News

The writing assignments are coming hot-and-heavy now! Lesson 45, like several of the assignments before it, covers the phenomena of the text; particularly, the Bible's ancient content. Scripture has numerous instances where the content is very ancient and primitive in nature. Subject matter, such as areas of medicine and science (astronomy, cosmology, biology) are not accurate. For instance, ancient Hebrews believed the seed of emotions and intellect were in the bowels. These people didn't even have a word for "brain." They just did not understand how the body or the physical world were structured. They had no knowledge of genetics or chromosomes or DNA. For example, they did not understand that infertility could also be a male problem. Moreover, they did not recognize that the earth orbited the sun. The argument is this: If God were dispensing the information to the writer, wouldn't He accurately craft the material to prove the truth of the Bible to future generations? It would be hard to argue the existence of God if primitive Hebrews were Scripturally accurate prior to the science being discovered. Because the Bible does not do this, we need to account for the human input and how the books were produced.

This is my 750 word essay for the certificate: Early in the course, we discussed four definitions of “Systematic Theology.”  Considering that it is a term thrown about by academics, we would do well to understand the definition.  In order of the presentation, here are the definitions: 1.      Systematic Theology is the science of God and the relationships between God and the Universe (Augustus Strong); 2.      Systematic Theology is a Christian study that reflects on and articulates about the God-centered life and beliefs that Christians share as followers of Jesus Christ.  This is done in order that God may be glorified in all that Christians are and do (Stanley Grenz, Roger Olson); 3.      Systematic Theology is that discipline which strives to give a coherent statement of the doctrines of the Christian faith based primarily upon the Scriptures, placed in context of culture in general, worded in the contemporary idiom, and related to issues of life (Millard Erickson); and 4.      Systematic Theology is the study of the fundamental ideas of the Christian faith (Alister McGrath). These definitions seem complex and perhaps not easily understood.  Packed within these efforts are methodologies and subject matters.  At the end of the day, if we could funnel the definitions into plain English, we should find that Systematic Theology is study done in service to the church to help it accomplish its mission for God.  In essence, we are all theologians as we think about God and His work, through disciplined study. Once we decide to delve into disciplined study, we have an initial path to choose.  Much like sitting in our car at a 5-way intersection, we must decide our direction for that day.  Most scholars contend that these approaches alone are not truly systematic theology; rather, such study requires the best of all of these paths.  The five types of theology are: 1.      Biblical Theology – this is an attempt to study God and His works by focusing almost exclusively on the text of Scripture.  Here, we use the Bible to focus questions, answers, and terminology; 2. Historical Theology – this is an attempt to understand what the church has taught about a particular topic over history.  For instance, we can look at the evolution of the “Doctrine of Atonement” in the early church, the medieval period and, finally, the Reformation; 3. Philosophical Theology – this is an attempt to understand God using the tools of philosophy and reason.  For instance, we can look at “proofs” of God’s existence, or the problem of evil; 4. Ethics – this is an attempt to explain how Christians should behave and respond to cultural challenges.  Ethics gives us applications and implications for our beliefs; and lastly 5. Apologetics – this is an attempt to defend the Christian faith by demonstrating the beliefs are reasonable and true. Once we choose our path, we have one more decision to make; namely, which starting point to take.  Remember, we said Systematic Theology is broader than any of the five paths alone as it incorporates the best of all these disciplines into a unified whole.  There are three recognized starting points for our study: 1.      Natural Theology – this is an attempt to study God using reason, science, and philosophy.  William Paley famously argued that science cannot explain everything!  One of the best examples I have ever heard occurred during a Greek Philosophy class during my undergrad training.  We were studying the nature of consciousness and how science could not truly explain it.  The brain is composed of individual cells that individually have no conscious parts whatsoever.  Yet, when combined with other unconscious cells, consciousness erupts.  Unconscious + unconscious = conscious. Science cannot explain how this happens; 2.      Tradition or Authority – this begins with the beliefs that have been handed down over the ages.  Those who have gone before us state these positions are true.  The doctrines of the Catholic Church are an example of this approach.  Perhaps the weakness to this approach is its circular reasoning.  How do we know the tradition is correct?  The church says so.  How do we know the church is correct?  The tradition says so; 3. Scripture – often considered a safe starting point because all of the verses therein have been interpreted many times and understood.  The counterargument, of course is, how do we know every single verse has been interpreted correctly. To take our first steps in theological study, we appear to be in a bit of pickle.  What is the proper starting point?  Do we start with reason or science, tradition or authority, or scripture?  Why do we choose any of these positions?  Should we accept any of them?  At the end of the day, we must be able to defend our stance.  This is ultimately why I am enjoying the study of theology.  I love the challenge of determining what settles my beliefs. The path that I am currently taking helps me understand why I believe what I believe.

"This is ultimately why I am enjoying the study of theology.  I love the challenge of determining what settles my beliefs. The path that I am currently taking helps me understand why I believe what I believe." - Amen and I pray this goal of yours was achieved (or is being achieved).

This is the correct place. Someone posted theirs under the Discussions tab, but posting it here works just fine.

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.

Matt Hamrick, 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.

Thanks Miles, I thought I read in the past the video and transcript should match which is why I reported it.

You can ignore this Miles, it appears the products pages have what I am looking for.