Toward an apostolic Systematic Theology

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Theology, Christology, Soteriology, Ecclesiology and Eschatology

1. How does one actually differentiate between theology and christology (speaking from a oneness perspective)?

If God is one, and incarnated as the Christ, then would theology be subsumed under christology? or vice versa? And pneumatology as well?

2. How does one actually differentiate between soteriology and ecclesiology? If we are saved by being placed into the church of the Lord, if salvation is not merely 'individual salvation' but if it includes our membership in the elect, the church, as citizens of the kingdom of God, etc... then wouldn't soteriology be a function of ecclesiology? Or vice versa?

I mean as far as differentiating things for the purposes of exposition and investigation of the topics, of course. (What used to be known as 'division' and 'arrangement'...)

Where does angelology fit in? Or is it even necessary?

In discussing anthropology and the nature of man... does that fit into soteriology? Or eschatology (meaning, personal eschatology, ie final judgement, resurrection, after-death, etc)?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

1. How does one actually differentiate between theology and christology (speaking from a oneness perspective)?

They can overlap when the discussion is specifically about the incarnation. Not ever topic having to do with the study of Jesus is just that he was God

[Esaias]

And one more generalized question... what is the overall THEME of the Bible? In other words, is there a unifying theme which can serve as a sort of ideological or pedagogical 'center', into which or around which the various 'topics' of a sytematic theology can be arranged?

If not one unifying theme, then what would be the primary themes?

I'm thinking 'the Kingdom of God' would probably be the main, unifying theme.

The purpose of Creation is to manifest the dominion of God, as a display of his glory.

The fact of creation establishes or at least declares that He is King of all, and his kingdom thus extends to all things. Here we'd get into 'physical or natural government vs moral or spiritual government'.

The subjects of the kingdom would include men and angels. This gets into moral government, moral law, the will, the law of God, sin and remission, justification, holiness, death, sickness, healing, the covenants, Israel, Messiah as King, etc.

Etc. Prophecy/eschatology is the kingdom foretold, the history of the kingdom written beforehand, etc.

Christology is a study of both the King, his person and work, and his rulership 9means and methods) of the kingdom.

Ecclesiology deals with the established human element of the government of the kingdom (ecclesia is a governmental term, in fact), and how the kingdom operates in people's lives. Of course, I think Israel fits into ecclesiology as well, since Israel is called 'the church in the wilderness'...

What do ya'll think?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

They can overlap when the discussion is specifically about the incarnation. Not ever topic having to do with the study of Jesus is just that he was God

Yes, I am not saying 'everything is about he is God', what I am saying is how can one have a discussion about God, his nature, character, works, etc... and not discuss Christ? Knowledge of Christ = knowledge of God.

So would an apostolic theology proper be Christ-centered? Seems like it would be, since Jesus is more than the Incarnation itself...

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Yes, I am not saying 'everything is about he is God', what I am saying is how can one have a discussion about God, his nature, character, works, etc... and not discuss Christ? Knowledge of Christ = knowledge of God.

So would an apostolic theology proper be Christ-centered? Seems like it would be, since Jesus is more than the Incarnation itself...

Like I said they overlap. So Christology involves MORE than just discussing THEOLOGY :-)

You are asking ME my opinion on how Theology differs from Christology...

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

And one more generalized question... what is the overall THEME of the Bible? In other words, is there a unifying theme which can serve as a sort of ideological or pedagogical 'center', into which or around which the various 'topics' of a sytematic theology can be arranged?

God's desire to have relationship with and be manifest in His creation... man.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

And one more generalized question... what is the overall THEME of the Bible? In other words, is there a unifying theme which can serve as a sort of ideological or pedagogical 'center', into which or around which the various 'topics' of a sytematic theology can be arranged?

The "theme" of the Bible (IMHO) was best summarized in this inspired pronouncement written by apostle Paul concerning the culmination of the reign of Christ Jesus as the Son (recorded in I Corinthians 15:26-28; specifically the final seven words) - "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, THAT GOD MAY BE ALL IN ALL."

In essence, it comes down to determining an answer to this critical question: What was the purpose for God's creation of mankind?

After countless hours expended over many years in studying the scriptural record in an effort to determine the answer to this question, I have concluded the following: God, being an incorporeal invisible eternal Spirit, described by apostle John as One whose basic or fundamental nature (quality) is "love," desired to build for Himself a substantive "temple" whereby He might be made manifest (readily perceived by sight).

God decreed that the physical body of man was to serve as such a "temple," with His own body being the chief corner stone (Acts 4:11), however, when the first man Adam's rebellion caused the invisible eternal soul and substantive flesh of mankind to become corrupt, God (whose omniscient ability allowed Him to know this would occur) began the task of effectuating a plan of redemption (which He devised before the creation of all things), whereby these two essential "building blocks" of His temple (the soul and body of mankind) might be cleansed (i.e., made habitable for His Spirit to dwell therein).

This is why God had decreed that repentance, water baptism "in His name" for the remission of sins, and baptism of the Spirit are so extremely essential for mankind's reconciliation to Himself. When we, as individuals, have willingly taken these necessary actions, and thereafter live the remainder of our earthly life in an manner that is pleasing to God, then following our resurrection from the dead (for we all must die - Hebrews 9:27), death is defeated and the Sonship of Christ is finished, then we who have been purified by the indwelling Spirit shall possess all of the glory of heaven and share it together with Christ Jesus for all of eternity.

[Esaias]

As I look more into the meaning and method of discipleship, I am beginning to have a certain thought about 'theology'...

The purpose of a Systematic Theology or a Biblical Theology is to provide a 'textbook' or course of instruction on the various important doctrinal subjects. This instruction is designed basically as a 'course of study in Christianity'. While those may certainly be helpful, I wonder why God did not inspire any 'systematic theology' for us?

I see Jesus taught his disciples. And those disciples taught others. And 'systematic theology' did not really come about until over a century and a half - at BEST - later. More like not really until the early medieval period. Ie 'systematic theology' was developed primarily within the catholic movement.

Jesus did not teach by giving a 'systematic' course of instruction in various 'doctrines to be believed and remembered'. Instead he did the following:

1. He modeled what they were to become. Instruction was not the acquisition of intellectual ideas and 'facts of theology', but rather it was the conforming of the student to the likeness of the Teacher.

2. He taught truths as the opportunity arose. He used just about every possible experience he had with his disciples as an object lesson in some truth or truths. Life is abounding with 'teaching moments', and he took advantage of them all the time.

3. He gave direct instruction, 'precept upon precept', as well. Yet his instruction was not arranged 'systematically' according to the 'topics of invention' or other schemes of education and presentation. I am still researching the arrangement he used for his didactic instruction of doctrine.

4. He guided them from being mere students to being 'teachers' themselves. Theological instruction was not a 'class room' experience, or a 'series of courses in theological subjects', it was a direct, hands-on apprenticeship. At first they could do nothing but follow him around and listen and observe. eventually he was sending them forth to preach and teach. Finally he empowered them to go forth in his Spirit as if they were him. On the job training.

So then from seeing these things, it seems to me that a truly 'apostolic' and 'biblical' theology, or course of instruction in bible theology, would not be a series of lectures bound in a book, but an actual apprenticeship. It seems the 'church' is supposed to be, among other things, an apprenticeship class.

We are, after all, called to be disciples.

[Aquila]

Paul could be rather systematic in his Epistles. In Scripture we see many different styles of teaching employed by the Holy Ghost through the anointing of various teachers.

And in fact... at the end of the day... He presented us with... a book. lol

[Luke]

The book of romans is a very near systematic theology book.