Bible Study Will Only A Few People Be Saved? No. A Great Multitude Will Be Saved.

[JLB]

THEIR FINAL DESTINY was determined/chosen by God and not self-determined as "freewill / deism" suggests.

What is self determined freewill deism?


Never heard of it.





JLB

 

[for_his_glory]

That's what makes it interesting.
The problem is, there's too much to take in and each of us has bias to over come. I've heard several people on this forum discredit theologians that have studied scripture for decades and have a gift for teaching. This is a grave mistake.

Read 3 Systematic Theology books (wisdom in numbers), make notes on each topic ... then better chance to put it all together. At a minimum you can be wrong but have a lot to evidence to support your understanding. :yes

Aside:
Inductive reasoning starts with particular facts and moves toward a general truth to interpret particular facts. Deductive reasoning uses a general truth to interpret particular facts.

No one ever comes to the Bible and simply begins by inductively studying a particular passage. Inductive Bible study leaders may give the impression that they are setting aside their prejudices and simply reading Scripture, but this is not really the case. Baptists tend to read the Bible as if it teaches adult-only baptism, non-charismatics as if it teaches that there is no longer an office of prophet, and Calvinists as if it teaches unconditional election. We all read expecting to find specific things.

In other words, we never see Scripture through completely fresh, unprejudiced eyes. We read particular passages in the light of what we already know ---or think we know--- of Scripture's general teaching. So we both deduce how to interpret particular Scriptures from our general knowledge of the whole of Scripture even as we inductively examine the particular parts of Scripture in order to reach general conclusions about the whole of it. It is never completely clear when we are doing the one task or the other. This delicate, back-and-forth dance that strives to get closer to the true meaning of Scripture is called "the hermeneutical spiral."

When systematic theology does its job well, it is well aware of this spiral, knowing that a system without parts and parts without a system are equally useless for Christian preaching, faith, and practice. We are not free to impose a system on Scripture (which would be a purely deductive approach), but we are at no greater liberty to assume, rather arrogantly, that we are the first to read the Bible just as it is at face value (which would be a purely inductive approach). Imposing a system on Scripture makes the Bible a slave of tradition, while assuming that we are the first to read it just as it is at face value renders Scripture a slave to unacknowledged personal prejudices.

Good systematic theologians, regardless of their differences, always strive to approach Scripture as students rather than as masters. They also seek to gather together whatever Scripture says anywhere on the same topic and thus interpret the particular parts in the light of the whole, even as they once again test their conclusions about the whole in the light of what they find in Scripture's particular parts-and so on. This dance never ends on this side of Glory. Author Unknown

Just because one calls themselves a theologian, has gone to Bible colleges holding many Degrees and even become Pastor's and write many books doesn't mean they hold all truth that we should trust them in knowledge as we see many of them disagreeing with each other.

I don't need to read theology books and take notes from them as God has already given us the only book that we should be studying from praying and asking the Holy Spirit teach us.

I came to the Bible in the beginning reading the book of John giving more emphasis on a particular verse in order to gain understanding before moving on to the next verse. That's how I study is vs. by vs. until the Holy Spirit gives me the full context of the whole chapter.

Logic and carnal understanding has no place when it comes to seeking truth as this is how many theologians teach others. We need to prove all that we hear and read from others as it's only when what one teaches lines up with what is already written is when we will come into all truths.

I'm not saying I am infallible and I am always open for correction as long as the Holy Spirit shows me where I have errored. There are those who follow everything that comes out of the pulpit because it makes sense to them and then you have those who dig the deeper mysteries of God's word. Everyone has a view, an opinion, but it's only the Holy Spirit, not man, that teaches us all truths if we are really listening.

 

[JLB]

Just because one calls themselves a theologian, has gone to Bible colleges holding many Degrees and even become Pastor's and write many books doesn't mean they hold all truth that we should trust them in knowledge as we see many of them disagreeing with each other.

I don't need to read theology books and take notes from them as God has already given us the only book that we should be studying from praying and asking the Holy Spirit teach us.

Amen!

 

[Fastfredy0]

Just because one calls themselves a theologian, has gone to Bible colleges holding many Degrees and even become Pastor's and write many books doesn't mean they hold all truth that we should trust them in knowledge as we see many of them disagreeing with each other.

For sure ... that is a given. Years of study of a subject does suggest that such a person has more knowledge than someone that has not studied the bible; you and I for example. God give us teachers. On the other hand, one should be like a Berean and verify what one hears.

I don't need to read theology books and take notes from them as God has already given us the only book that we should be studying from praying and asking the Holy Spirit teach us.

You don't need to, but you handicap yourself if you don't. In point of fact, you use the expertise of scholars every time you read the Bible. Scholars do textual criticism to ascertain from historical documents (dead sea scrolls for example) what the contents of the Bible are as well as translation from the Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic to your native language. I trust God has guided them so we have the true Bible just like I trust that God inspired the original authors.
To ignore scholarship is to SERIOUSLY LIMIT oned knowledge of God. You are an intelligent woman so your need is not as great as, say, a 6 year old ot a person with an IQ of 80 ...nevertheless, there is NO WAY one's knowledge cannot be improved by the hard work of others ....granted, there are false teachers and everyone is fallible.
The method by which the Holy Spirit teaches is by the Bible....not some mystical hope of illumination.
Example: It was only by reading a systematic theology book that I was able to the 10 to 12 various aspects of prayer scattered through the Bible together into a comprehensive unit. It would take a normal person a year (guess-ta-mate) to do the same and that assumes the person have at least normal intelligence, drive and organizational skills.

