Posted on 09/16/2007 7:11:48 AM PDT by Ottofire
I've been reading Van Til's An Introduction To Systematic Theology. Van Til notes systematic theology seeks to offer an ordered presentation of what the Bible teaches about God. He says "the study of systematic theology will help men to preach theologically. It will help to make men proclaim the whole counsel of God. Many ministers never touch the greater part of the wealth of the revelation of God to man contained in Scripture. But systematics helps ministers to preach the whole counsel of God, and thus to make God central in their work."
Here was the point that I found most interesting: "It is but natural to expect that, if the church is strong because its ministry understands and preaches the whole counsel of God, then the church will be able to protect itself best against false teaching of every sort. Non-indoctrinated Christians will easily fall prey to the peddlers of Russellism, spiritualism and all of the other fifty-seven varieties of heresies with which our country abounds. One-text Christians simply have no weapons of defense against these people. They may be able to quote many Scripture texts which speak, for instance, of eternal punishment, but the Russellite will be able to quote texts which, by the sound of them and taken individually, seem to teach annihilation. The net result is, at best, a loss of spiritual power because of loss of conviction. Many times, such one-text Christians themselves fall prey to the seducers voice."
Of course, I had the converts to Roman Catholicism in mind, rather than Russellites. I wonder how many of these Catholic converts actually attended churches that proclaimed the whole council of God? A question I would ask is how many Catholic converts previously went to churches with strong systematic confessions of faith, like the Westminster Confession, and how often were they taught the confession, like in a Sunday School class, and how well did their minister cover all the doctrines in the confession of faith? I would expect some rather weak answers. Van Til states, "We have already indicated that the best apologetic defense will invariably be made by him who knows the system of truth of Scripture best." I would modify this a bit and make it a negative: "the best converts to false gospels will invariably be made by those who knows the system of truth of Scripture least."
Will the teaching of a systematic theological system help people resist the apologia of other sects?
Teaching the major heresies and the problems with them directly also is valuable. A course in apologetics with heresies/cults as a focus will give people the tools to speak to anyone being sucked into a cult.
Heresies then and now: ancient Christian heresies practiced in modern times
The Rev. John Piper: an interesting look at "heresy vs. schism"
Pietism as an Ecclesiological Heresy
Arian Heresy Still Tempts, Says Cardinal Bertone (Mentions Pelagianism As Well)
Catholic Discussion] Church group stays faithful (to heresy!)
Where heresy and dissent abound [Minnesota]
Gnostic Gospels - the heresy entitled "Gnosticism."
The So-Called ‘Gospel’ of Judas: Unmasking an Ancient Heresy
The truth is that there are few social benefits to becoming Catholic and many disincentives. Most who become Catholic are rejected by their former friends. If they are clergy, they lose their social status entirely, and their salaries. There is little to be gained by becoming Catholic save the security of knowing one has come home to the only church founded by Christ himself.
On the other hand, Protestant congregations are trained to fawn all over a wayward Catholic. It is a great prize to snatch a Catholic from the fold. A Catholic venturing to a Protestant church will quickly find a new set of zealous “friends.”
As for theology—this article is a joke. Those who become Catholic do so because they have done tons of reading, and thinking and deliberating and praying. They are intelligent and educated in the faith and it is their study of scripture and tradition which leads them to the truth of Catholicism.
On the other hand, those who leave the Catholic Church are usually divorced and remarried, gay, have a rebellious spirit or are so poorly educated as Catholics that they fall prey to a barrage of bible quotes and cant defend themselves.
Fortunately, three new developments of the past 15 years have slowed the tide of Catholics from the Church and even reversed the trend: 1. the Catechism of the Catholic Church is readily available, well written and satisfying to the intelligent mind. 2. the apologetic movement has clarified and made avaiable all that a Catholic needs to understand and defend his faith. 3. the internet has brought these two resources to the masses without needing to buy a library.
So, as well trained Protestant clergy continue to trek their way to the Catholic Church and those seeking an easier path find their way to the Protestant ecclesial bodies, it is becoming ever more clear we are getting their best and they are getting our worst.
No systematic protestant theology course is going to reverse this trend, because the movement of the Beckwiths of the world into the Catholic Church is based on years and years of study. Any course you could put up, he could tear down in half the time. The problem with Protestantism is not the number of courses offered, it is the content of those courses.
Swan’s questions seem silly. Sure, some converts did not study systematic theology before becoming Catholics. Some did. What does that prove?
Look at the hundreds of ministers who have converted in recent years. I know two personally - both former Lutheran ministers. They studied systematic theology. They converted. What does that prove?
I thought of this scripture as I went through some of the heresy threads you pointed to:
Revelation 2
To the church in Ephesus
1”To the angel[a] of the church in Ephesus write:
These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands: 2I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked men, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. 3You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary. 4Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love. 5Remember the height from which you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place. 6But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. 7He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.
