Latest / Reformed Thinking / Introduction to Biblical Theology

Transcript

Introduction to Biblical Theology · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Welcome to reform thinking. It's good to be here.
0:02
So if you're tuning in, you're probably looking to get a
0:05
clearer picture of, you know, the basic structure of
0:08
theological study. Right, and not just as some
0:12
abstract academic subject. No, not at all.
0:15
We're talking about it as something absolutely necessary
0:17
for spiritual health, for real growth.
0:20
That's right. And today we're going to try to
0:23
bring some real clarity to that. We want to help you sort through
0:26
these different disciplines that you know, they can sound alike,
0:29
but they actually do very different jobs.
0:31
It's like having different tools for different parts of the
0:33
construction. A great way to put it.
0:35
Think about the big distinction we need to make right from the
0:38
start, studying the timeline of how God revealed truth.
0:42
That's the process. OK, the process.
0:44
Versus compiling a a complete system of doctrine for today the
0:48
final product. The process versus the product.
0:51
Right. And by the time we finish this
0:53
deep dive, you should have a really solid map of how the
0:56
church organizes truth and maybe more critically, why that
0:59
structure is so vital for, well, for avoiding some serious
1:03
spiritual dangers. That really sets the stage.
1:05
Well, before we get into the methods themselves, the five
1:09
lenses we're going to look at, we have to start with the why.
1:13
Why is this detailed, careful ursuit of doctrine so necessary?
1:18
I mean, there's a common idea out there that theology is just
1:22
for academics, for pastors. And that's a dangerous idea, a
1:25
really dangerous misconception. This is for every single
1:29
believer. So where does that need come
1:31
from? Well, the source material we're
1:32
drawing from makes a very strong point here.
1:34
It talks about the spiritual danger of immaturity.
1:37
It's a critique that, you know, many believers are just stalled
1:41
at the very basics. Yeah.
1:43
It pulls directly from the book of Hebrews, where the author is,
1:47
let's say, frustrated with his readers.
1:48
He tells them they've become dull of hearing.
1:51
They still need milk when they should have been ready for solid
1:54
food a long time ago. And that kind of stagnation, it
1:57
isn't harmless, is it? Yeah.
1:59
It's the root cause of that kind of Arrested Development.
2:02
The source identifies it as a failure of really the intellect
2:06
and the will. Things like apathy, just simple
2:08
inattention or kind of spiritual energy just coasting and.
2:13
What are the consequences of that?
2:15
They're serious. When spiritual growth gets
2:17
stunted like that, believers don't develop what the text
2:20
calls trained powers of discernment.
2:22
The ability to distinguish. Correct.
2:25
They haven't disciplined their minds to handle real,
2:28
substantial truths, and the result is they're left unable to
2:32
distinguish good from evil when it really counts.
2:35
So when complex cultural issues come up or you have some new
2:38
teaching appears in the church. They're left vulnerable.
2:41
If you don't have that refined ability to discern, you're
2:44
basically navigating the spiritual world as a perpetual
2:46
infant, and you're likely to accept whatever just sounds good
2:50
or feels right at the moment. And if you're always an infant,
2:53
you can't fulfill one of the most basic commands.
2:55
The mandate for discipleship. A duty for all of us.
2:58
For every Christian. Yes, we're all called to be
3:00
disciple makers, to be teachers of the truth in some capacity.
3:04
But the source is blunt. Someone who is unskilled and
3:08
doctoring cannot possibly be a capable teacher.
3:11
You can't give what you don't have.
3:12
You really can't. You have to wrestle with the
3:14
deep truths yourself before you can even begin to guide someone
3:18
else through them. And if you try to do it without
3:21
that doctrinal substance, what's left?
3:23
Well, the material calls any religious activity that's left
3:26
mere pretense. It might look like you're doing
3:28
a lot, it might look like service, but it's missing the
3:31
core, the intellectual clarity needed to guide the next
3:35
generation well. I think the argument about
3:37
doctrine being a form of protection is, for me, one of
3:40
the most compelling. It keeps us out of these two
3:43
major spiritual ditches. It does, and those ditches are
3:46
both rooted in ignorance, not in too much study.