I came to the Bible in the beginning reading the book of John giving more emphasis on a particular verse in order to gain understanding before moving on to the next verse. That's how I study is vs. by vs. until the Holy Spirit gives me the full context of the whole chapter.

I am not saying Bible study verse by verse is not of value. I am saying that the study of the whole (systematic theology) is critical to the understanding of the bible. Systematic theology is nearly impossible for the individual because most lack the talent, bias and time. I outline the Hermeneutical Spiral above as one aspect of accummulating knowledge that one should contemplate.

Logic and carnal understanding has no place when it comes to seeking truth as this is how many theologians teach others.

LOL .... Logic (reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity) has not place when seeking truth ... this is to say God is not rational. If God is not rational then He cannot be understood. This is absurdity. When God says there were 5 fish and 12 loaves, are we to believe there could have been 52 fish and 1 loaf? Knowledge of God is an absolute requisite unto salvation. Knowledge is unattainable without logic.
Maybe this is why you have problems answering some of my syllogisms as you seem to be denying logic.
Premise 1: God says He is All Knowing
Premise 2: Don't use logic
Conclusion: No conclusion(s) are possible ...

I'm not saying I am infallible and I am always open for correction as long as the Holy Spirit shows me where I have errored.

We all are fallible. I could write books on what I get wrong ... it's just that I don't know what I got wrong.
The method the Spirit uses to teach is by knowledge via the Bible. Not mystic transference of the awareness of God through the ether. God gave my reason to accummulate knowledge of God. I think you, though well versed on the bible, handicap yourself GREATLY by not being like the Bereans who listened to others with suitable credentials and then cross checked with Scripture. You are more intelligent than most, yet you handicap yourself IMO if you rely on only your study of the Bible without the aid of God given teachers. There is NO WAY you can know more about God by just reading the Bible and not considering what others say and guiding you (granted, be on guard).
Aside: Hmmm, seeing as what I am saying is not in the Bible I have to assume you are ignoring it as it might pertain to any change.... but I like typing .....*giggle*

Everyone has a view, an opinion, but it's only the Holy Spirit, not man, that teaches us all truths if we are really listening.

Agreed. And the Holy Spirit can use others that study the Bible to help us be even better. Especially, for those that are not as gifted as you .... though, there are people more gifted than you that I think you are ignoring.

Thanks for your patience and civility.

 

[daninthelionsden]

For sure ... that is a given. Years of study of a subject does suggest that such a person has more knowledge than someone that has not studied the bible; you and I for example. God give us teachers. On the other hand, one should be like a Berean and verify what one hears.


You don't need to, but you handicap yourself if you don't. In point of fact, you use the expertise of scholars every time you read the Bible. Scholars do textual criticism to ascertain from historical documents (dead sea scrolls for example) what the contents of the Bible are as well as translation from the Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic to your native language. I trust God has guided them so we have the true Bible just like I trust that God inspired the original authors.
To ignore scholarship is to SERIOUSLY LIMIT oned knowledge of God. You are an intelligent woman so your need is not as great as, say, a 6 year old ot a person with an IQ of 80 ...nevertheless, there is NO WAY one's knowledge cannot be improved by the hard work of others ....granted, there are false teachers and everyone is fallible.
The method by which the Holy Spirit teaches is by the Bible....not some mystical hope of illumination.
Example: It was only by reading a systematic theology book that I was able to the 10 to 12 various aspects of prayer scattered through the Bible together into a comprehensive unit. It would take a normal person a year (guess-ta-mate) to do the same and that assumes the person have at least normal intelligence, drive and organizational skills.



I am not saying Bible study verse by verse is not of value. I am saying that the study of the whole (systematic theology) is critical to the understanding of the bible. Systematic theology is nearly impossible for the individual because most lack the talent, bias and time. I outline the Hermeneutical Spiral above as one aspect of accummulating knowledge that one should contemplate.



LOL .... Logic (reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity) has not place when seeking truth ... this is to say God is not rational. If God is not rational then He cannot be understood. This is absurdity. When God says there were 5 fish and 12 loaves, are we to believe there could have been 52 fish and 1 loaf? Knowledge of God is an absolute requisite unto salvation. Knowledge is unattainable without logic.
Maybe this is why you have problems answering some of my syllogisms as you seem to be denying logic.
Premise 1: God says He is All Knowing
Premise 2: Don't use logic
Conclusion: No conclusion(s) are possible ...


