Taking Apologetics or Systematic Theology First

[dsanch1120]

Hello everyone,
I'll be starting the online MAR program at WTS next week. Originally I was just going to take Greek 1 before potentially ramping up later. However, after talking with wife and thinking through future plans, I think it would be best for me to add another class. I'm currently trying to decide between taking an intro to apologetics and an intro to systematic theology course and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on if one is better to start with than the other. I've gravitated toward Systematic and Biblical theology for quite a while, and haven't had much in the way of apologetics learning beyond a cursory understanding of the classic arguments. I'm interested in presuppositional apologetics, but know very little about it. Is there any benefit to starting with one over the other one? I'll be taking both eventually, but am planning on devoting more of my credits to systematics over apologetics.
Thanks all!

 

[TheInquirer]

I would go with whatever you have the most passion and energy for right now. Or, if you are worried about workload, maybe inquire as to which course would be easier to manage with Greek.

Fyi, Greek starts out easy but the cumulative nature means it gets harder toward the end of the class so something to keep in mind.

 

[alexanderjames]

Congratulations for getting on the programme at such an esteemed seminary, I hope that whichever option you choose it goes really well!

 

[iainduguid]

What Jim said. They are both introductory courses, and full time students take them both in their first semester. I don't know that there is much of a difference between them in total workload, but sometimes classes that you have more interest in feel easier.

 

[RamistThomist]

In terms of introductory courses where you can only learn so much in a short time, it does not matter. Take what you are most excited about. In terms of foundations, systematic theology is a thousand times more important to master. There are too many apologists today who are largely incompetent about key theological doctrines.

 

[Logan]

It seems to me like a good grounding in systematics would be helpful for seeing the cohesive nature of the faith for use in apologetics. But since they are introductory courses I would guess it doesn't matter too much.

 

[RamistThomist]

I know we disagree with Geisler on Calvinism and though he is not presuppositional, this is still excellent advice.

Advice to Aspiring Apologists and Philosophers – NORMAN GEISLER

 

[RamistThomist]

I know it is fashionable to attack Aristotle because he is Greek or synthesizing or something, but you will realize that those thinkers who really know Aristotle are also really good at critical thinking.

On a practical note, if you master the first 50 pages of Turretin and the first 250 pages of Charles Hodge, you will be a much better apologist than any "wise guy" online.

 

[dsanch1120]

Thanks all! I'm leaning toward systematic at the moment, but we'll see.

I know it is fashionable to attack Aristotle because he is Greek or synthesizing or something, but you will realize that those thinkers who really know Aristotle are also really good at critical thinking.

I've been wanting to read some of Aristotles works for a while, just need to find the time. What would you recommend with respect to the critical thinking aspect? I have his book on Rhetoric already.

 

[RamistThomist]

Thanks all! I'm leaning toward systematic at the moment, but we'll see.

I've been wanting to read some of Aristotles works for a while, just need to find the time. What would you recommend with respect to the critical thinking aspect? I have his book on Rhetoric already.

Categories is short and covers the basic aspects of predication. Posterior Analytics is much easier than Prior Analytics.

Review of Aristotle’s Categories

Categories is the intro text to Aristotle’s Metaphysics, or so some essay from Plato.Stanford.Edu said. Good enough for me. It is short and clear. Some things are predicable of a subject but ne…

tentsofshem.wordpress.com

Review: Aristotle’s Organon

Included within this larger work are several major treatises. Every critical thinker would do well to study “Categories,” “On Interpretation” and the first and last parts of “Topics.” P…

tentsofshem.wordpress.com

Physics has his so-called Unmoved Mover. Metaphysics was a bit over my head the first time I read it.

 

[sgemmen9]

Hello everyone,
I'll be starting the online MAR program at WTS next week. Originally I was just going to take Greek 1 before potentially ramping up later. However, after talking with wife and thinking through future plans, I think it would be best for me to add another class. I'm currently trying to decide between taking an intro to apologetics and an intro to systematic theology course and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on if one is better to start with than the other. I've gravitated toward Systematic and Biblical theology for quite a while, and haven't had much in the way of apologetics learning beyond a cursory understanding of the classic arguments. I'm interested in presuppositional apologetics, but know very little about it. Is there any benefit to starting with one over the other one? I'll be taking both eventually, but am planning on devoting more of my credits to systematics over apologetics.
Thanks all!

It shouldn’t matter “which first,” as they’re both intros. Just do what you are most passionate about.

 

[The Calvinistic Methodist]

I do think systematic theology would help lay some groundwork for most/all seminary courses. I would guess you’d be ok with either order though

 

[RamistThomist]

Thanks all! I'm leaning toward systematic at the moment, but we'll see.

I've been wanting to read some of Aristotles works for a while, just need to find the time. What would you recommend with respect to the critical thinking aspect? I have his book on Rhetoric already.

To show you how terrible at marketing I am, I just remembered I did a youtube video on this very question not long ago. I totally forgot about it. LOL.
The audio isn't great, since I am still new at "zoomering." And I don't think the headset mic was working.

 

[Knight]

All else being equal (and I echo earlier remarks about doing what you are more passionate about, if either), systematics is more foundational. Apologetics = defense. But what are you defending? -> Systematics.

 

[Edward]

I'd suggest Systematics. That's the basis for pretty much everything else (except, of course, the languages).

 

[RamistThomist]

The more I think about it, the more it does not matter. Although theology is infinitely more important than apologetics, an intro course won't teach you all that much. The best you can hope for is to learn the tools and categories for further research. That's it.

 

[Deleted member 12431]

All else being equal (and I echo earlier remarks about doing what you are more passionate about, if either), systematics is more foundational. Apologetics = defense. But what are you defending? -> Systematics.

I agree with this sentiment, and think the right order of things means that you take systematic theology courses first. We all want to be able to contend for our faith, but it is hard to contend for that which you do not first know.

 

[dsanch1120]

Thank you all! I ended up going with intro to systematic, which, looking at the syllabus, I'm very excited to take!

 

[jwright82]

Hello everyone,
I'll be starting the online MAR program at WTS next week. Originally I was just going to take Greek 1 before potentially ramping up later. However, after talking with wife and thinking through future plans, I think it would be best for me to add another class. I'm currently trying to decide between taking an intro to apologetics and an intro to systematic theology course and was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on if one is better to start with than the other. I've gravitated toward Systematic and Biblical theology for quite a while, and haven't had much in the way of apologetics learning beyond a cursory understanding of the classic arguments. I'm interested in presuppositional apologetics, but know very little about it. Is there any benefit to starting with one over the other one? I'll be taking both eventually, but am planning on devoting more of my credits to systematics over apologetics.
Thanks all!

Honestly I think Dr Oliphint's intro to apologetics goes over basic systematic theology. He's big about knowing the faith you're defending. If his free lectures online are any indication than yes he goes over that. So it might not matter too much at this point.

 

[No Other Name]

On a practical note, if you master the first 50 pages of Turretin and the first 250 pages of Charles Hodge, you will be a much better apologist than any "wise guy" online.

I hope you know me well enough to know that I am not being pedantic or confrontational when I ask genuinely what does it mean to "master" the first 50 pages or Turretin or any page of anything?

 

[RamistThomist]

I hope you know me well enough to know that I am not being pedantic or confrontational when I ask genuinely what does it mean to "master" the first 50 pages or Turretin or any page of anything?

Let them become part of your own thought processes. For example, when hearing a complicated theological question, you immediately (without reflection) say, "I distinguish..."