3:49
The handbook says that religious fervor without knowledge is
3:53
spiritually deadly. Deadly.
3:55
That's a strong word. It is when you leave clear
3:58
anchor doctrine behind. People tend to go one of two
4:00
ways. The first extreme is legalism,
4:03
and the historical poster child for this, of course, is the
4:06
Pharisees. Their mistake wasn't that they
4:08
studied the Scriptures too much, Not at all.
4:10
It was that they failed to apply it correctly.
4:13
So what was their error then? Romans chapter 10 pinpoints it.
4:16
It says they had zeal without knowledge and that unchecked
4:20
zeal it just leads straight into a legalistic self-righteous kind
4:24
of religion. A cold external checklist of
4:27
rules. So legalism is the ditch on one
4:30
side of the road all about works without a real grasp of grace?
4:34
What's the ditch on the other side?
4:36
The opposite error? Licentiousness.
4:38
This is what happens when someone takes the wonderful
4:40
doctrine of God's grace, but they separate it from God's
4:43
holiness and our responsibility. They twist grace into a license
4:47
to do whatever they want. Using grace as a cover for
4:50
carelessness. That's it.
4:52
And the source material says something pretty stark here.
4:54
It warns that both of these extremes, legalism and
4:57
licentiousness, are equally deadly.
5:00
They are as dangerous as rankist Pagan superstition.
5:03
So sound doctrine is what keeps us on the road.
5:06
It's the anchor that holds us in that biblical balance between
5:10
God's perfect holiness and his incredible grace.
5:14
It provides that necessary tension.
5:16
Which brings us right to the problem we see so much today,
5:19
the flaw of superficiality. It feels like huge parts of the
5:23
modern church have just decided to reject that need for rigor
5:28
and for balance. There's a very pointed criticism
5:30
in the sources about this that many people today have a
5:33
blithely superficial approach to theology.
5:36
Just happy go lucky. About it?
5:37
Blithely superficial. I like that phrasing.
5:39
It's good, isn't it? The detailed, careful work of
5:42
getting doctrine right. What we're talking about today
5:44
is often just dismissed. It's seen as a pedantic concern.
5:48
You know, something that just gets in the way of church unity
5:50
or being relevant. But that's a huge mistake.
5:53
If you reject precision, you're just opening the door for
5:56
confusion and for error. Of course, the sources really
5:59
lament that there's this cultural preference now for
6:01
novelty, human cleverness and political correctness over just
6:05
being faithful to the Bible. The priorities have shifted.
6:08
They really have. Style gets put ahead of
6:10
substance. Sentimentality and style are
6:13
often treated as more authoritative than the actual
6:15
meaning of Scripture, and that is a massive departure from how
6:18
the Church has historically approached these things.
6:21
So to guard against all that drift, we have to get back to
6:25
the one non negotiable starting point for all our beliefs.
6:29
The starting point has to be the inspiration and the authority of
6:31
Scripture. It has to be the sources are
6:34
very clear. If you reject biblical
6:36
inerrancy, the idea that the Bible is completely true and
6:40
everything it affirms you will inevitably lead to theological
6:44
error. It's a domino effect.
6:45
It is if the foundational text can be questioned.
6:48
If it's not seen as totally truthful, then every single
6:52
doctrine you build on top of it becomes shaky, subjective.
6:55
You've lost your objective standard.
6:57
And our ultimate example for holding this high view of
6:59
Scripture is Christ himself. He is the pattern he affirmed
7:02
the inspiration of the very words of Scripture down to the
7:05
smallest details. His example is the one we have
7:07
to follow to establish our own doctrinal beliefs.
7:10
So it all comes back to the text.
7:12
It all comes back to exegesis, that detailed analysis, drawing
7:17
the meaning out of the text itself.