We all are fallible. I could write books on what I get wrong ... it's just that I don't know what I got wrong.
The method the Spirit uses to teach is by knowledge via the Bible. Not mystic transference of the awareness of God through the ether. God gave my reason to accummulate knowledge of God. I think you, though well versed on the bible, handicap yourself GREATLY by not being like the Bereans who listened to others with suitable credentials and then cross checked with Scripture. You are more intelligent than most, yet you handicap yourself IMO if you rely on only your study of the Bible without the aid of God given teachers. There is NO WAY you can know more about God by just reading the Bible and not considering what others say and guiding you (granted, be on guard).
Aside: Hmmm, seeing as what I am saying is not in the Bible I have to assume you are ignoring it as it might pertain to any change.... but I like typing .....*giggle*




Agreed. And the Holy Spirit can use others that study the Bible to help us be even better. Especially, for those that are not as gifted as you .... though, there are people more gifted than you that I think you are ignoring.

Thanks for your patience and civility.

I think you were kind enough to point out the Systematic Theology book on another thread, but could you please share the title once more so I can write it down? Thanks.

 

[Edward]

For sure ... that is a given. Years of study of a subject does suggest that such a person has more knowledge than someone that has not studied the bible; you and I for example. God give us teachers. On the other hand, one should be like a Berean and verify what one hears.

Several years back I was in a heavy study phase and I realized that I had studied the scriptures a lot, but had never actually read it cover to cover. And that some day I will be standing in front of Jesus...and what if He asks me, so did you like my book? How many times did you read it?

How bad would that look to have to stand there and answer, uh never Lord? I don't want to be that guy, lol. So I read it cover to cover. It does take awhile. Reading one or two chapters per day only which allows time to meditate upon it, it took me a year to finish it. But I got a lot out of it! I got even more out f it when I read it two more times cover to cover.

And it's weird too, every time I do that I'll see new things in it and get little epiphanies and illuminations of simple things which are as if I never read that before. But I have and I know it, so that there is proof that the Holy Spirit is or teacher and on the job, leading us into all truth.

There's a bunch of good teachers on You tube. But nobody is perfect so let's not be judgmental. But a man's message either agrees with scripture or it doesn't and we are charged with verifying everything by scripture. That Book, the word of God, is our book of truth, our ruler to go by on this earth.

So it wouldn't be a good thing to neglect the reading of the scriptures every day, and completely cover to cover. Ask yourselves, Brothers & Sisters...Have I ever read the scriptures front to back?

 

[for_his_glory]

For sure ... that is a given. Years of study of a subject does suggest that such a person has more knowledge than someone that has not studied the bible; you and I for example. God give us teachers. On the other hand, one should be like a Berean and verify what one hears.


You don't need to, but you handicap yourself if you don't. In point of fact, you use the expertise of scholars every time you read the Bible. Scholars do textual criticism to ascertain from historical documents (dead sea scrolls for example) what the contents of the Bible are as well as translation from the Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic to your native language. I trust God has guided them so we have the true Bible just like I trust that God inspired the original authors.
To ignore scholarship is to SERIOUSLY LIMIT oned knowledge of God. You are an intelligent woman so your need is not as great as, say, a 6 year old ot a person with an IQ of 80 ...nevertheless, there is NO WAY one's knowledge cannot be improved by the hard work of others ....granted, there are false teachers and everyone is fallible.
The method by which the Holy Spirit teaches is by the Bible....not some mystical hope of illumination.
Example: It was only by reading a systematic theology book that I was able to the 10 to 12 various aspects of prayer scattered through the Bible together into a comprehensive unit. It would take a normal person a year (guess-ta-mate) to do the same and that assumes the person have at least normal intelligence, drive and organizational skills.



I am not saying Bible study verse by verse is not of value. I am saying that the study of the whole (systematic theology) is critical to the understanding of the bible. Systematic theology is nearly impossible for the individual because most lack the talent, bias and time. I outline the Hermeneutical Spiral above as one aspect of accummulating knowledge that one should contemplate.



LOL .... Logic (reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity) has not place when seeking truth ... this is to say God is not rational. If God is not rational then He cannot be understood. This is absurdity. When God says there were 5 fish and 12 loaves, are we to believe there could have been 52 fish and 1 loaf? Knowledge of God is an absolute requisite unto salvation. Knowledge is unattainable without logic.
Maybe this is why you have problems answering some of my syllogisms as you seem to be denying logic.
Premise 1: God says He is All Knowing
Premise 2: Don't use logic
Conclusion: No conclusion(s) are possible ...


We all are fallible. I could write books on what I get wrong ... it's just that I don't know what I got wrong.
The method the Spirit uses to teach is by knowledge via the Bible. Not mystic transference of the awareness of God through the ether. God gave my reason to accummulate knowledge of God. I think you, though well versed on the bible, handicap yourself GREATLY by not being like the Bereans who listened to others with suitable credentials and then cross checked with Scripture. You are more intelligent than most, yet you handicap yourself IMO if you rely on only your study of the Bible without the aid of God given teachers. There is NO WAY you can know more about God by just reading the Bible and not considering what others say and guiding you (granted, be on guard).
Aside: Hmmm, seeing as what I am saying is not in the Bible I have to assume you are ignoring it as it might pertain to any change.... but I like typing .....*giggle*




Agreed. And the Holy Spirit can use others that study the Bible to help us be even better. Especially, for those that are not as gifted as you .... though, there are people more gifted than you that I think you are ignoring.

Thanks for your patience and civility.

