The Concept of Systematic Theology (Part 2)

2. HOW SHOULD SYSTEMATIC THELOGY BE PURSUED?

 

If systematic theology seeks to answer the question, “What does the whole Bible teach?”, then the manner in which we approach Scripture becomes critically important. A doctrine cannot be considered biblical merely because a number of verses can be assembled to support it. The passages themselves must first be interpreted correctly, and their individual contributions must then be considered in relation to the rest of Scripture.

 

2.1 The Authority of Scripture

The foundation of Christian systematic theology is the authority of Scripture. Jesus commanded His disciples to make disciples of all nations and to teach them “to observe all things that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19–20). The Great Commission therefore includes a substantial teaching responsibility. The Church is not merely called to announce the gospel; it is called to teach disciples how to understand and obey everything Christ has commanded.

The scope of this teaching is broader than the recorded sayings of Jesus in the four Gospels. Luke begins Acts by referring to his earlier account as a record of “all that Jesus began both to do and teach” (Acts 1:1), indicating that the ministry of Jesus continued through the apostles after His resurrection. The apostles understood themselves to speak and write with divine authority. Paul could say that the things he wrote were “the commandments of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 14:37), while Peter referred to apostolic teaching alongside the words spoken beforehand by the prophets (2 Peter 3:2).

Furthermore, Jesus and the apostles consistently affirmed the authority of the Old Testament Scriptures. Jesus treated the Old Testament as the Word of God, declared that Scripture could not be broken (John 10:35), and affirmed its enduring authority while explaining its fulfillment in Him (Matthew 5:17–18; Luke 24:44–47). Paul likewise taught that the Scriptures given to Israel were “given by inspiration of God” and were profitable for teaching, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:15–17).

Consequently, the Church cannot fulfill Christ's command to teach His disciples without teaching the whole counsel of God revealed in Scripture. Systematic theology serves this responsibility by helping believers gather and understand the biblical teaching concerning particular subjects. Since human beings are finite in memory and limited in time, we require some means by which the diverse teachings of Scripture can be brought together and clearly communicated. Systematic theology therefore serves Scripture rather than competing with it. Its task is not to add revelation to the Bible but to help the Church understand, articulate, defend, and apply what God has already revealed.

 

2.2 Exegesis Must Come Before Synthesis

Because systematic theology seeks to synthesize the biblical witness, it must begin with careful exegesis. Before we can ask what the whole Bible teaches about a subject, we must first understand what individual passages actually mean.

Exegesis seeks to draw out the meaning of a passage by paying careful attention to its language, literary context, historical setting, immediate argument, and relationship to the broader biblical narrative. Hermeneutics provides the principles by which this interpretation is carried out. Without sound interpretation, systematic theology becomes vulnerable to a serious error: beginning with a theological conclusion and then searching Scripture for verses that appear to support it. The proper direction is the opposite. We begin with Scripture, interpret each relevant passage carefully, compare the testimony of those passages, and then formulate the theological conclusion that best accounts for the biblical evidence.

The doctrine of prayer again provides a useful example. A study of prayer cannot responsibly be reduced to a concordance search. The student must examine the circumstances surrounding particular prayers, the purpose of those prayers, the promises connected with them, and the instructions God gives concerning prayer. Hannah's prayer in 1 Samuel 1 must be understood within the circumstances of her barrenness and the worship practices of Israel. Solomon's prayer in 1 Kings 8 must be interpreted in connection with the dedication of the temple and God's covenant promises to Israel. Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane must be understood in light of His impending suffering and His submission to the Father's will. The prayers of the early Church in Acts must be understood within the context of the Church's mission and the work of the Holy Spirit. Only after the individual passages have been interpreted can their teaching be brought together into a coherent doctrine.

This is why systematic theology cannot afford to neglect hermeneutics. If the individual pieces are misunderstood, the final synthesis will also be wrong. A theological system can be internally logical and still be biblically false if it was constructed upon faulty interpretations of the biblical text.

 

2.3 Gathering the Whole Biblical Witness

Once the relevant passages have been interpreted, the next responsibility is to gather the biblical witness as comprehensively as possible. This involves identifying passages that speak directly about the subject as well as passages that contribute indirectly to our understanding of it.

A concordance or digital Bible-search tool can be extremely helpful in this process. When studying humanity as created in the image of God, for example, it would be natural to examine passages containing the words image, likeness, and create. Yet the study should not stop there. Other passages concerning human dignity, dominion, moral responsibility, sin, restoration, and the renewal of humanity in Christ may also contribute to the doctrine.