7:19
That's the work that anchors every single doctrine into that
7:22
bedrock. Without that precise objective
7:25
anchor, the whole structure just it can't stand.
7:30
OK, that grounding an exegesis that makes perfect sense.
7:34
And to fight back against that theological superficiality we
7:36
were just talking about, we have to understand the structure of
7:39
deep theological study, right? And this is where these five
7:42
distinct lenses come in. They cover the whole spectrum of
7:45
how we investigate theology. You can think of them as the the
7:49
essential tools in a theologians toolkit.
7:51
Each one is designed for a very specific job related to
7:54
understanding God's revelation. What's the first tool?
7:57
The one everything else is built on.
7:58
The first one, the one that's most tied to historical analysis
8:01
and exegesis, is biblical theology.
8:04
Its nature is strictly exegetical and historical.
8:07
OK, exegetical and historical. What does that mean in practice?
8:10
It means its main goal is to investigate the historically
8:13
conditioned progress of the self revelation of God.
8:16
So it's about the process. It's all about the process.
8:19
It wants to understand how God revealed himself not in one big
8:23
data dump, but piece meal. You know, portion by portion all
8:27
throughout history. So biblical.
8:29
Theology is basically like tracking the development of a
8:32
certain truth as it unfolds chronologically through the
8:34
Bible. You've got it.
8:36
It looks at the theology of specific eras, like the Noahic
8:39
Covenant or the Abrahamic period.
8:42
Or it can focus on the writings of one person, like Pauline
8:45
theology or Yohanian theology. It's totally concerned with the
8:49
context and the progression of truth as it was first revealed
8:52
to its original audience. It keeps us honest historically.
8:56
OK, that's tool #1 let's pick up the next one.
8:58
Systematic theology. This is the one I think most
9:01
people picture when they hear the word theology.
9:03
It is, and it's very different. Systematic theology is
9:06
categorical and philosophical in its approach.
9:09
Categorical and philosophical. Meaning it has a much wider
9:12
scope and a totally different aim.
9:14
Its job is to pull together truth not just from the entire
9:17
Bible, which it does, but also from sources outside of
9:20
Scripture, general revelation, what we can learn from nature,
9:23
from science, from history. It takes all of that information
9:27
and it organizes it into a comprehensive, coherent
9:30
worldview. It covers all the big topics
9:34
from the doctrine of God all the way to the doctrine of the End
9:37
times. So if biblical theology traces
9:39
the process, how a doctrine was revealed step by step.
9:42
Then systematic theology builds the product, the final unified
9:46
statement of truth. I like that distinction process
9:49
and product. It's helpful.
9:50
Systematic theology asks what is ultimately true about any given
9:54
doctrine, say, the nature of Christ, from our viewpoint
9:57
today, putting all the pieces of revelation together into one
10:00
statement. And it adds that philosophical
10:02
layer, trying to explain why something is true, often
10:05
connecting the biblical data with truths we can see from
10:08
creation. OK, so that's BT and St. moving
10:12
on to the third tool, historical theology.
10:14
This one feels a bit like being an archivist.
10:16
That's a good way to see it. Historical theology tracks how
10:19
doctrines have been understood, debated, and developed over the
10:23
entire 2000 year history of the Church.
10:25
So it's like looking at the case law and.
10:26
That's the perfect analogy. It's like studying legal
10:29
precedent. How has the foundational
10:31
document Scripture been interpreted by the courts?
10:34
You know, the church councils, the leading theologians down
10:37
through the centuries. It shows us where the consensus
10:39
has been and also where the church has gone wrong in the
10:42
past. And that leads us right into
10:43
tool #4 dogmatic theology. If historical theology is the
10:48
precedent, what's dogmatic theology?
10:51
Dogmatic theology is very close to systematic, but it's more
10:54
specific. It deals with the officially
10:57
settled tenets, the creeds, the Confessions of a particular
11:01
faith tradition. So the final rulings.