God does put others in our path to help teach us of Spiritual things of what God wants us to learn, but yet we also need to test the Spirits that are teaching us so we are not deceived into believing the lies that are out there, 1John 4:1-6. It is only the Holy Spirit working through us and in us that we will come to know truth as the Holy Spirit is our teacher that either directly teaches us or works through others to help teach us, John 14:26.

 

[humble soul]

So if you have the HS, it's like you have superpowers. Suddenly you understand the Bible better than scholars. Gotta get some of that HS, asap. Too bad they don't have HS stations like gas stations. You just fill up when you need. But the price would become high I imagine.

 

[for_his_glory]

So if you have the HS, it's like you have superpowers. Suddenly you understand the Bible better than scholars. Gotta get some of that HS, asap. Too bad they don't have HS stations like gas stations. You just fill up when you need. But the price would become high I imagine.

This shows that you have never been Spiritually born again from above nor indwelled with the Holy Spirit. Those who are not Spiritually born again are none of Christ own. John 3:5-7; 14:26; Romans 8:1-11

 

[Fastfredy0]

I think you were kind enough to point out the Systematic Theology book on another thread, but could you please share the title once more so I can write it down? Thanks.

Systematic Theology is a field of systematization of the supernatural. It is based almost wholly on one Book which is God-breathed. The Bible is to the theologian what nature is to the scientist, --a body of unorganized or only partially organized facts. It is necessary, therefore, if we are to know all the facts on any given subject for us to gather together the scattered teachings and to construct them into a logical and harmonious system. The function of systematic theology is to unfold the Bible using revelation and reason; where the former trumps the latter. It is the orderly collecting, scientifically arranging, comparing, exhibiting and defending of all facts from any and every biblical source concerning God and His works. Author Unknown

Grudem, Wayne A.. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine ... this is a good one. I think he is REFORMED. He gives, as I recall, what theologians of various denominations believe as well as his interpretation. Naturally, he favors his interpretation when there are variances. See Appendix 1 for list of "Systematic Theology" books by other authors that Grudem references. I assume these book are available for the most part on Amazon.

I've read:

1. Systematic Theology_ An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine - Wayne A. Grudem
2. John MacArthur, Richard Mayhue (general editors) - Biblical Doctrine _ a Systematic Summary of Bible Truth-Crossway (2017)
3. G. William Shedd - Dogmatic Theology_ Volume 1 (2011)
4. Horton (Reform) The-Christian-Faith-A-Systematic-Theology
5. Joel Beeke & Paul M. Smalley [Beeke, Joel] - Reformed Systematic Theology-Crossway (2019)
6. a-new-systematic-theology-of-the-christian-faith Robert Redmond
7. William Burt Pope (Arminian) - A Compendium of Christian Theology _Systematic Theology (3 volumes) 1(1889, LONDON_ WESLEYAN-METHODIST)
8. Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology . Kindle Edition.
9. James Boyce. Abstract of Systematic Theology. Kindle Edition.
10. Institutes of Christian Religion - John Calvin
11. Systematic Theology - Lewis Chafer (3 vol.) (Dispensational)
12. Systematic Theology - Robert Dabney (Dispensational)
13. Systematic Theology - Charles Finey (Arminian)
14. Frame, John M. (2013-11-03). Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief (Kindle Location 4493). P&R Publishing. Kindle Edition.
15. Systematic Theology - Charles Hodge (difficult to read)
16. Systematic Theology - Morton Smith
17. Systematic Theology - Augustus Strong
18. Systematic Theology - https://www.vincentcheung.com/books/Systematic Theology.pdf (online, Reformed)
19. Systematic Theology - Karl Barth (Reformed)
    
    #18 if free online... I think I could email some of the others. I would suggest the one by Wayne Grudem as it is current, easy to read, and does mention varying opinions on matters where there is not agreement ... you can private PM (conversation) me and give me your email and see what I can do. I also have a 1,000 page summary of it all.
    
    Appendix 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
20. Anglican (Episcopalian)
    
    
    
21. 
    
22. 1882– 92 Litton, 1– 8

1930 Thomas, xvii– xxviii, 146– 52

2. Arminian (Wesleyan or Methodist)
1875– 76 Pope, 1: 3– 32, 42– 46 1892– 94
Miley, 1: 2– 54 1940 Wiley, 1: 13– 123 1960
Purkiser, 19– 38 1983
Carter, 1: 19– 101 1987– 90
Oden, 1: 11– 14, 375– 406

3. Baptist
1767 Gill, 1: vii– xxx 1
887 Boyce, 1– 8 1907
Strong, 1– 51 1917
Mullins, 1– 136 1976– 83
Henry, 1: 13– 411; 6: 7– 34
1983– 85 Erickson, 9– 149 1987– 94
Lewis/ Demarest, 1: 13– 123 4.

Dispensational
1947 Chafer, 1: 3– 17 1949 Thiessen, 1– 20
1986 Ryrie, 9– 22 5.
Lutheran 1917– 24
Pieper, 1: 3– 190 1934
Mueller, 1– 89 6.

