To Know and Love God

Method for Theology

David K. Clark, John S. Feinberg

• Publisher: Crossway
• Year: 2003
• Print ISBN: 9781433521898
• eBook ISBN: 9781433516054
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

It is the job of all believers, not just theologians, to serve God by discerning what is true about the crucial issues of life. Our task is to learn more about God. Our privilege is to love God passionately with our minds. Clearly then, spiritual life must have theology as one of its ingredients, but this, by itself, will not guarantee a vibrant spiritual life. Rather, evangelicals must link a theological experience and an experiential theology. Knowing and loving God are both necessary.

David Clark explains how evangelical systematic theology is structured and how this discipline assists believers in understanding God more fully and worshipping him more completely. To do so, he uses strategies of analytical philosophy to reveal the nature, purposes, methods, and limits of evangelical systematic theology. He attempts to speak both to and for evangelicals, with the goal of showing how a reasonable, articulate, and credible evangelical theology can proceed.

Other questions are raised while trying to define evangelical systematic theology: Is systematic theology a legitimate intellectual enterprise? How does theology build upon the teachings of the Bible? How can evangelical theologians in different cultures assist each other? How does theology contribute to transforming society? What does the existence of other religions mean for evangelical theology? How does systematic theology relate to other intellectual disciplines? How does it connect with the life of the church? What are the purposes and the final goal of systematic theology? The answers to these questions are not ends in themselves, but assist believers in attaining the goal of knowing and loving God.

Asserting that evangelical systematic theology is the science by which evangelical believers learn of God, Clark claims that the insights of apparently contradictory viewpoints can and should be drawn together. He works past the false dilemmas, imprecision, overstatement, inferences, and generalizations that often cloud theological discussion and arrives at clear definitions, precise distinctions, careful analysis, and modest conclusions.

Clark argues that evangelical systematic theology is rooted in the Bible and focused on Christ. Good theology provides vision, fosters wisdom, and nurtures covenantal relationship with God. Good theology leads to knowing and loving God.

Part of the Foundations of Evangelical Theology series.

CHAPTER
ONE

CONCEPTS OF THEOLOGY

The Christian apologist Justin Martyr (c. 100–c. 164) faced a dilemma. He entrusted his soul to a humble Jewish rabbi who lived and died only a century before him. Such a short time span, a mere one hundred years, would pose no problem today. We despise what is old and treasure what is new. But the ancients, with their respect for hoary traditions, felt suspicion toward any prophet so recent as that. To meet an objection that emerged from his particular culture, Justin identified his Savior with Logos, the principle of Reason that the early Greeks recognized. He even claimed that Plato borrowed some of the themes in The Republic from Moses.¹ In this way, he hoped to show that his doctrine about Jesus was not an innovation but the crowning glory of a long tradition. Like many theologians since, Justin contemplated the meaning of his faith. Borrowing concepts from several sources, he sought to relate his faith directly to his culture. This, in general terms, is the task of systematic theology: theology seeks to articulate the content of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the context of a particular culture. The purpose of this work is to explore how evangelical theology fulfills this task.

I. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES

Christians have thought about their faith for two millennia. Concrete, practical problems like Justin’s often stimulated Christian reflection. This theology is tactical; it responds, sometimes in an ad hoc manner, to issues and needs as they arise. A millennium after Justin, Peter Lombard (c. 1100–1160), in his Sentences, attempted to answer more systematically the questions scholars ask about Christian theology. This theology is not tactical, but strategic; it expresses in a broad, synthetic style the content of Christian believing. Writing a true systematic theology means describing, interpreting, and applying Christian doctrine in a comprehensive manner. As a discipline, systematic theology examines God, God’s works, and God’s relationship with his creation, and it expresses its content in terms of particular cultures.

A. Patristic Beginnings

Early Christians, of course, were not self-conscious about their concepts of theology. During the patristic period, they used ‘theology’ to mean the doctrine of God. A strategic, systematic theology would not develop for centuries. Yet as Christians crafted their convictions about God to fit their time and place, the Christian church developed implicit views about how to express its mes-sage. The historical context in which the church’s first theologians lived and worked forced them to consider the relation of Christianity to pagan culture and philosophy.