11:03
Right. If historical theology is the
11:05
precedent, dogmatic theology is like the Supreme Court rulings
11:09
for our specific tradition. These are the positions
11:12
considered binding and authoritative within that
11:14
system, like our own reliance on the Westminster Confession.
11:17
OK, makes sense. And finally #5 we have
11:20
contemporary theology. This is where we apply all that
11:23
historical work to what's happening right now.
11:25
This is where the rubber meets the road, as they say.
11:28
This field looks at the current theological trends, the new
11:32
movements, the immediate issues that are popping up in the
11:35
modern world. It forces us to take those
11:38
established doctrines, the dogmatics and systematics, and
11:42
apply them to challenges the reformers could have never even
11:44
imagined. We're.
11:46
Definitely going to come back to the big ones like post modernism
11:48
later, but what are some of the other specific issues this area
11:52
has to wrestle with? Well, the sources list several
11:54
key debates. There's openness theology, which
11:58
questions God's complete knowledge of the future.
12:00
There's feminism, which brings up debates over the roles of
12:03
women in the home and in church leadership.
12:05
There's Dominion theology, which is all about the right level of
12:09
Christian political involvement. And the charismatic?
12:12
Movement and various charismatic issues, yeah, including the
12:15
health and wealth doctrines of prosperity theology.
12:18
So contemporary theology has to use the other 4 disciplines to
12:21
carefully evaluate all these new claims.
12:23
OK, since biblical theology and systematic theology are the two
12:27
big ones and people mix them up all the time, we really need to
12:30
dig into their relationship. Specifically why BT isn't just
12:35
an elective, but it's the required first step for good St.
12:39
It's. So critical.
12:40
Let's start with the difference in their scope and their
12:42
sources. Go ahead.
12:43
Biblical theology is very restrictive.
12:46
It limits its study to Scripture and the historical context of
12:49
the Bible alone. That's it.
12:51
It's all about looking at the parts of Scripture in isolation
12:55
first, say the theology of the book of Romans before you try to
12:58
combine them. But systematic theology, by its
13:00
very nature, has to have a much broader view.
13:03
It does. Systematic theology pulls from
13:05
the whole of Scripture, of course, but it also, and this is
13:08
key, it brings in truth from outside sources.
13:11
It uses philosophy, history, science, general revelation,
13:15
anything that helps correlate all truth into one big
13:19
comprehensive system. It's aiming for a unified
13:21
worldview. Right, one that honors the
13:23
biblical data but also applies it to our modern context.
13:26
This brings us back to that process versus product idea.
13:29
I think we need to hit that again for the listener.
13:32
It's the core distinction. Biblical theology is all about
13:35
tracing the process of revelation, the path it took.
13:38
It follows that historically conditioned progress of God
13:42
revealing Himself, recognizing that God met people where they
13:45
were in history and gave them truth gradually in layers.
13:50
And systematic theology then takes all those layers, all
13:53
those historical developments, and combines them.
13:55
To produce the product, the final result, the statement of
13:59
truth that stands for us today, A.
14:01
Good way to frame it might be by the questions each one asks.
14:04
That's a great idea. Biblical theology is trying to
14:07
figure out what the biblical writer said in their specific
14:09
context. It's strict exegesis.
14:12
Systematic theology then builds on that.
14:14
It tries to explain why something is true.
14:16
It often adds A philosophical defense or a full discussion
14:19
that addresses modern objections and questions.
14:21
The sequence here is absolutely key, isn't it?
14:24
And it seems like this is where a lot of churches can go wrong
14:27
today. Why is it so risky to just jump
14:30
from reading a verse to making a systematic statement without
14:34
that bridge of biblical theology in between?
14:36
The danger is you turn the Bible into a flat collection of proof
14:39
texts. The proper order is always
14:41
exegesis, then biblical theology, then systematic
14:45
theology. Exegesis.
14:46
Right ROBT. Right RST.
