best systematic theology?
- Thread starter rembrandt
- Start date
- Status
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
Berkhof by far is better, not only because he is more sound in his theology but because he interacts much more with other reformed scholars of the past.
Some other systematic theologies that are helpful are:
Charles Hodge
A.A. Hodge
William Shedd
R.L. Dabney
Some other systematic theologies that are helpful are:
Charles Hodge
A.A. Hodge
William Shedd
R.L. Dabney
J
JonathonHunt
Guest
I have Berkhof, but I now use Robert Reymond's New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith.
I am aware of some criticism of him in his treatment of various doctrines (I think as memory serves people critique his position on the Trinity and possibly regarding the eternal Sonship of Christ?) but his work is most useful - largely because he takes a text first, and expounds the doctrine, mentioning the other proof texts on the way, rather than starting with the doctrine as a bare fact, and then going to all the proof texts.
I prefer the method. You just have to weed out where any writer's work shifts from theology to philosophy and keep the balance firmly towards theology! (Infra and Supra Lapsarianism debate is a good example. It seems like 90 per cent philosophy a lot of the time, and whilst I would love to know the absolute truth in that matter, I'm quite happy to leave it until I get to heaven and get on with doing God's work here and now!)
I also have the only baptist systematic that I know of by JL Dagg. It comes in two parts 'Manual of Theology' and 'Manual of Chruch Principles'
I am aware of some criticism of him in his treatment of various doctrines (I think as memory serves people critique his position on the Trinity and possibly regarding the eternal Sonship of Christ?) but his work is most useful - largely because he takes a text first, and expounds the doctrine, mentioning the other proof texts on the way, rather than starting with the doctrine as a bare fact, and then going to all the proof texts.
I prefer the method. You just have to weed out where any writer's work shifts from theology to philosophy and keep the balance firmly towards theology! (Infra and Supra Lapsarianism debate is a good example. It seems like 90 per cent philosophy a lot of the time, and whilst I would love to know the absolute truth in that matter, I'm quite happy to leave it until I get to heaven and get on with doing God's work here and now!)
I also have the only baptist systematic that I know of by JL Dagg. It comes in two parts 'Manual of Theology' and 'Manual of Chruch Principles'
J
Jenson
Guest
Hi,
I have Reymond's ST which is quite good. He holds a different view on the man in Roms 7 but apart from that I think his work is worth-reading.
For older works, do try Watson's Body of Divinity ("older" term for ST). A bit dated, but useful.
For a baptistic view of Christian matters, do try John Gill's Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity (3 vols). I cannot find it sold in UK, but I know it is republished in the US by Baptist Standard Bearer. You can find it online, though...
Sincerely,
Jenson
I have Reymond's ST which is quite good. He holds a different view on the man in Roms 7 but apart from that I think his work is worth-reading.
For older works, do try Watson's Body of Divinity ("older" term for ST). A bit dated, but useful.
For a baptistic view of Christian matters, do try John Gill's Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity (3 vols). I cannot find it sold in UK, but I know it is republished in the US by Baptist Standard Bearer. You can find it online, though...
Sincerely,
Jenson
BobVigneault
Bawberator
Systematic Theology
I tend to catagorize my ST's into two catagories, readable and dense. I love Reymond and Berkhof because of their readability. Between the two, if you are a Clarkian get Reymond, if you are a Van Tillian get Berkhof, (though you'll benefit from both). Hodge (Charles) is also very readable but a bit dated.
In the dense category, I like Turretin, Calvin, Dabney and Gill. I think I spent a week trying to decipher Dabney on why Adam, though created with a righteous bent could sin. I might as well have been reading ugarit but when I finished and was able to teach my Sunday School class the "laymens" version, it was so richly rewarding.
:wr50:
[Edited on 2-26-2004 by maxdetail]
[Edited on 2-26-2004 by maxdetail]
I tend to catagorize my ST's into two catagories, readable and dense. I love Reymond and Berkhof because of their readability. Between the two, if you are a Clarkian get Reymond, if you are a Van Tillian get Berkhof, (though you'll benefit from both). Hodge (Charles) is also very readable but a bit dated.
In the dense category, I like Turretin, Calvin, Dabney and Gill. I think I spent a week trying to decipher Dabney on why Adam, though created with a righteous bent could sin. I might as well have been reading ugarit but when I finished and was able to teach my Sunday School class the "laymens" version, it was so richly rewarding.
:wr50:
[Edited on 2-26-2004 by maxdetail]
[Edited on 2-26-2004 by maxdetail]
BobVigneault
Bawberator
I agree on Grudem. He seems to be trying to bring about a synthesis between conservative, reformed and charasmatic teachings. I detected a measure of compromise in his writings.
Here is what you should have, in this order:
1. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
2. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Turretin
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
Before you were to get anything more, you need to get either works that are not systematic but have good indexes (Owen) or books on a specific issue.
1. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
2. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Turretin
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
Before you were to get anything more, you need to get either works that are not systematic but have good indexes (Owen) or books on a specific issue.