The word theologia has Greek origins. Among the Greeks, the word denoted a chronicle of the gods of Greece. Early on, the great poets of Greece offered accounts of their polytheistic and anthropomorphic deities. Later, the Stoics and other philosophers developed more philosophically oriented versions of these narratives about the divine. Theologia in this sense became an important piece within humanitas, the larger educational process that included not just understanding of the divine but of humanity and nature as well. The main view, then, was that wise persons should not raise wisdom about God to a higher position that is independent of other intellectual pursuits.²

In presenting his case, Justin followed this strategy, freely connecting Christian themes with concepts from pagan philosophy. In addition, he claimed against the Romans that Christians are not rebels but model citizens.³ In rebut-ting the Jews, he used detailed exegesis to show that the NT does in fact fulfill the OT.⁴ The Martyr’s practice already involved certain assumptions about the nature of Christian proclamation even if he did not expend effort developing an explicit model of theology. He aggressively adapted concepts his audience would know and allowed their perspectives to shape his discussion of distinctively Christian ideas.

Similarly, among the Alexandrians, philosophy supported theology. Clement (c. 150–c. 219) stimulated an important tradition with his view that Greek philosophy purifies the individual in preparation for receiving a true knowledge (gnosis) which is the highest expression of the gift of Christian faith.⁵ Going beyond Clement, Origen of Alexandria (c. 186–c. 232) produced On First Principles, which fleshes out a more extensive Christian expression of this gnosis.⁶ Origen built his argument on Clement’s distinction between simple faith and higher, speculative wisdom, and then tied this distinction to the allegorical method of biblical interpretation. The literal or material meanings of Scripture correlate to simple faith while the allegorical or spiritual meanings connect with wisdom.⁷ Yet like other patristics, Origen’s interest was primarily biblical, for he wrote On First Principles primarily to persuade some anti-intellectual Christians of the validity of his work in biblical studies. When the Alexandrians used philosophical categories and perspectives, they deliberately sanctified and transformed them, putting them into the service of biblical thought.

In his implicit conception of theologizing, Tertullian (c. 160–c. 220) took a different approach, at least on the surface. In his well-known and dramatic claims, Tertullian placed Christianity and pagan thought in sharp opposition. “What has Jerusalem to do with Athens, the Church with the Academy, the Christian with the heretic?” he asked rhetorically.⁸ “The Son of God died; it is by all means to be believed, because it is absurd.”⁹ But Tertullian’s bold statements should not obscure his subtle use of argument. Clearly, Tertullian rejected some content of pagan philosophy, but he used the careful thinking and interpreting that are the heart of philosophy as a method. “There are logical limits to the possibilities for human irrationality,” Richard Swinburne noted dryly, “and even Tertullian cannot step outside them.”¹⁰

Similarly, the illustrious Irenaeus (c. 130–202) was more wary of specifically pagan concepts than were the Alexandrians. In pursuing a major agenda, the refutation of Gnosticism, Irenaeus revealed his commitment to apostolic teaching and a self-consciously biblical method. As the basis of true knowledge or gnosis, the church preserves the true apostolic tradition in its mother churches (those founded by apostles) and in the Scriptures themselves. The heretics go wrong, he argued, when they use a perverted method of biblical interpretation. They disconnect biblical truths from each other like a depraved artist who rearranges the pieces of a beautiful mosaic. To counter this, a Christian theologian should set specific citations in their proper context within the whole fabric of biblical truth.¹¹

Though Irenaeus refuted the content of Gnostic philosophy, he did not repudiate all pagan language or concepts. Rather, he expressed Christian truth and argument by adapting certain pagan categories to Christian use. Consider his use of the word gnosis. Irenaeus rebutted Gnosticism, not by showing that gnosis is heretical or evil, but by declaring that true gnosis is found in Christ as revealed in the apostolic tradition.¹² While not as overt as the Alexandrians, the biblically oriented Irenaeus and even the rhetorically dramatic Tertullian used categories implicit in their culture to develop and explain their Christian theology.