14:48
Always. Biblical theology is that
14:51
preliminary defensive step. It forces the systematic
14:54
theologian to respect the specific historical situation a
14:58
revelation was given in. If you skip that step, you might
15:01
take a verse written to ancient Israel about the Temple and just
15:04
apply it straight to a 21st century church.
15:07
Without considering all the revelation that's happened in
15:09
between. You'd be losing all the context.
15:11
BT saves St. from that error. Let's dig a little deeper into
15:15
the method of biblical theology itself, because it has to
15:19
organize things differently for the Old and New Testaments,
15:21
right? The time spans are so different.
15:23
They are. The Old Testament covers
15:24
thousands of years of history. It's a long, progressive
15:27
revelation. So biblical theologians see a
15:30
need to find a center or unifying theme to connect all
15:33
those centuries of progress. Like a central plot line for the
15:36
whole drama. That's a good way of thinking
15:38
about it. So what are the scholarly
15:40
proposals for what that unifying theme is?
15:43
The sources mentioned three big ones.
15:45
They do. Walter Pizer argues the center
15:48
is promise. He sees God's plan being driven
15:52
by the fulfillment of his covenants and oaths.
15:55
Then Elmer Martin suggests it's God's design, focusing on the
15:58
overall purpose being worked out through history.
16:01
And Eugene Merrill says the center is Kingdom.
16:04
Seeing the establishment of God's rule is the main theme.
16:07
And why does it matter which one you pick?
16:09
It changes your perspective. If you center the Old Testament
16:13
on Kingdom, you're going to read the prophets and historical
16:16
books with an eye toward political rule and land.
16:19
If you center it on promise, you might focus more on the
16:21
spiritual and salvific side of things, but either way, the goal
16:25
is to trace the unfolding of that theme through all the
16:28
different eras. Now the New Testament is a whole
16:30
different story. It was all written in less than
16:32
50 years. So how does biblical theology
16:35
handle the NT? Right.
16:37
You can't focus on vast historical eras, so for the New
16:40
Testament, BT focuses on the distinct viewpoints of the
16:43
individual authors. So Pauline theology, Petrine
16:47
theology, Yohanian theology. Exactly this lets us respect
16:51
what the source calls the human factor in inspiration.
16:55
Can you unpack that a little? The human factor?
16:57
That can sound tricky when we're talking about inspired
17:00
scripture. Sure, it just means we
17:01
acknowledge that God used the specific background around the
17:04
personality, the intellectual style of the human author, but
17:08
without compromising the truth of the final product.
17:11
So for example. For example, Matthew was writing
17:14
to a Jewish audience, so he focuses heavily on Jesus as the
17:18
fulfillment of Old Testament messianic prophecy.
17:21
Paul, on the other hand, was writing mostly to Gentiles, so
17:24
he structures his arguments around justification by faith
17:27
and how the New Covenant applies to the whole world.
17:30
So we study those different emphases.
17:31
We study them as legitimate expressions of God's one truth,
17:35
but tailored to specific audiences.
17:38
We don't just treat them all as a flat, monolithic list of proof
17:40
texts. OK, our source material comes
17:43
from a specific tradition, and it's very clear about what it
17:47
sees as the defining distinction of Reformed theology.
17:50
We often think of the five points of Calvinism, but the
17:53
handbook is clear that it's actually covenant theology that
17:56
sets this system apart from others.
17:58
Especially from dispensationalism, that's the
18:01
main contrast drawn. Right.
18:02
So covenant theology is the big framework, the scaffolding for
18:06
how to interpret the whole Bible.
18:08
That's it. It's this systematic approach to
18:10
the covenants that creates the primary split between Reformed
18:13
theology and dispensationalism. And that split really comes down
18:17
to how we view the people of God and the nature of future
18:20
Kingdom. OK, let's break that down.
18:21
Distinction #1 the people of God.
18:24
Is it one group or two? Covenant theology argues for one
18:28
people of God all throughout history.
18:30
They are all unified under 1 overarching plan of redemption.