Reformed (or Presbyterian)
1559 Calvin, 1: 3– 33, 35– 43 (prefaces and 1.1– 2)
1724– 58 Edwards, 2: 157– 63 1861
Heppe, 1– 11, 42– 47 1871– 73
Hodge, 1: 1– 150 1878
Dabney, 133– 44 1887– 1921
Warfield, SSW, 2: 207– 320 1889
Shedd, 1: 3– 58; 3: 1– 26 1937– 66
Murray, CW, 1: 3– 8, 169– 73; CW, 4: 1– 21 1938
Berkhof, Intro., 15– 128, 170– 86 1962
Buswell, 1: 13– 26 7.

Renewal (or charismatic/ Pentecostal)
1988– 92 Williams, 1: 11– 28

Sections in Representative Roman Catholic Systematic Theologies
1. Roman Catholic: Traditional
1955 Ott, 1– 10
2. Roman Catholic: Post-Vatican II
1980 McBrien, 1: 3– 78, 183– 200

 

[daninthelionsden]

Systematic Theology is a field of systematization of the supernatural. It is based almost wholly on one Book which is God-breathed. The Bible is to the theologian what nature is to the scientist, --a body of unorganized or only partially organized facts. It is necessary, therefore, if we are to know all the facts on any given subject for us to gather together the scattered teachings and to construct them into a logical and harmonious system. The function of systematic theology is to unfold the Bible using revelation and reason; where the former trumps the latter. It is the orderly collecting, scientifically arranging, comparing, exhibiting and defending of all facts from any and every biblical source concerning God and His works. Author Unknown

Grudem, Wayne A.. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine ... this is a good one. I think he is REFORMED. He gives, as I recall, what theologians of various denominations believe as well as his interpretation. Naturally, he favors his interpretation when there are variances. See Appendix 1 for list of "Systematic Theology" books by other authors that Grudem references. I assume these book are available for the most part on Amazon.

I've read:

1. Systematic Theology_ An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine - Wayne A. Grudem
2. John MacArthur, Richard Mayhue (general editors) - Biblical Doctrine _ a Systematic Summary of Bible Truth-Crossway (2017)
3. G. William Shedd - Dogmatic Theology_ Volume 1 (2011)
4. Horton (Reform) The-Christian-Faith-A-Systematic-Theology
5. Joel Beeke & Paul M. Smalley [Beeke, Joel] - Reformed Systematic Theology-Crossway (2019)
6. a-new-systematic-theology-of-the-christian-faith Robert Redmond
7. William Burt Pope (Arminian) - A Compendium of Christian Theology _Systematic Theology (3 volumes) 1(1889, LONDON_ WESLEYAN-METHODIST)
8. Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology . Kindle Edition.
9. James Boyce. Abstract of Systematic Theology. Kindle Edition.
10. Institutes of Christian Religion - John Calvin
11. Systematic Theology - Lewis Chafer (3 vol.) (Dispensational)
12. Systematic Theology - Robert Dabney (Dispensational)
13. Systematic Theology - Charles Finey (Arminian)
14. Frame, John M. (2013-11-03). Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief (Kindle Location 4493). P&R Publishing. Kindle Edition.
15. Systematic Theology - Charles Hodge (difficult to read)
16. Systematic Theology - Morton Smith
17. Systematic Theology - Augustus Strong
18. Systematic Theology - https://www.vincentcheung.com/books/Systematic Theology.pdf (online, Reformed)
19. Systematic Theology - Karl Barth (Reformed)
    
    #18 if free online... I think I could email some of the others. I would suggest the one by Wayne Grudem as it is current, easy to read, and does mention varying opinions on matters where there is not agreement ... you can private PM (conversation) me and give me your email and see what I can do. I also have a 1,000 page summary of it all.
    
    Appendix 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
20. Anglican (Episcopalian)
    
    
    
21. 
    
22. 1882– 92 Litton, 1– 8

1930 Thomas, xvii– xxviii, 146– 52

2. Arminian (Wesleyan or Methodist)
1875– 76 Pope, 1: 3– 32, 42– 46 1892– 94
Miley, 1: 2– 54 1940 Wiley, 1: 13– 123 1960
Purkiser, 19– 38 1983
Carter, 1: 19– 101 1987– 90
Oden, 1: 11– 14, 375– 406

3. Baptist
1767 Gill, 1: vii– xxx 1
887 Boyce, 1– 8 1907
Strong, 1– 51 1917
Mullins, 1– 136 1976– 83
Henry, 1: 13– 411; 6: 7– 34
1983– 85 Erickson, 9– 149 1987– 94
Lewis/ Demarest, 1: 13– 123 4.

Dispensational
1947 Chafer, 1: 3– 17 1949 Thiessen, 1– 20
1986 Ryrie, 9– 22 5.
Lutheran 1917– 24
Pieper, 1: 3– 190 1934
Mueller, 1– 89 6.

Reformed (or Presbyterian)
1559 Calvin, 1: 3– 33, 35– 43 (prefaces and 1.1– 2)
1724– 58 Edwards, 2: 157– 63 1861
Heppe, 1– 11, 42– 47 1871– 73
Hodge, 1: 1– 150 1878
Dabney, 133– 44 1887– 1921
Warfield, SSW, 2: 207– 320 1889
Shedd, 1: 3– 58; 3: 1– 26 1937– 66
Murray, CW, 1: 3– 8, 169– 73; CW, 4: 1– 21 1938
Berkhof, Intro., 15– 128, 170– 86 1962
Buswell, 1: 13– 26 7.