Like his predecessors, the great St. Augustine of Hippo (354–430) reflected his time. His voluminous writings tackled a variety of ecclesiastical and theological issues. Yet he wrote to meet specific problems. For instance, his great masterpiece, The City of God, a philosophical interpretation of history, is an occasional work. Although Christianity was the official religion of the empire, pagans whispered that the betrayal of the Roman gods by the Christians caused Alaric’s sack of Rome. In answering this charge, Augustine addressed the con-CONCEPTS tent of faith to his context, but did not present it in a systematic way. No Christian had yet written, or even thought about, a systematic theology.

An important topic related to theology is the relation of faith and reason. There was some confusion in the first centuries about the value of reason, but Augustine’s opinion was quite positive. Augustine’s dialogical understanding of faith and reason confirms in a general way Clement’s claim that pagan and Christian thought complement each other in building theology. Faith and reason, authority and understanding, reinforce each other. Yet Augustine preserved the priority of faith. Augustine expressed this by saying, “faith, you see, is a step toward understanding; understanding is the well-deserved recompense of faith.”¹³ In temporal sequence, faith (which is really a commitment to a Christian way of life) precedes full understanding, for one first accepts basic Christian truth on divine authority. At the same time, in order to exercise faith, a person must understand the words that minimally explain the gospel. Reason can also help us decide which of several competing authorities to adopt. Thus, reason tells us that it is rational to accept what reason alone cannot demonstrate. ¹⁴ Then, after initially accepting basic Christian truth, the Christian the-ologian moves forward, using reason to acquire richer understanding. In this dialectic, faith and reason reinforce each other.¹⁵

For the theologian who would grasp Scripture fully, the Bishop of Hippo recommended gaining skill in biblical languages, the nature of being, dialectics (refuting sophistry and learning to define words and distinguish concepts), eloquence, the science of numbers, history, and law.¹⁶ With these skills, fuller understanding would elucidate faith, removing objections and developing Christian knowledge. In a word, Augustine advised, “First believe, then under-stand.” ¹⁷ His view commanded allegiance for centuries. St. Anselm (1033–1104), for instance, echoed Augustine: “I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this also I believe—that unless I believe, I should not understand.”¹⁸

One distinction in Augustine’s thought is of continued importance for theology even though academic theology today sometimes shunts this distinction to a sidetrack. Augustine preferred the word ‘wisdom’ (in Latin, sapientia) to ‘knowledge’ (in Latin, scientia; basically episteme in Greek and Wissen in German) as a description of the Christian reflection about God.¹⁹ Sapientia is contemplative understanding of divine and eternal things. Scientia is active knowledge of mundane and temporal things. The word ‘science’ would later come to denote an academic discipline, as in the phrase “queen of the sciences.” Later still, in modern times, it would come to mean the method of empirical observation and explanation, as in “modern science.” But in Augustine’s sense, theology goes beyond mere science to wisdom as the believer orders or applies knowledge according to the highest good, namely, the love of God. Wisdom, then, is knowledge directed to salvation.

In contemporary terms, we could say that wisdom is not merely knowledge about God, but knowledge directed toward knowing and loving God person-ally. It is information applied for the purpose of transformation. It is “engaged knowledge that emotionally connects the knower to the known.”²⁰ In light of this, evangelical theology is not merely scientia. More fundamentally, it is scientia directed to the purposes of sapientia. So Augustine’s distinction provides a framework for the concept of evangelical systematic theology that I will defend in this book. To anticipate, we should understand scientia, the science of God, as an indispensable feature of theology. In this dimension, theology is a disciplined activity by which the church reflects on the nature, will, and ways of the Creator. But scientia, isolated by itself, is a truncated theology. For theology requires another dimension: sapientia, the wisdom of God. For the definitive purpose of theology is the knowledge of God applied as wisdom. It forms godly character in Christians as they live in community, and it governs the loves and the lives of faithful Christians who serve God and transform culture. Any theology that loses contact with this goal falls short.