The same is true of prayer. Words such as pray, prayer, intercession, supplication, petition, thanksgiving, and confession may identify important passages, but the student must also consider the wider biblical teaching concerning dependence upon God, faith, God's sovereignty, persistence, forgiveness, worship, and submission to His will. The student of systematic theology must therefore learn to think beyond isolated words and consider the theological concepts developed throughout Scripture.

This is particularly important because biblical revelation unfolds within the history of redemption. The Bible does not present all theological truth with the same degree of development at every point in the canon. The Old Testament establishes foundational truths concerning creation, covenant, sin, sacrifice, priesthood, kingship, and God's promises, while the New Testament brings these themes to their fulfillment and greater clarity in Christ. Jesus Himself explained the Scriptures in light of His death and resurrection, teaching His disciples that “all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me” (Luke 24:44).

Therefore, systematic theology must take seriously the progressive character of biblical revelation. An Old Testament command, promise, institution, or prophecy cannot simply be transferred into the New Covenant without asking how it relates to the fulfillment brought by Christ. At the same time, New Testament teaching must not be detached from the Old Testament foundations upon which it rests. The Bible is one unfolding revelation, and its doctrines must be understood within that unified story.

 

2.4 The Proper Use of Human Reason and Logical Deduction

The fact that Scripture is our final authority does not mean that Christians should abandon reason. Scripture itself demonstrates the legitimate use of reasoning. Jesus and the apostles regularly drew conclusions from biblical statements and showed how particular truths necessarily followed from what God had revealed. The important distinction is between Scripture itself and our deductions from Scripture. God's Word is infallible; our reasoning is not. We can misunderstand, overlook evidence, make invalid assumptions, or draw conclusions that appear logical but fail to account for the whole biblical witness.

The doctrine of the Trinity provides a clear illustration. Scripture teaches that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. Yet Scripture also clearly teaches that there is one God. If we begin with the truth that the Father, Son, and Spirit are each fully divine and then reason carelessly, we might conclude that Christianity teaches three Gods. But that conclusion cannot stand because it contradicts the explicit biblical testimony concerning God's unity. We must therefore formulate the doctrine in a way that accounts for all the biblical evidence: there is one God, and the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct persons, each fully divine. The precise theological formulation goes beyond quoting one verse, but it is derived from the combined testimony of Scripture. This example demonstrates why theological reasoning requires humility. Our deductions can be mistaken even when the biblical passages themselves are perfectly true. Scripture does not contradict itself, but our interpretation of Scripture can.

Consequently, whenever our theological conclusion appears to place one biblical teaching against another, we should first examine our interpretation rather than assuming that Scripture contains a contradiction. Sometimes the difficulty arises because we have misunderstood a passage, failed to account for its context, or attempted to make Scripture answer a question it does not actually answer. There will also be mysteries that exceed our ability to comprehend fully. A doctrine may be clearly taught by Scripture without every aspect of its inner workings being explainable to the human mind. Mystery should not be confused with contradiction. A contradiction would require Scripture to affirm and deny the same proposition in the same sense and at the same time. Mystery, by contrast, occurs when truths revealed by God are beyond our ability to exhaustively comprehend. The proper response is therefore not to discard what Scripture clearly teaches simply because we cannot explain every aspect of it. Rather, we should affirm what Scripture affirms while remaining humble concerning the limits of our understanding.

 

2.5 Learning From Teachers and the Historic Church

God has also provided teachers for the Church. Paul writes that Christ gave some to be apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers “for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry” (Ephesians 4:11–12). Christian theological study should therefore include a willingness to learn from others who have been gifted to teach. This includes the careful use of commentaries, theological dictionaries, systematic theology texts, historical works, confessions, and other resources produced by Christians throughout the history of the Church. We should be grateful for the fact that generations of believers have wrestled with difficult biblical questions, defended the faith against error, and developed carefully considered theological formulations.

Yet the existence of a long theological tradition does not mean that tradition becomes the final authority. The Bereans provide an important model in Acts 17:11. They received Paul's teaching with eagerness, but they also searched the Scriptures daily to determine whether what they were being taught was true.

The lesson is not that Christians should distrust teachers. Rather, it is that teachers themselves remain accountable to Scripture. We should listen carefully, learn humbly, examine diligently, and ultimately submit our conclusions to the Word of God. A mature Christian therefore does not reject theological scholarship simply because human teachers can make mistakes, nor does he accept theological authorities uncritically because they possess impressive credentials. Instead, he learns to evaluate theological claims according to Scripture.