Me Died Blue
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
One good volume to get would be J. I. Packer's [i:5b592a9e37]Concise Theology[/i:5b592a9e37]. It's more of a "skeletal" systematic theology than a detailed one, as it only gives a brief summary of each doctrine and the reasons behind it, but it encompasses a wide range. It's title perfectly describes its purpose and strength--concise (yet with breadth).
Chris
[Edited on 2-26-2004 by Me Died Blue]
Chris
[Edited on 2-26-2004 by Me Died Blue]
Reena Wilms
Puritan Board Freshman
Next saterday i will buy :William Shedd - systematic dogmatics! Iam looking foreward to read it. Did anyone already read something of this book ?
Ralph
Ralph
Wow! Thanks guys!
[quote:e723e2ae3e]Haven't read Grudem, but considering his affiliation with the Vinyard churches, I would not recommend him.[/quote:e723e2ae3e]
[quote:e723e2ae3e]I agree on Grudem. He seems to be trying to bring about a synthesis between conservative, reformed and charasmatic teachings. I detected a measure of compromise in his writings.[/quote:e723e2ae3e]
:shocked::shocked2::shocked::shocked2:
eeehhhh....
Rembrandt
[quote:e723e2ae3e]Haven't read Grudem, but considering his affiliation with the Vinyard churches, I would not recommend him.[/quote:e723e2ae3e]
[quote:e723e2ae3e]I agree on Grudem. He seems to be trying to bring about a synthesis between conservative, reformed and charasmatic teachings. I detected a measure of compromise in his writings.[/quote:e723e2ae3e]
:shocked::shocked2::shocked::shocked2:
eeehhhh....
Rembrandt
BobVigneault
Bawberator
Great list fredgreco!!! I want your library! :thumbup::thumbup:
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
Ralph,
I have Shedd, and yes I have read part of it. It VERY good. One of my favorites of all time.
Fred :sad:
1. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
2. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Turretin
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:no:
1. [b:95c766b269]Turretin[/b:95c766b269] :biggrin:
2. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
Tied for 3rd place
3. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Ames' Marrow of Theology
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:thumbup:
I have Shedd, and yes I have read part of it. It VERY good. One of my favorites of all time.
Fred :sad:
1. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
2. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Turretin
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:no:
1. [b:95c766b269]Turretin[/b:95c766b269] :biggrin:
2. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
Tied for 3rd place
3. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Ames' Marrow of Theology
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:thumbup:
[quote:fba2373edb][i:fba2373edb]Originally posted by love2read[/i:fba2373edb]
What do you all think of Owen his book on Systematic Theology printed by Soli Deo Gloria? [/quote:fba2373edb]
I don't think this exists. I think you mean his [i:fba2373edb]Biblical Theology[/i:fba2373edb]. If so, it is excellent.
What do you all think of Owen his book on Systematic Theology printed by Soli Deo Gloria? [/quote:fba2373edb]
I don't think this exists. I think you mean his [i:fba2373edb]Biblical Theology[/i:fba2373edb]. If so, it is excellent.
[quote:5e7f2e8ff4][i:5e7f2e8ff4]Originally posted by webmaster[/i:5e7f2e8ff4]
Ralph,
I have Shedd, and yes I have read part of it. It VERY good. One of my favorites of all time.
Fred :sad:
1. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
2. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Turretin
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:no:
1. [b:5e7f2e8ff4]Turretin[/b:5e7f2e8ff4] :biggrin:
2. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
Tied for 3rd place
3. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Ames' Marrow of Theology
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:thumbup: [/quote:5e7f2e8ff4]
Funny thing is, I bet if you asked Turretin, he would agree with me that Calvin is #1. :biggrin:
Ralph,
I have Shedd, and yes I have read part of it. It VERY good. One of my favorites of all time.
Fred :sad:
1. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
2. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Turretin
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:no:
1. [b:5e7f2e8ff4]Turretin[/b:5e7f2e8ff4] :biggrin:
2. Calvin's Institutes (essential)
Tied for 3rd place
3. Berkhof (best standard systematic)
3. Shedd (best (dogmatic)
4. Ames' Marrow of Theology
5. Dabney
6. Hodge (a bit dry, but helpful)
6. Cunningham's Historical Theology
7. Reymond
8. Gill
:thumbup: [/quote:5e7f2e8ff4]
Funny thing is, I bet if you asked Turretin, he would agree with me that Calvin is #1. :biggrin:
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
What can I say....your right on that.
If Turretin boasted about himself being greater than Calvin, then he would probably lose constituants!
If Turretin boasted about himself being greater than Calvin, then he would probably lose constituants!
New wine skin
Puritan Board Freshman
I also a agree with the list above but would add works by Herman Bavinck. I just read Doctrine of God (Vol. 2 of Dogmatics translation) and Our Reasonable Faith (overview of 4 vol dogmatics). Doctrine of God can be difficult reading due to the translation but its worth the effort. Our Reasonable Faith is an easy read and hind sight 20/20 would be perfect intro to pre seminary student... I started with Berkhof, which is good, but I found him a bit dry in some places...