Renewal (or charismatic/ Pentecostal)
1988– 92 Williams, 1: 11– 28

Sections in Representative Roman Catholic Systematic Theologies
1. Roman Catholic: Traditional
1955 Ott, 1– 10
2. Roman Catholic: Post-Vatican II
1980 McBrien, 1: 3– 78, 183– 200

Wow. I'll look for the Introduction one by Grudem, Thanks much.

 

[daninthelionsden]

Several years back I was in a heavy study phase and I realized that I had studied the scriptures a lot, but had never actually read it cover to cover. And that some day I will be standing in front of Jesus...and what if He asks me, so did you like my book? How many times did you read it?

How bad would that look to have to stand there and answer, uh never Lord? I don't want to be that guy, lol. So I read it cover to cover. It does take awhile. Reading one or two chapters per day only which allows time to meditate upon it, it took me a year to finish it. But I got a lot out of it! I got even more out f it when I read it two more times cover to cover.

And it's weird too, every time I do that I'll see new things in it and get little epiphanies and illuminations of simple things which are as if I never read that before. But I have and I know it, so that there is proof that the Holy Spirit is or teacher and on the job, leading us into all truth.

There's a bunch of good teachers on You tube. But nobody is perfect so let's not be judgmental. But a man's message either agrees with scripture or it doesn't and we are charged with verifying everything by scripture. That Book, the word of God, is our book of truth, our ruler to go by on this earth.

So it wouldn't be a good thing to neglect the reading of the scriptures every day, and completely cover to cover. Ask yourselves, Brothers & Sisters...Have I ever read the scriptures front to back?

Hopefully He asks "How well did you live my Book?"

 

[Fastfredy0]

God does put others in our path to help teach us of Spiritual things of what God wants us to learn, but yet we also need to test the Spirits that are teaching us so we are not deceived into believing the lies that are out there, 1John 4:1-6.

Agreed ...
I am not sure what you mean by: "we test the Spirits" ... IMO, "we test the Spirits" is done by referring to Scripture. Using Systematic Theology you can organize Scripture. Thus one would have the TESTING OF THE SPIRITS utilizing an organized mindset with multiple scriptural references for validation.

Holy Spirit working through us and in us that we will come to know truth as the Holy Spirit is our teacher that either directly teaches us or works through others to help teach us, John 14:26.

Agreed. IMO the teaching of the Spirit only applies to Christians (1 Cor. 2:14) and the Bible is the source of the Spirit's teaching almost exclusively via the transfer of God's knowledge. I.E. No mysticism, but meditation upon scripture

 

[JLB]

Systematic Theology is a field of systematization of the supernatural. It is based almost wholly on one Book which is God-breathed. The Bible is to the theologian what nature is to the scientist, --a body of unorganized or only partially organized facts. It is necessary, therefore, if we are to know all the facts on any given subject for us to gather together the scattered teachings and to construct them into a logical and harmonious system. The function of systematic theology is to unfold the Bible using revelation and reason; where the former trumps the latter. It is the orderly collecting, scientifically arranging, comparing, exhibiting and defending of all facts from any and every biblical source concerning God and His works. Author Unknown

Grudem, Wayne A.. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine ... this is a good one. I think he is REFORMED. He gives, as I recall, what theologians of various denominations believe as well as his interpretation. Naturally, he favors his interpretation when there are variances. See Appendix 1 for list of "Systematic Theology" books by other authors that Grudem references. I assume these book are available for the most part on Amazon.

I've read:

1. Systematic Theology_ An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine - Wayne A. Grudem
2. John MacArthur, Richard Mayhue (general editors) - Biblical Doctrine _ a Systematic Summary of Bible Truth-Crossway (2017)
3. G. William Shedd - Dogmatic Theology_ Volume 1 (2011)
4. Horton (Reform) The-Christian-Faith-A-Systematic-Theology
5. Joel Beeke & Paul M. Smalley [Beeke, Joel] - Reformed Systematic Theology-Crossway (2019)
6. a-new-systematic-theology-of-the-christian-faith Robert Redmond
7. William Burt Pope (Arminian) - A Compendium of Christian Theology _Systematic Theology (3 volumes) 1(1889, LONDON_ WESLEYAN-METHODIST)
8. Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology . Kindle Edition.
9. James Boyce. Abstract of Systematic Theology. Kindle Edition.
10. Institutes of Christian Religion - John Calvin
11. Systematic Theology - Lewis Chafer (3 vol.) (Dispensational)
12. Systematic Theology - Robert Dabney (Dispensational)
13. Systematic Theology - Charles Finey (Arminian)
14. Frame, John M. (2013-11-03). Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief (Kindle Location 4493). P&R Publishing. Kindle Edition.
15. Systematic Theology - Charles Hodge (difficult to read)
16. Systematic Theology - Morton Smith
17. Systematic Theology - Augustus Strong
18. Systematic Theology - https://www.vincentcheung.com/books/Systematic Theology.pdf (online, Reformed)
19. Systematic Theology - Karl Barth (Reformed)
    
    #18 if free online... I think I could email some of the others. I would suggest the one by Wayne Grudem as it is current, easy to read, and does mention varying opinions on matters where there is not agreement ... you can private PM (conversation) me and give me your email and see what I can do. I also have a 1,000 page summary of it all.
    