18:34
Old Testament Saints and New Testament believers are all part
18:37
of the same body. The same body, yes, administered
18:40
under the covenant of grace. It really highlights the
18:43
spiritual continuity of God's saving work from Adam all the
18:46
way through to the end. And the dispensational view sees
18:49
a break there, a discontinuity. It does.
18:52
Classic dispensationalism argues for a very sharp distinction
18:56
between ethnic Israel and the Church.
18:58
The church is seen as a separate, almost parenthetical
19:01
plan that was inserted after Israel rejected the Kingdom.
19:05
So in that view you have two peoples of God.
19:07
You have two distinct people of God, each with their own
19:11
separate destinies and separate programs within God's bigger
19:14
plan. That distinction naturally leads
19:16
right into the second one. What is the future of Israel?
19:19
This is where you hear the term replacement theology.
19:22
Right, because covenant theology sees one unified people, it
19:26
teaches what's called replacement theology.
19:29
Now that doesn't mean God just arbitrarily switched plans.
19:32
It means that the Church, the Body of Christ, is the
19:36
functional and spiritual successor to national Israel,
19:39
the new Israel and. What does that mean for the Old
19:41
Testament promises? It means the prophetic,
19:43
spiritual and land promises made to ancient Israel are seen as
19:48
being fulfilled by Christ and His Church in this current age.
19:52
In this view, there's no distinct future for the nation
19:54
of Israel as a national ethnic entity with a restored temple
19:58
and so on. So the promises to Abraham about
20:01
his descendants in the land. They're seen as fulfilled
20:04
spiritually in Christ, who is the true seed of Abraham.
20:08
The emphasis is on spiritual fulfillment.
20:10
So the land promises are interpreted as being fulfilled
20:13
in the global scope of the New Covenant and in the end in the
20:16
new heavens and new earth. And dispensationalism on the
20:19
other hand? Maintains that Israel has a
20:21
specific national and literal future in God's prophetic plan,
20:25
totally separate from the Church's role, including a
20:28
literal earthly Kingdom in the future.
20:30
OK, which brings us to the third and final distinction, which is
20:33
all about eschatology, the end times realized Kingdom versus a
20:38
future Kingdom. This is a big one.
20:39
Covenant theology embraces what's called realized
20:41
eschatology. Realized eschatology.
20:44
It means that Christ's first coming inaugurated the Kingdom
20:48
of God. It's not fully here yet, not
20:50
perfected, but it has begun. Many of the millennial
20:53
prophecies are seen as being fulfilled right now in this
20:56
present age, the Kingdom Age. We are living in the time of
21:00
Christ's rule from heaven. So that really changes how we
21:03
see our lives right now. The Kingdom isn't just something
21:05
we're waiting for, we're in it. We are participating in it now.
21:08
That's the key take away. We live in the spiritual reality
21:12
of Christ's reign, and that affects how we understand the
21:15
spiritual battles of today and. The dispensational view on that.
21:18
Generally it restricts Christ's physical ruling Kingdom to the
21:22
future Millennium, a literal 1000 year reign on earth.
21:27
So while they would acknowledge a current spiritual reign of
21:29
Christ, the defining part of the Kingdom is placed firmly in the
21:33
future. Although we should note that
21:35
there's been some development inside dispensationalism on this
21:37
point. Yes, that's fair.
21:40
The development of progressive dispensationalism has tried to
21:43
bridge that gap a bit. It proposes a now and not yet
21:47
view of the Kingdom. It acknowledges that some
21:49
aspects of Christ's rule are happening now, but it still
21:52
maintains that the ultimate literal national fulfillment for
21:56
Israel is still in the future. Which just shows that systematic
21:59
theology is always a living thing, always processing and
22:03
refining its views. Always.
22:05
That breakdown of the classical systems is really helpful, but
22:08
now we have to shift gears and look at contemporary theology
22:11
and the immediate challenges that are really pushing against
22:14
the authority of scripture we talked about at the beginning.