:wr50:
:wr50:
Ianterrell
Puritan Board Sophomore
Grudem was my first systematic. It is getting less and less use as I grow in biblical thinking. I prefer Institutes.
What are the benefits of precise treatments, anyone? Are there problems that come up in brief handlings of doctrines?
What are the benefits of precise treatments, anyone? Are there problems that come up in brief handlings of doctrines?
Ianterrell
Puritan Board Sophomore
Bavinck "Gereformeerde Dogmatiek"
Harrie,
Isn't the first vol. the only one translated in English right now? I know its held in high regard! Can't wait to get my hands on all the volumes. Has anyone started reading these yet? Harrie could you talk a little about why you enjoy this set by Bavinck?
Harrie,
Isn't the first vol. the only one translated in English right now? I know its held in high regard! Can't wait to get my hands on all the volumes. Has anyone started reading these yet? Harrie could you talk a little about why you enjoy this set by Bavinck?
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Grudem has been criticized on this post and I must agree with all the criticisms leveled against him (prophecy, Vineyard); I will even add one more (although this is not a fault of his, only my disagreement): he holds to a post trib rapture. Nothing against historic premillers!
Grudem's advantages:
He has a strong chapter on election
" " Providence
In those two chapters he interacts a lot with Pinnock and Co.
And one last advantage (relevant only if your a Baptist): Grudem's work is a standard at most SBC seminaries, meaning that many future baptist pastors and theologians are being exposed to erudite argumentation on God's Sovereignty.
However if you have read any other systematic, you can probably bypass Grudem.
Grudem's advantages:
He has a strong chapter on election
" " Providence
In those two chapters he interacts a lot with Pinnock and Co.
And one last advantage (relevant only if your a Baptist): Grudem's work is a standard at most SBC seminaries, meaning that many future baptist pastors and theologians are being exposed to erudite argumentation on God's Sovereignty.
However if you have read any other systematic, you can probably bypass Grudem.
Irishcat922
Puritan Board Sophomore
No wonder so many of the SBC churces are going charismatic.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
IrishCat,
That was a good insight that I overlooked. I guess I was so excited about SBC relearning the The Five Points that I didn't see that obvious fact.
That was a good insight that I overlooked. I guess I was so excited about SBC relearning the The Five Points that I didn't see that obvious fact.
[quote:62f76987d0][i:62f76987d0]Originally posted by Finn McCool[/i:62f76987d0]
Grudem's work is a standard at most SBC seminaries[/quote:62f76987d0]
Excuse me, Brother, but I wonder on what you base this statement? Guthrie and Erikson have been the standard for many years and I find it inconceivable that any SBC seminary would accept Grudmen's Vineyard connection.
[Edited on 6-7-2004 by lkjohnson]
Grudem's work is a standard at most SBC seminaries[/quote:62f76987d0]
Excuse me, Brother, but I wonder on what you base this statement? Guthrie and Erikson have been the standard for many years and I find it inconceivable that any SBC seminary would accept Grudmen's Vineyard connection.
[Edited on 6-7-2004 by lkjohnson]
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
My apologies,
I made a blanket statement when I only had one seminary and another's president in mind (NOBTS and SwBTS). I saw grudem on the list at New Orleans and I knew that Paige Patterson had strongly recommended Grudem. Now, does that warrant the belief that all SBC seminaries use Grudem. Forgive that minor faux pas.
On the other hand, however, as a Southern Baptist I find it quite conceivable that Vinyard-type movements are effecting SBC churces. For instance, once you introduce your church to the "contemporary sevice" to reach the "seeker-sensitive" what's to stop the church at that? Discernment is not a praised gift at many contemporary services. Now that is not say that all SBC churches are like that, just many, and the trend is growing.
And were you referring to Shirley Guthrie? Just wondering. Having myself read Erickson I wonder why I forgot to put him on here.
I made a blanket statement when I only had one seminary and another's president in mind (NOBTS and SwBTS). I saw grudem on the list at New Orleans and I knew that Paige Patterson had strongly recommended Grudem. Now, does that warrant the belief that all SBC seminaries use Grudem. Forgive that minor faux pas.
On the other hand, however, as a Southern Baptist I find it quite conceivable that Vinyard-type movements are effecting SBC churces. For instance, once you introduce your church to the "contemporary sevice" to reach the "seeker-sensitive" what's to stop the church at that? Discernment is not a praised gift at many contemporary services. Now that is not say that all SBC churches are like that, just many, and the trend is growing.
And were you referring to Shirley Guthrie? Just wondering. Having myself read Erickson I wonder why I forgot to put him on here.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I am reading Berkhof right now (I just finished Calvin) and I am amazed at how lucid he is (you were right, Fred). He handled the Doctrine of God masterfully.
Assuming that I finish Berkhof in the reasonable future, who would you recommend out of Dabney, Shedd, and Reymond? BTW, what does Dogmatic Theology mean, as opposed to Systematics?
Assuming that I finish Berkhof in the reasonable future, who would you recommend out of Dabney, Shedd, and Reymond? BTW, what does Dogmatic Theology mean, as opposed to Systematics?
- Status