    Appendix 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
20. Anglican (Episcopalian)
    
    
    
21. 
    
22. 1882– 92 Litton, 1– 8

1930 Thomas, xvii– xxviii, 146– 52

2. Arminian (Wesleyan or Methodist)
1875– 76 Pope, 1: 3– 32, 42– 46 1892– 94
Miley, 1: 2– 54 1940 Wiley, 1: 13– 123 1960
Purkiser, 19– 38 1983
Carter, 1: 19– 101 1987– 90
Oden, 1: 11– 14, 375– 406

3. Baptist
1767 Gill, 1: vii– xxx 1
887 Boyce, 1– 8 1907
Strong, 1– 51 1917
Mullins, 1– 136 1976– 83
Henry, 1: 13– 411; 6: 7– 34
1983– 85 Erickson, 9– 149 1987– 94
Lewis/ Demarest, 1: 13– 123 4.

Dispensational
1947 Chafer, 1: 3– 17 1949 Thiessen, 1– 20
1986 Ryrie, 9– 22 5.
Lutheran 1917– 24
Pieper, 1: 3– 190 1934
Mueller, 1– 89 6.

Reformed (or Presbyterian)
1559 Calvin, 1: 3– 33, 35– 43 (prefaces and 1.1– 2)
1724– 58 Edwards, 2: 157– 63 1861
Heppe, 1– 11, 42– 47 1871– 73
Hodge, 1: 1– 150 1878
Dabney, 133– 44 1887– 1921
Warfield, SSW, 2: 207– 320 1889
Shedd, 1: 3– 58; 3: 1– 26 1937– 66
Murray, CW, 1: 3– 8, 169– 73; CW, 4: 1– 21 1938
Berkhof, Intro., 15– 128, 170– 86 1962
Buswell, 1: 13– 26 7.

Renewal (or charismatic/ Pentecostal)
1988– 92 Williams, 1: 11– 28

Sections in Representative Roman Catholic Systematic Theologies
1. Roman Catholic: Traditional
1955 Ott, 1– 10
2. Roman Catholic: Post-Vatican II
1980 McBrien, 1: 3– 78, 183– 200

10 Strengths and Dangers of Systematic Theology.

1. It can enrich your understanding of a text (but also distort it).
2. It can give you an accurate theological grid (or an inaccurate one).
3. It can precisely identify doctrinal tensions (or wrongly resolve them).
4. It can help you harmonize texts (but lead you to develop a “canon within the canon”)
5. It can helpfully address contemporary issues (but overlook the text because it is further removed from it).
6. It can draw necessary and helpful conclusions from texts (or irresponsibly speculate).
7. It can efficiently assemble what the whole Bible teaches (but irresponsibly prooftext the Bible).
8. It can help you refute error (but it may be erroneous).
9. It can help you understand what the whole Bible teaches on a particular topic (but get distracted by related disciplines).
10. It can help you do theological triage (but it does not automatically churn out the right answer).

https://www.challies.com/articles/10-strengths-and-10-dangers-of-systematic-theology/



Like any commentary you get the slant of the authors beliefs.





JLB

 

[humble soul]

This shows that you have never been Spiritually born again from above nor indwelled with the Holy Spirit. Those who are not Spiritually born again are none of Christ own. John 3:5-7; 14:26; Romans 8:1-11

I think I'm bored again. Let me check .

 

[Fastfredy0]

1. It can enrich your understanding of a text (but also distort it).
2. It can give you an accurate theological grid (or an inaccurate one).
3. It can precisely identify doctrinal tensions (or wrongly resolve them).
4. It can help you harmonize texts (but lead you to develop a “canon within the canon”)
5. It can helpfully address contemporary issues (but overlook the text because it is further removed from it).
6. It can draw necessary and helpful conclusions from texts (or irresponsibly speculate).
7. It can efficiently assemble what the whole Bible teaches (but irresponsibly prooftext the Bible).
8. It can help you refute error (but it may be erroneous).
9. It can help you understand what the whole Bible teaches on a particular topic (but get distracted by related disciplines).
10. It can help you do theological triage (but it does not automatically churn out the right answer).

Agreed (for once) ... lol

Similarly, the10 Strengths and Dangers of studying the bible solely on one's own.

1. It can enrich your understanding of a text (but also distort it).
2. It can give you an accurate theological grid (or an inaccurate one).
3. It can precisely identify doctrinal tensions (or wrongly resolve them).
4. It can help you harmonize texts (but lead you to develop a “canon within the canon”)
5. It can helpfully address contemporary issues (but overlook the text because it is further removed from it).
6. It can draw necessary and helpful conclusions from texts (or irresponsibly speculate).
7. It can efficiently assemble what the whole Bible teaches (but irresponsibly proof text the Bible).
8. It can help you refute error (but it may be erroneous).
9. It can help you understand what the whole Bible teaches on a particular topic (but get distracted by related disciplines).
10. It can help you do theological triage (but it does not automatically churn out the right answer).

So when it comes to the question of studying God's word by:
1) oneself exclusively or
2) with the help of others (Systematic Theology being part of that help)
We have a draw at this point

Let's break the draw
God says there is wisdom in the console of others (Proverbs 11:14; Proverbs 15:22; Proverbs 24:6). Thus, God has spoken and favors Systematic Theology (council of many) as opposed to exclusive self study of the bible alone.

Ephesians 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers. Thus, God has spoken and favors Systematic Theology (the council of many) as opposed to the exclusive self study of the bible alone.

Note: It is a hypocritical contradiction to advise Christians to not consider the council of many and yet offer one's council.

It is foolish to rely on oneself to the exclusion of others to learn of God if one is:

• illiterate
• an imbecile
• very young
• not so inclined
• doesn't have time
• wants to be efficient; thus further enhancing the knowledge of God

The story of the Ethiopian eunuch is an example. He has the scriptures but can't understand it. Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” Does Philip say, well figure it out on your own, that's the best way". No, Philip is an expert and guides him. Same with the Berean's who listened and the WISELY consulted scripture to see if what they heard was verifiable/true.

Conclusion: If you disregard the 10s of thousands of hours men of God have devoted to the organization of the Bible topically (Systematic Theology) you are doing yourself a great disservice. Now you points are well taken ... men are fallible and Systematic Theology is therefore fallible. Therefore, to minimize fallibility one should read multiple Systematic Theology books and compare the thoughts of experts a(Proverbs 11:14; Proverbs 15:22; Proverbs 24:6) and always compare their thoughts to scripture. If they don't use scripture then ignore what they say.

To the degree that one does not take advantage of God's teachers one's knowledge of God is vastly inferior to another's knowledge of God given all other things being equal. If one does not believe in studying the council of others, then one is a hypocrite to council others.
Premise 1: Don't rely on the council of others for biblical knowledge
Premise 2: Listen to someone when they say don't listen to the council of other for biblical knowledge
Conclusion: A contradiction ... you cannot listen to someone when I say don't listen to them

 

[Fastfredy0]

The Benefits of Systematic Theology
Christianity is system of thought summarized and contained in a series of doctrines that are arranged and considered in what we call systematic theology. These doctrines are biblically and logically related such that any topic can be, and often must be, discussed in relation to other topics. In fact, one way for a believer to comprehend truth and to guard against error is to do precisely that –that is, to learn each biblical doctrine itself as well as its relation to all other doctrines. Then, since they are related in such a manner that the central principles necessitate or authenticate all the others, and that all of them affirm or justify one another, as a result of grasping these doctrines as a system, each one gains greater depth and security in the Christian's thinking. When placed in the context of a system, the understanding of one doctrine enhances and fortifies the understanding of all others. And there is a similar benefit when Christianity is advanced and defended as a system.

Therefore, systematic theology is paramount –not just beneficial, but essential and necessary –to spiritual development and church operation. Of course, it is just a formal term to denote a comprehensive, interrelated, and coherent understanding of biblical doctrines. Vincent Cheung – Commentary on Colossians

It is NOT POSSIBLE for 95%+ of the population to correlate God's word systematically, thus ensuring a cohesive, non contradictory whole. (granted, some debate will always exist as one gets deeper into the minutia.) (Consider: Hermeneutical Spiral and Individual Bias)

 

[daninthelionsden]

The Benefits of Systematic Theology
Christianity is system of thought summarized and contained in a series of doctrines that are arranged and considered in what we call systematic theology. These doctrines are biblically and logically related such that any topic can be, and often must be, discussed in relation to other topics. In fact, one way for a believer to comprehend truth and to guard against error is to do precisely that –that is, to learn each biblical doctrine itself as well as its relation to all other doctrines. Then, since they are related in such a manner that the central principles necessitate or authenticate all the others, and that all of them affirm or justify one another, as a result of grasping these doctrines as a system, each one gains greater depth and security in the Christian's thinking. When placed in the context of a system, the understanding of one doctrine enhances and fortifies the understanding of all others. And there is a similar benefit when Christianity is advanced and defended as a system.

Therefore, systematic theology is paramount –not just beneficial, but essential and necessary –to spiritual development and church operation. Of course, it is just a formal term to denote a comprehensive, interrelated, and coherent understanding of biblical doctrines. Vincent Cheung – Commentary on Colossians

It is NOT POSSIBLE for 95%+ of the population to correlate God's word systematically, thus ensuring a cohesive, non contradictory whole. (granted, some debate will always exist as one gets deeper into the minutia.) (Consider: Hermeneutical Spiral and Individual Bias)

There are some verses that I am at odds with any known theology/commentary/teaching by any of the theologians I've encountered, but I still feel I am correct in my understanding of Matt 11:11/12.

 

[Fastfredy0]

There are some verses that I am at odds with any known theology/commentary/teaching by any of the theologians

Usually not a good thing I suppose.

I still feel I am correct in my understanding of Matt 11:11/12.

O.K., I'll bite. What's your opinion.
(seems like relatively innocuous verses ... phew)

 

[for_his_glory]

I think I'm bored again. Let me check .

I think you need to study your Bible, especially the book of John and you would not be bored anymore.