Enns uses Chafer’ s definition that emphasizes the process of this theology. They define systematic theology as “ the collecting, scientifically arranging, comparing, exhibiting and defending of all facts from any and every source concerning God and His works” . This definition is more focused on the scientific approach to theology, particularly the Bible. Webster agrees with this definition. He describes systematic theology as “ an exercise of reason in the domain of God’ s saving and revelatory goodness to creatures. ” “ Reason” is an important aspect of organizing and understanding God’ s works. Healy diverges from these definitions in that he embraces systematic theology’ s scope in terms of sources and applications.
He states that it is the “ activity of reflecting critically and constructively on the beliefs and practices of Christians and their churches, and on the Christian and non-Christian sources in relation to which such beliefs and practices arise” . He believes that systematic theology includes critical thinking and constructive analysis in organizing all Christian and non-Christian works that are used in understanding God and His works. Furthermore, Healy underscores the vitality of systematic theology when he says that it is “ an ongoing performance, always incomplete, and inadequate to its object” .
He does not want to put any permanence on systematic theology’ s output because it is a product of human interpretation. Furthermore, Healy argues that systematic theology is holistic because of it: . ..seeks to uncover the relations amongst the various parts of the web of beliefs and actions that constitute Christianity, and these include the history of doctrine and practice, moral issues and the like. ” He notes that systematic theologians are concerned with applying reflection and critical thinking in analyzing and resolving contemporary issues and moral dilemmas.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples