[winstonchurchill]

I meant that they are ignorant of systematic theology. Generally, it seems similar to systematic ignorance. It's not a Christian virtue. It leaves a person incapable of formulating a comprehensive explanation for scripture. Either Calvinism or Arminianism is preferable to ignorance.

You know, increasingly I'm not so sure. I think that many of us have trouble separating Scripture from our preferred systematic theology and we forget that Scripture is inspired, but systematic theology is not. It is merely man's effort to put his intellectual arms around Scripture - not always successfully, but always 'confidently.'

What exactly would we lose if there were no systematic theology? We would surely still have the Gospel -- the Good News of salvation. I suppose the argument would be that without systematic theology there would be confusion among believers. Yet I would think I could make a pretty good case that we have ample confusion WITH systematic theology -- and possibly, just possibly some of it BECAUSE of systematic theology.

No, I'm not at all sure that all our writings, debates, etc in systematic theology have brought us closer to our Lord Jesus Christ.

One final argument against systematic theology. It God had thought it truly necessary, He could have inspired one of the biblical writers to write one. Instead, He evidently concluded that a quartet of gospels, a history and a bunch of letters would be better -- and quite sufficient. [That's the old 'If God had intended us to fly, He would have given us wings' argument.]

So, don't you agree that we could have gotten along without systematic theology?

[George W. Bush]

So, don't you agree that we could have gotten along without systematic theology?

Calvinists would insist upon it. But no one would say it is desirable.

Systematic theology is simply a term that means we can explain all scripture in context and in the context of all other scripture.

In other words: to rightly divide the Word.

Study of the scriptures requires the development of a thorough understanding and application of scripture. Without it, we are subject to superstition and the holding of inconsistent views or even to be prey for heretics.

You might as well suggest that the study of Hebrew and Greek are useless. I suppose a Calvinist would have to agree that we could have gotten along without them too. But we'd be poorer for their lack.