_IV.3.2_p._951;off=169881 https://ref.ly/logosres/chrchdog4p32?ref=KD.KD+IV.3.2+p.+951&off=169881
      1. has joined the group.
      2. has joined the group.
      3. has joined the group.