Yah. Anyone with any intelligence agrees with you. Everyone else is a sinner and so they don’t count. Mmmmmm-kay.
Got any stats on that? I've never known of this to occur.
>On the other hand, Protestant congregations are trained to fawn all over a wayward Catholic. It is a great prize to snatch a Catholic from the fold. A Catholic venturing to a Protestant church will quickly find a new set of zealous “friends.”
No matter which side of the Tiber you are on, any convert to any faith will be shown plenty of attention. It is not just Protestants. But if you notice, most people that convert from one sect to another are not firmly grounded in their original faith for one reason or another.
>No systematic protestant theology course is going to reverse this trend, because the movement of the Beckwiths of the world into the Catholic Church is based on years and years of study. Any course you could put up, he could tear down in half the time. The problem with Protestantism is not the number of courses offered, it is the content of those courses.
I agree. Those that are not of us were never of us.
I find it funny you mention Beckwith, he claims he only studied the roman works for a few months prior to his announcement. Years of study? Not. And he could not even handle a softball interview with Greg Koukl. Could not answer simple questions on the basics of Protestantism. I am REALLY surprised that you brought him up with his reluctance to follow the Marion Doctrines. I thought those were defide, but I guess he has yet to REALLY be converted, eh? It seems he fled Protestantism straight to cafeteria catholicism.
Just as the last great Protestant-turned-Catholic Gerry Matatics, it seems that those that jump to the Roman side are not all that orthodox...but hey, as long as they are on that side, with Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, they are saved, what?
“Got any stats on that? I’ve never known of this to occur.”
Numerous converts who have given their testimony describe this happening. Not only do some lose their friends, a few lose (or nearly lose) their families.
Many stories are here:
http://chnetwork.org/converts.htm
Never say never. You might want to learn how James White has treated his sister Patty Bonds after she converted as only one example.
Of course John Henry Newman and Scott and Kimberly Hahn, as only three examples, blow your weak assertion clean out of the water; something which happens quite frequently in this forum.
If this is true, why aren't the "best and the brightest" Protestant theologians reverting in mass? Why are there brilliant Protestant theologians like R.C. Sproul, Alvin Plantinga, John Stott, William Lane Craig, just to name a few, still in the Protestant camp? If it is so clear and logical to the learned, why are there any Protestant theologians at all?
The "best and the brightest" are still with us.
Ping to read later. I love your threads, Ottofire!
I'll bite, none, that is why they are now Catholics. The are Christians who were looking for the fullness of faith and it resides in the Catholic Church.
Guess that's why all Cino politicians try to keep their Catholic creds quiet, cuz no one in the Church ever tried to promote voting for "one of our own", not even in heavily Catholic areas.
Most who become Catholic are rejected by their former friends.
Interesting statement. I've never seen anything of that sort, but then again, I live in an area where Catholics are a large percentage of the population.
On the other hand, Protestant congregations are trained to fawn all over a wayward Catholic. It is a great prize to snatch a Catholic from the fold. A Catholic venturing to a Protestant church will quickly find a new set of zealous “friends.”
We get that in some kind of super secret training sessions that I missed?
As for theology—this article is a joke. Those who become Catholic do so because they have done tons of reading, and thinking and deliberating and praying. They are intelligent and educated in the faith and it is their study of scripture and tradition which leads them to the truth of Catholicism.
After reading a bunch of conversion stories, by generalizing you've missed the mark.
On the other hand, those who leave the Catholic Church are usually divorced and remarried, gay, have a rebellious spirit or are so poorly educated as Catholics that they fall prey to a barrage of bible quotes and cant defend themselves.
Most of the people I know who've left the Catholic Church became atheists or agnostic & no amount of Bible quotes make that sort of thing happen.
I think the Catholic Church & all Protestant denominations would be better served by working to pick up the fruit that's on the ground than trying to pick off the low hanging fruit in each other's trees.
Our efforts as believers in communicating to others are simply divided in to two camps. Via the spiritual gift of evangelism, a spiritual communication gift to communicate to unbelievers about the Gospel, and the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher, a spiritual communication gift to guide and teach believers the Word of God, so that in the thinking of the believer, they might be further worked upon in their spirit by the Holy Spirit.
In both cases, it is never the work of man which improves the human spirit of the fellow human, but only the work of God the Holy Spirit. This occurs while we are in fellowship or are walking with Him.
The issue of which church happens to effect such communication, really is only significant when the recipient of the Word understands the Word and receives faith through Christ with their own volition.
Better to be rejected by earthly friends than by God.
“Those who become Catholic do so because they have done tons of reading, and thinking and deliberating and praying. They are intelligent and educated in the faith and it is their study of scripture and tradition which leads them to the truth of Catholicism.”
well said.
It gets tiring to see yet another “well golly gee! what would it be like if catholics actually read the bible?!!”
Spare me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.