B. Medieval Modifications

The medieval period saw several important innovations on the concept of theology. John of Damascus (c. 674–c. 749) displayed a fourfold pattern (prolegomena, theology, anthropology and soteriology, ecclesiology and eschatology). This still influences some forms of theology today.²¹ Peter Abelard (1079–1142) helped establish the medieval method of synthesis. He sought both to force critical reflection about the apparently contradictory opin-ions of the Fathers whom he quoted and, to some degree, to reconcile them.²² Abelard’s student, Peter Lombard (c. 1100–1160), wrote a theological text-book, The Sentences, in which he followed the Damascene’s organizational pattern, arranging the discussion topically rather than biblically. Like his teacher, Lombard compiled sources that addressed in a sequential way many of the questions scholars were asking about Christian theology—although he himself left some of the tensions unresolved.

Alain of Lille (c. 1116– c. 1202) first called theology a science in a new sense—as an academic discipline.²³ A science is a coherently ordered field of inquiry that is based on presuppositions and follows rules that are suited to its own method and object. Theology, conceived as a science in this way, found a home in the newly developing medieval universities, beginning with Paris around 1200. Those in the universities distinguished the various disciplines or faculties. Students began by studying the arts and then moved into law, medicine, or theology. As part of this process, academics sought to clarify the relation of theology to philosophy. The standard approach was to place philosophy or natural reason logically first so it could provide the basis for sacred theology and supernatural revelation. Thus the earliest parts of theology tended to focus on metaphysical issues such as the existence and attributes of God, as they were understood philosophically and scientifically. Once grounded in these disciplines, theologians turned to biblical materials that dealt with salvation and the church. In this arrangement, interpretations of biblical themes came under the influence of the philosophical and scientific background. Theology became the culmination of all learning. Although it existed as a separate faculty, it was the queen of the sciences.

In Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–1274) the medieval synthesis found its high-est expression. Thomas’s view of faith and reason both reflects and reinforces theology as a new discipline. It was in his thirteenth-century context that the word ‘theologia’ was first used for what we call theology. Thomas affirmed the value of unaided reason, and in so doing modified Augustine’s view of its relation to faith. For Thomas, unaided reason, operating without faith, can demonstrate such things as the existence, oneness, and simplicity of God. Through faith (that is, understanding acquired through the authority of the church), we can believe (but not prove) these truths. Reason and faith, then, are independent and parallel paths leading to knowledge a...

Table of contents

• COVER PAGE
• TITLE PAGE
• COPYRIGHT PAGE
• DEDICATION
• CONTENTS
• INTRODUCTIONBY GENERAL EDITOR
• PREFACE
• INTRODUCTION
• CHAPTER ONE: CONCEPTS OF THEOLOGY
• CHAPTER TWO: SCRIPTURE AND THE PRINCIPLE OF AUTHORITY
• CHAPTER THREE: THEOLOGY IN CULTURAL CONTEXT
• CHAPTER FOUR: DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES AND THEOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE
• CHAPTER FIVE: UNITY IN THE THEOLOGICAL DISCIPLINES
• CHAPTER SIX: THEOLOGY IN THE ACADEMIC WORLD
• CHAPTER SEVEN: THE SPIRITUAL PURPOSES OF THEOLOGY
• CHAPTER EIGHT: THEOLOGY AND THE SCIENCES
• CHAPTER NINE: THEOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY
• CHAPTER TEN: CHRISTIAN THEOLOGYAND THE WORLD RELIGIONS
• CHAPTER ELEVEN: REALITY, TRUTH, AND LANGUAGE
• CHAPTER TWELVE: THEOLOGICAL LANGUAGE AND SPIRITUAL LIFE
• CONCLUSION: THE FUTURE OF EVANGELICAL THEOLOGY
• NOTES