22:15
And the biggest one mentioned in the source is the post
22:18
Evangelical shift. Post evangelicalism?
22:21
How is that defined? It's described as a movement
22:24
that is broader theologically than historic evangelicalism,
22:29
and it gets that breath by actively bringing in views and
22:32
methods that traditional evangelicalism would have
22:35
rejected. It's heavily influenced by late
22:37
20th century postmodernism. So what's the core feature of
22:41
that postmodern influence? The source identifies the
22:44
postmodern mindset as essentially a post Christian
22:47
one. Post Christian at its.
22:49
Core. It's a rejection of the idea of
22:51
objective, absolute truth. Instead, it sees truth claims,
22:55
especially about religion and morality, as being subjective
23:00
and relative. So truth is just something we
23:02
create with our language or our culture.
23:04
Or it's a tool of power structures, and if that's what
23:07
you believe, then it leads directly to denying foundational
23:09
Christian doctrines. It has to It immediately attacks
23:12
the Bible's authority. Immediately, this mindset leads
23:16
right to denying the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture, and
23:19
it also effects how the church engages with the culture.
23:22
It often leads to bracing religious pluralism, the idea
23:26
that all paths lead to God, and sometimes even to denying that
23:29
behaviors the Bible calls immoral, like homosexuality, are
23:33
actually wrong. It's all in an effort to
23:35
accommodate and engage the culture.
23:37
Let's get specific about how post evangelical views on
23:40
Scripture differ from the historic view.
23:43
The first one is that they accept methodologies from
23:45
critical scholarship. That's right, they accept higher
23:48
critical views of Scripture. This is an analytical method
23:51
that treats the Bible mostly as a human book, something you can
23:54
deconstruct historically. It can separate the historical
23:57
reality from the narrative itself.
23:59
And that's totally opposed to the historic view of divine
24:03
inspiration. Completely.
24:05
And the sources note that because of this post,
24:08
evangelicals no longer hold to the historic view of inspiration
24:12
and inerrancy. And this critical method then
24:15
directly impacts how they read the very beginning of the Bible.
24:18
It does. It leads them to deny the
24:20
historicity of the early chapters of Genesis.
24:23
They suggest that these chapters contain mythological notions.
24:26
So creation, the Fall, the flood, they're not seen as
24:30
literal historical events. Not in that view, and this is a
24:33
really critical line to cross. The source material asks the key
24:36
question here. If the historicity of the Bible
24:39
is questioned, what can be trusted?
24:41
Right, if the whole basis for sin and redemption and the
24:44
covenants is just a myth. Then the entire redemptive story
24:47
becomes unstable. And even more startling, this
24:50
critique is even applied to Jesus's own teachings, this idea
24:54
of cultural accommodation. This might be the most serious
24:58
departure post Evangelicals will question things Jesus said by
25:02
suggesting that he accommodated himself to the culture of his
25:06
day. What?
25:07
Does that mean accommodated? The idea is that his statements
25:10
weren't always absolute timeless truths, they were just adapted
25:14
to the limited understanding of his 1st century audience.
25:17
Or maybe they were only met for that specific Jewish context.
25:20
And that allows them to do what? It allows them to reinterpret or
25:23
just dismiss parts of his teaching that seemed difficult
25:26
or culturally unpopular today, especially on things like
25:30
morality or in gender roles. But that creates a huge crisis
25:33
of authority. If Rice was just accommodating
25:35
himself to cultural norms, how can we be sure any of his
25:38
statements are binding for us today?
25:40
You can't. You've made Christ's teachings
25:43
conditional. They depend on cultural
25:45
acceptance. And that's why these
25:46
contemporary challenges have to be met with strong, systematic
25:49
doctrine that's built on careful exegesis.
