As I brisk through Martyn Lloyd Jone’s “Preaching and Preachers”, I’ve discovered a fascinating concept: the preacher as a systematic theologian. So what’s systematic theology? I’ll answer that by defining what it’s not:
1. Old Testament Theology. What does the O.T. say about any given subject?
2. New Testament Theology. What does the N.T. say about any given subject?
3. Biblical Theology.What does an individual biblical author or book say about any given subject? Or, how is any given subject developed in the Bible from beginning to end?
4. Historical Theology.Historically, what has the church said about any given subject?
5. Philosophical Theology. What does our God given reasoning conclude about any given subject?
6. Systematic Theology.What does the whole Bible say about any given subject?
There’s nothing wrong per se with the other categories, but Systematic Theology is the primary call of the preacher.
Does the term “Systematic Theology” turn you off? Why or why not?
godstory.wordpress.com 
This does turn me off a bit, but only because #5 is so easiliy confused. It often gets defined incorrectly.
Without our God-given ability to reason, we couldn’t read the Bible and make any sense of anything it says. If we throw logic out the window, the Gods’s Word necessarily goes out with it. Your blog post would be nothing more than gibberish if I couldn’t use logic to arrive at conclusions about the words contained therein.
Hey Jeremy – I agree that reasoning is given by God…but that doesn’t change the definition of systematic theology!
But maybe I’m misunderstanding you…I don’t see anything wrong with philosophy, but I don’t think the preacher is chiefly a philosopher.
Agreed. No, it’s not the definition of Systematic Theology that bugs me. My bad. It just bugs me when people mix up definitions for Philosophical Theology. As defined above, it is a necessary component of Systematic Theology. I’ve known people to dismiss it by confusing it with “human reasoning” that is subject to error. (Not suggesting you do this.) Big pet peeve.
Looking up, I don’t even know where in the world I was going with that. Too much coffee this morning, I think…
Is this like a bunch of subsets, or rings in a Venn diagram? Aren’t they all useful, and none should be taken in isolation?
Tim
Hey Tim,
I agree – they’re all useful, and they all have their place. I will say, however, that I believe systematic theology has the least amount of limitations when it comes to discovering truth.