Which Systematic Theology to study first?
- Thread starter monoergon
- Start date
- Status
Shimei
Puritan Board Freshman
Thank you Mr. Religion.
I love Grudem's Systematic Theology (haven't graduated from the little league
). What I appreciate about your comment was the discernment needed. Grudem lists multiple views, for and against arguments. I like to reference his material when I am debating someone. It kinda gives a more indepth outline of the opposing argument, and often better articulated from the book than most people can muster themselves. Interesting that you also mentioned Grudem's continuationist position. It was rather apparent once in those pages of the book. Lastly, I plan to tackle Berkhof here in the months to come. An OPC church got me interested in it because they are doing a slow moving study on the book. I heard it is THE book on Systematic Theology.
God bless,
William
Ask Mr. Religion
Flatly Unflappable
Berkhof is trustworthy when it comes to Reformed doctrine. Very few have found anything to quibble about in his very terse work. Berkhof was channeling Bavinck, whose work was not yet available in English. So if you want the full course meal, Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics is something to consider down the road.
Think that one can profit from using His ST, but again, make sure to read especially his views on spiritual gifts/Holy Spirit!
While in school. my main textbook was Dr Milliard Erickson , and that one also is good for summary of various theological viewpoints of major doctrines!
I am a reformed baptist, so would see things from his viewpoint more than the Reformed Presbyterian Bethren!
While in school. my main textbook was Dr Milliard Erickson , and that one also is good for summary of various theological viewpoints of major doctrines!
I am a reformed baptist, so would see things from his viewpoint more than the Reformed Presbyterian Bethren!
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
And his views on the Trinity.
Justified
Puritan Board Sophomore
Just a wee bit more serious than one's views on the spiritual gifts.
reaganmarsh
Puritan Board Senior
Berkhof is very helpful, but he's dry as a bone (to my taste, anyway). A PCA pastor friend told me that seminarians at RTS called it "the big blue sleeping pill." 
I'd recommend Ames, then Calvin, then a'Brakel, then Hodge, then Turretin.
I recently received a review copy of vol 4 of Vos, and his format looks terrific. Haven't gotten to read it yet, though. It might be suitable as a second ST; but I'd start with Ames.
I'd recommend Ames, then Calvin, then a'Brakel, then Hodge, then Turretin.
I recently received a review copy of vol 4 of Vos, and his format looks terrific. Haven't gotten to read it yet, though. It might be suitable as a second ST; but I'd start with Ames.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
There is more to Trinitarianism than simply saying "3 Persons/1 God." Eternality is a predicate of God's essence, so if the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father, then it is hard to see how he is homoousios.
Does the Son's submission only refer to His humanity?
Not really, as my son and I are both fully human, yet he is subordinate to me in the family dynamic!
The scriptures do seem to infer that Jesus etrnally is agreeing that the Father is head of the trinity, and the Holy Spirit is agreeable to be subordiante to boith father/Son...
God has no problem in allowing that among His 3 Persons, so why would we then?
As subordination does not mean inferior, just differing roles in the Godhead, but all Three equally God still!
The scriptures do seem to infer that Jesus etrnally is agreeing that the Father is head of the trinity, and the Holy Spirit is agreeable to be subordiante to boith father/Son...
God has no problem in allowing that among His 3 Persons, so why would we then?
As subordination does not mean inferior, just differing roles in the Godhead, but all Three equally God still!
reaganmarsh
Puritan Board Senior
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Relation is a predicate of essence, so saying he is ontologically subordinate is highly problematic.
- Status