25:52
If we fail here, we're chipping away at the very bedrock of the
25:56
faith. OK, beyond this post evangelical
25:59
shift, what are some of the other contemporary movements
26:02
that are forcing theology to defend or redefine its core
26:06
ideas? Well, we mentioned openness
26:08
theology. This questions God's perfect
26:10
knowledge of the future. It suggests God voluntarily
26:13
limits his knowledge to allow for genuine human freedom.
26:17
And that's part of a bigger cultural trend, isn't it?
26:19
It is, the source says. It's symptomatic of a tendency
26:22
today to devalue God's sovereignty and majesty and to
26:25
elevate humanity and freedom. It's theology trying to make God
26:29
fit into a human sized philosophical box.
26:32
And what about the church in politics?
26:34
There we see dominion theology, which pushes for the goal of
26:37
Christian domination in the public square.
26:39
And that forces us to ask really detailed questions about the
26:42
proper biblical role for political action.
26:45
You know what is the relationship between God's
26:47
Kingdom and earthly governments? Is the goal of theocracy now or
26:50
something else? That's the question.
26:52
Are we supposed to be building a theocracy now, or are we called
26:55
to live faithfully under Christ's spiritual rule while we
26:58
wait for Him to return? And finally, there's the
27:01
influence of the charismatic movement, specifically
27:03
prosperity theology. Right.
27:05
And this movement radically changes the traditional views on
27:08
God's Providence and on suffering.
27:11
It forces systematic theology to answer the question, Does God
27:15
want all of his people to be healthy and wealthy all the
27:18
time? It often links spiritual
27:20
maturity directly to financial and physical blessing.
27:23
And that requires a deep dive into some very serious
27:26
doctrines. It does.
27:28
To answer that, you need a thorough understanding of sin,
27:31
suffering, the cross, and what the Bible actually means by
27:35
God's blessing. These are all critical questions
27:37
that contemporary theology has to work through using that
27:40
established, authoritative framework from historical and
27:42
biblical theology. Hashtag tag outro well.
27:46
We've covered a lot of ground in this deep dive.
27:48
We've identified, and I hope clearly distinguish the five
27:51
major areas of theological study, biblical, systematic,
27:54
historical, dogmatic, and contemporary.
27:57
And we've looked at some of the big theological tides right now,
28:00
postmodernism, post evangelicalism, that are really
28:03
challenging the historic faith. We really trying to establish
28:06
the need for sound doctrine at the beginning, not as some kind
28:09
of optional extra for super spiritual people.
28:11
No, but as a necessary spiritual immune system, it protects us
28:15
from those destructive errors of legalism on one side and
28:19
lysentiousness on the other, and it guards US against the kind of
28:22
cultural compromise that comes from just dismissing doctrinal
28:25
rigor. The stated goal of the original
28:27
handbook that we've been pulling from was just to provide an
28:30
accessible introduction to this whole spectrum.
28:33
You know, for students, for laypeople, for anyone.
28:36
The goal was clarity and structure.
28:38
It was, and we should always remember the real point of all
28:40
this, all this intellectual knowledge it has to issue in
28:44
response. It has to lead to action.
28:46
It has to lead to worship. The goal of understanding God's
28:49
truth and its structure isn't just to fill our heads.
28:52
It's meant to directly help us fulfill the great and foremost
28:56
commandment. To love God with all your heart,
28:58
soul and mind. As Matthew 22.37 says, good
29:03
solid doctrine should lead to genuine devotion.
29:06
So we'll leave you with one final thought to Mull over and
29:10
it's centered on that critical relationship between biblical
29:12
and systematic theology that we discussed.
29:15
If we know the biblical theology is the non negotiable first
29:19
step, that it's the bridge that anchors our modern doctrines in
29:22
history and in context, that we have to ask ourselves this.
29:26
If our systematic beliefs are only as sound as our commitment
29:29
to biblical methodology, how much more rigorously must we as
29:33
believers commit ourselves to the detailed exegesis and the
29:36
historical analysis that biblical theology requires?
29:39
Something to consider as you continue your own studies.
29:42
We thank you for joining us for this deep dive.